Vortex vs Burris! WHICH ONE DO I GET! first world problems...

kykamo

kykamo

Regular
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Location
St Paul, AB
I need a scope for a new rifle. my main goal is to get a scope that doesn't have any "fish globe" distortion or bluryness around the edges, and will work with want i want to do with the scope. i will be hunting for deer and elk in both woods and prairie, and i would like to start long range shooting out to 600-1000 yards.

So i got 2 choices for each; a low range and a mid range model for each. My budget is $400, so do i spend it all on the better scopes or is it not worth paying extra over the baseline models??? which company would you go with??

Vortex Diamondback 4-12x40 BDC for $260 (absolute cheapest scope out of the others, maybe i should get the AO model, not sure???)

Burris Droptine 4.5-14x42 for $285

Burris Predator Quest 4.5-14x42 $400 (top of my budget, is it worth it??)

Diamondback HP 4-12x42 BDC $430 (top of my budget plus a bit. Is it worth it? seems like these scopes have the best glass, but $200 better???)

Vortex or burris, low end or mid end? WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
 
Ive had both diamondback and burris fullfield II's, on a .222 varmint rig that is my primary gopher gun. After a day of shooting id have eye fatigue and a headache from the vortex. Not so with the burris. ( or bushnell elite) now that shouldnt be a factor as on a big game rifle you won't spend all day staring through the scope, maybe 15 minutes a year at most. For that either will be fine. Another one to look at in that price range is the Redfield Revolution 4-12×40. WSS was clearing them out last month at something like %25 off. Just a rebadged leupold VX1 really.
 
Also what caliber of gun? I put my diamondback on a lightwieght 8x57 with a hot load, and its come close to my forehead under recoil. Not the best eyerelief, dont think id want it on a magnum. Burris feels better in that department and the leupold/redfields are all 4 inches+ and its a non issue.
 
I've owned both. The Diamondback HP was quite heavy but had really nice glass. The Burris Droptine also has excellent glass for the money and is a superb hunting scope in every respect.

I sold the Vortex and kept the Droptine. I liked the Droptine so much that I bought two more. They're lightweight, strong, have a great finish and track nicely. The new gen Burrises are leaps ahead of the previous generation ones, which were great in their own right. Go have a look and you might be surprised.
 
propliner said:
I've owned both. The Diamondback HP was quite heavy but had really nice glass. The Burris Droptine also has excellent glass for the money and is a superb hunting scope in every respect.

I sold the Vortex and kept the Droptine. I liked the Droptine so much that I bought two more. They're lightweight, strong, have a great finish and track nicely. The new gen Burrises are leaps ahead of the previous generation ones, which were great in their own right. Go have a look and you might be surprised.
Click to expand...

WAAAAAAT, you chose the droptine over the diamonback HP!!! i need more details.
 
Last edited:
kevin.303 said:
Also what caliber of gun? I put my diamondback on a lightwieght 8x57 with a hot load, and its come close to my forehead under recoil. Not the best eyerelief, dont think id want it on a magnum. Burris feels better in that department and the leupold/redfields are all 4 inches+ and its a non issue.
Click to expand...

sounds like it gathered "too much" light?
 
kevin.303 said:
Also what caliber of gun? I put my diamondback on a lightwieght 8x57 with a hot load, and its come close to my forehead under recoil. Not the best eyerelief, dont think id want it on a magnum. Burris feels better in that department and the leupold/redfields are all 4 inches+ and its a non issue.
Click to expand...

270 win. the eye relief was the thing that made me most concerned about it.
 
I had a diamondback 3-9x50 for a while. I'd have the scope touch my forehead on a 30-06 regularly. It was difficult to get a decent sight picture in as well. Then I bought a viper in 2.5-10x44 with 30mm tube, night and day difference. I think I paid $500 for it, glass is excellent, it's super easy to get a good sight picture and has a pile of eye relief. If you try one you may have a hard time buying anything else in this price range, and it's only 3 boxes of beer more initial cost. Mine lives on my 300 H&H now.
 
flying pig said:
I had a diamondback 3-9x50 for a while. I'd have the scope touch my forehead on a 30-06 regularly. It was difficult to get a decent sight picture in as well. Then I bought a viper in 2.5-10x44 with 30mm tube, night and day difference. I think I paid $500 for it, glass is excellent, it's super easy to get a good sight picture and has a pile of eye relief. If you try one you may have a hard time buying anything else in this price range, and it's only 3 boxes of beer more initial cost. Mine lives on my 300 H&H now.
Click to expand...

I have a Viper 2.5-10x44 as well and love it, can't go wrong for the price. Also bought the same in the PST model, almost like the regular Viper better, turrets are nicer to work with even though they are covered.
 
kykamo said:
WAAAAAAT, you chose the droptine over the diamonback HP!!! i need more details.
Click to expand...

I had no problem with the glass on the HP but I found it to be an awkward fit in the rings on a Ruger 77 and the eye relief was an issue. The biggest problem though was the weight. For a hard recoiling rifle it was too heavy and slid in my rings. It was a tank for what it delivered. As a hunting scope, I gave up on it and sold it.

The Burris is a natural. Simple and with surprisingly good glass for the price range. They mount easily on any rifle and weigh what a hunting scope should. I've owned dozens of Burrises and have never had an issue with any of them. They are my go-to brand for guns afield. The Droptine has great value and does everything as it should.
 
kykamo said:
270 win. the eye relief was the thing that made me most concerned about it.
Click to expand...

Leupold got great eye relief, can be had in VX2 for around your price. 3-9X40 would be the all around choice. Woods hunting and long range would never be satisfied with a single scope.
 
Get a Leupold....
Then the 1st world problem is no more.
New or used via the EE and your done.
3-9/ 4-12 and your done ...with a 40mm objective of course.
Also asking the same question in the other sub forum is a waste of time for everyone...
Just my .05 worth..inflation factor for the defunct penny.
Rob
 
Last edited:
freddyfour said:
Yes sir, maybe a nice Burris Fullfield II 4-12. Both Burris and Vortex carry a lifetime warranty so no worries about buying used.
Click to expand...

The Fullfield II is an older design that goes back almost a decade. It's a good scope but is dated and the glass in the older ones is lacking in comparison to the new glass being sourced by Burris today. Same goes for the Signature which is now no longer in production.

The new gen Burrises are much brighter and crisper and really can't be beat for the money.
 
Seems like the choice is between the diamondback hp and a baseline burris. hmmm which to get. Should i spend all my money or not?

the diamondback hp does look like a good deal. a good entry level to high end glass with out some bells and whistles the viper series has. What kind of long range shooting would this scope be able to do? 6-800 yards sufficiently? or would it be a pita to try?

thanks for your help guys
 
kykamo said:
Seems like the choice is between the diamondback hp and a baseline burris. hmmm which to get. Should i spend all my money or not?

the diamondback hp does look like a good deal. a good entry level to high end glass with out some bells and whistles the viper series has. What kind of long range shooting would this scope be able to do? 6-800 yards sufficiently? or would it be a pita to try?

thanks for your help guys
Click to expand...

Take a look in the Precision Rifles forum and see what the guys that actually shoot "Long Range" are running on their rifles. $400 won't get you there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom