Vortex diamondback? Good scope?

swrmacmullin

swrmacmullin

Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Location
1hr east of Edmonton
Hey guys just looking for feedback on the diamond back scopes by vortex. I shoot a 7mm parker hale, just use the gun for hunting season and the odd target practice. Mostly hunt deer in central Alberta. Elk are in my future as well. Looking at the 4-12 x 40mm. Just looking for real world experience with this scope. I should mention that currently I'm running a 4x12-40 bushnell doe that I'm not super happy with.

Thanks for the input guys! Cheers, and happy hunting.
 
I had a 2-8 Diamondback. It worked well. I broke the reticle loose shooting a very light 375, but the one they replaced it with lasted fine on a heavier 375. I’ve since sold the scope.
 
I’d go up a class if you can. If the budget does not allow new, get a good used one. PS, while all the “hype” is there, my new Vortex Viper is nowhere near the scope that my Leupold VX-3 is. I’ll be getting rid of it to get another gold ring.
 
I have a Vortex Diamond back 4x12-40 BDC on a Remington 700 SPS .308 and I like it.

Sure you can get better scopes but I bought mine on sale from Cabelas and I can hit the gong at 500 yards so I'm happy with it.:):)
 
You reap what you pay for. I have tried several Vortex scopes and they were all metal heavy junk. I'm using high end Leupold and Trijicon on my numerous shooters. Period.
 
I'm glad to see someone else ask a question about the diamond back scope. I was looking at one to put on the long range rifle that I am looking at buying but after reading these couple reviews I have changed my mind. I have 2 leupold scopes and am very satisfied with them. I dont want to step down when it comes to optics. Especially not when it comes to long range shooting.
 
They cant hold up to recoil. My 458wm is a vortex killer. Bushnell. Leupold. Redfield and even a cheap fitco were all fine. Of 3 vortex scopes none made it passed the 5th shot. Good warrenty for junk product though
 
Check out the Nikon Prostaff line, I'm a Leupold and high-end Bushnell user, but I put a Nikon Prostaff Target EFR 3-9x40 AO on a .22, and couldn't be happier. Surprisingly bright and a very nice fine duplex reticle.
 
I really appreciateal the input guys! I completely forgot to subscribe to thread and was disappointed to not get any emails regarding the comments!

So I went down to cables and put my hands on em, and I have to say, the diamondback I want happy with at all. It was clunky, and was more similar to the low end bushnells that come on savage axis. (Nothing wrong with them, just not what i was looking for).

The next step up was the diamond back HD, and imho it's a completely different scope. Found better looks, sleeker design. Couldn't tell the difference with clarity in a store setting, but it was all around a nice scope, but for nearly double the price, I held off.

I took a look at the Nikon prostaff line and wasn't a huge fan of the reticle, didn't spend too much time looking at them so I'm not sure on the options as far as reticle goes.

After reading all your guys comments I'm definitely going to steer clear of the lower end vortex, I may try a higher end but i definitely will be buying used. That was i wont loose my shirt on resale if I decide it's not for me.

Regarding Leopold I've always liked their scopes (having shot friends) but from what I've heard "they ain't what they used to be". Not sure if anyone is shooting the newer leopold's or I'd there is any credibility behind this...?

Thanks again for the insight guys
 
Surprised you didn't like the Bushnell, the XLT line is a pretty good value scope for the $. The one i had was very clear and sharp and had good light gathering.

I hate Vortex optics. Tried really hard to like them. Nope.

I recently purchased a Sig Whiskey 3. For the price i paid, find it really hard to beat. Little heavier than a Leupold, but excellent glass and a forgiving eyebox even at max power.

Leupold aint' what they used to be. That is to say, not the value they once were.

Don't discount Burris either, their Fullfield E1 line is excellent for the $. It was neck and neck with the Sig, but i found a deal locally, which was the tie breaker for me.
 
What range is your 4-12 bushnell? I've never been disappointed with a Made in Japan Bushnell, even used ones. Whatever brand you get, be sure the get the ones that are made in Japan. Nightforce, Bushnell, Leupold all have mid to higher end models that are made in Japan. I've found that scopes made in Japan give you the most bang for your buck; sure Swaros can be marginally nicer but at exponentially higher cost for minimal gain in return over the Japanese made scopes.
 
I just emailed Bushnell, having noticed that the Elite 3500 has disappeared off their website. It is officially discontinued since Bushnell came out with the Nitro and Forge scopes, which are made in Korea and China instead of Japan. The Elite 3500 and 4500 scopes are excellent value. I run those and Leupolds. The new VX Freedom is supposed to be decent quality (VX2-quality glass) at a good price. About $300 for a 3-9x40 at SFRC. The Bushnell 3500 3-9x40 I just bought cost only $192 on sale. So even in the low price ranges you can stick to US and Japanese scopes. Except the 3500 is no more so I will have to stick to Leupold, I guess. My cousin just paid $260 for a Chinese Vortex Crossfire but he's a fool.
 
I have two: a 4-12 AO Diamondback on a .22 and a 3-9 diamondback on an sks
the 4-12 AO because I wanted an upgrade from a bushnell banner in the same range. It works great on the .22, I can't think of a reason to change it. Nice and bright etc.
The 3-9 has done fine on the sks.
Both these scopes are at least 5 years old and have never let me down. Maybe the newer ones aren't as good. The only downside is a smaller eyebox range compared to other scopes. Doesn't bother me.

I have a friend that had a cross fire something or other on a 6.5 x 55, as I recall. It failed. I'll never buy a crossfire, might as well stick to the unexciting banners than change to that.
 
swrmacmullin said:
I really appreciateal the input guys! I completely forgot to subscribe to thread and was disappointed to not get any emails regarding the comments!

So I went down to cables and put my hands on em, and I have to say, the diamondback I want happy with at all. It was clunky, and was more similar to the low end bushnells that come on savage axis. (Nothing wrong with them, just not what i was looking for).

The next step up was the diamond back HD, and imho it's a completely different scope. Found better looks, sleeker design. Couldn't tell the difference with clarity in a store setting, but it was all around a nice scope, but for nearly double the price, I held off.

I took a look at the Nikon prostaff line and wasn't a huge fan of the reticle, didn't spend too much time looking at them so I'm not sure on the options as far as reticle goes.

After reading all your guys comments I'm definitely going to steer clear of the lower end vortex, I may try a higher end but i definitely will be buying used. That was i wont loose my shirt on resale if I decide it's not for me.

Regarding Leopold I've always liked their scopes (having shot friends) but from what I've heard "they ain't what they used to be". Not sure if anyone is shooting the newer leopold's or I'd there is any credibility behind this...?

Thanks again for the insight guys
Click to expand...

It's my understanding the Diamondback HP's are the previous generation Vipers. I think for the price of the HP's I would probably try and find a user Viper first, personally. I have a 4-12x Diamondback on a 22lr, and I would agree it has a picky eyebox. Not a huge fan of the scope, but I will say the glass had better clarity than what it replaced (Leupold VX-1).
 
I have many vortex products and bought a Diamondback for my 300wsm. After about 12 rounds the reticle canted inside the tube. As I had it for 2 days Cabela's did take it back for me and I now have a Leupold VX-2 and it is a much better scope for a few bucks more but still very cost effective
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom