Yet Another Vortex Going in for Warranty

[Don Fischer]

I've owned 2 Vortex products and currently I have 1 vortex scope, a 4.5-27x56 Razor Gen II. I got it for 60% off and I'm still not sure how good of a deal it was. It doesn't track. Each MOA is really 1.09 MOA. It's repeatable at this so its not a huge deal now that I know its 1.09 but it was frustrating to begin with.

That said, Ever single critter I've shot at has tipped over when using this scope.

The other Item was a vortex 4000 rangefinder. basically a useless product as the laser was not pointed anywhere near the reticle.

I'm not sure I could see .09 MOA on a target?

 

[Deleted member 16014]

I'm not sure I could see .09 MOA on a target?

You are impossible.

Say you want to adjust your scope in either plane, or dial for longer range...a fella wants his scope to track 1:1. I had multiple Leupold's that were similarly afflicted.

 

[Don Fischer]

You are impossible.

Say you want to adjust your scope in either plane, or dial for longer range...a fella wants his scope to track 1:1. I had multiple Leupold's that were similarly afflicted.

Maybe so but 1/4" is .25. .09 is a lot less than that. Just went and got out my dial caliper and looked at .09. Barely noticeable!

 

[woods89]

Something about this sounds fishy to me. Two Vortex and THREE Leupold's gone back? Every company puts out a bad scope now and then but three back to Leupold? I don't use Leupold for whatever reason but they have to have about the best reputation in the industry and I simply can't imagine one guy getting three bad ones from them! And then you want to go from apparently Vortex price range to Night force price range? Something is fishy!

Leupold certainly doesn't have the best reputation in the industry in the circles I move in.

 

[Don Fischer]

Leupold certainly doesn't have the best reputation in the industry in the circles I move in.

Could be but until really recently I have never heard a bad thing about them. I'm certain they have had problems with scopes they've sold; they've sold to many not to have! But the thing that sets them apart has always been how well they honor their warrantee! I think for the sake of these internet discussions some guys get to nit picking to a fault!

 

[mtmuley]

I point my gun at stuff and kill it. mtmuley

 

[woods89]

Could be but until really recently I have never heard a bad thing about them. I'm certain they have had problems with scopes they've sold; they've sold to many not to have! But the thing that sets them apart has always been how well they honor their warrantee! I think for the sake of these internet discussions some guys get to nit picking to a fault!

I personally think we put way too much stock in warranties. I don't under any circumstances want to have to use the warranty.
If I have 5-7 days to hunt halfway across the country, and I have an issue that requires warranty work, that's a really big problem.
I probably just jinxed myself.....

 

[Farmerj]

Playing with the scopes today.;

Burris RT15 3-15X50
The parallax adjustment went way beyond the 365 yards to the speed sign and actually let me focus into 1000 meters. There’s a road behind the sign there.



Vortex Diamondback Tactical 6-24X50.

The parallax was pretty horrid out to the speed sign. It went to 300 and then infinity.



The quality of the glass and chromatic aberration is painful.

The uploads don’t do it justice.

 

[mtmiller]

I used to lose a lot of sleep worrying about someone breaking into my pickup and stealing my optics.

These days sleep comes easy.

 

[HighDesertSage]

I've had really good luck with Vortex. FWIW, a cheap scope is a cheap scope, regardless if it's Vortex, Leupold, Bushnell, Etc. To be honest the only scopes I have owned that did not lose a zero after being banged around in the mountains for a week is NightForce and the Razor line from Vortex.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I'm not sure I could see .09 MOA on a target?

Say a guy is taking a shot at 600 yards requiring roughly 12 MOA in elevation. If you get 1.09 MOA movement for every MOA dialed, you're off by over 6".

I can see 6" on a target and an error of over 6" from point of aim due to the device that is supposed to aid in aiming isn't acceptable. Especially for a boat anchor 3lb scope designed for such things.

 

[Don Fischer]

Say a guy is taking a shot at 600 yards requiring roughly 12 MOA in elevation. If you get 1.09 MOA movement for every MOA dialed, you're off by over 6".

I can see 6" on a target and an error of over 6" from point of aim due to the device that is supposed to aid in aiming isn't acceptable. Especially for a boat anchor 3lb scope designed for such things.

If your shooting game or target's that far away you need a scope made to do that!

 

[Irrelevant]

I gave my last Vortex away. Have another that came with a rifle, its also going down the road. I don't have any faith in them. I've had zero issues with Leupold and Weaver scopes in 30+ years and about 25 of them.

It's ridiculous that a cheap old weaver could hold zero better than a new Vortex that costs half a kidney.

 

[Irrelevant]

Let's see I own an old ass weaver, an old Bushnell, a couple Vortex, one leupold, and one Redfield. The two old ones are the only ones that hold zero year to year. But Vortex is the only ones that have gone in for warranty

 

[TimeOnTarget]

Say a guy is taking a shot at 600 yards requiring roughly 12 MOA in elevation. If you get 1.09 MOA movement for every MOA dialed, you're off by over 6".

I can see 6" on a target and an error of over 6" from point of aim due to the device that is supposed to aid in aiming isn't acceptable. Especially for a boat anchor 3lb scope designed for such things.

Now do the same math when you're dialing 25 MOA. See why it matters now @Don Fischer ?

And a Vortex Razor Gen II is a tool designed just for this job. It just doesn't do it awfully well. Or at least the one I have doesn't.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Now do the same math when you're dialing 25 MOA. See why it matters now @Don Fischer ?

And a Vortex Razor Gen II is a tool designed just for this job. It just doesn't do it awfully well. Or at least the one I have doesn't.

Yep. They seem to still be a decent option and if it's consistent error you can rectify it pretty easily but a 9% tracking error is not inconsequential.

 

[shannerdrake]

I personally think we put way too much stock in warranties. I don't under any circumstances want to have to use the warranty.
If I have 5-7 days to hunt halfway across the country, and I have an issue that requires warranty work, that's a really big problem.
I probably just jinxed myself.....

Tommy : Let's think about this for a sec, Ted. Why would somebody put a guarantee on a box? Hmmm, very interesting.
Ted Nelson, Customer : Go on, I'm listening.
Tommy : Here's the way I see it, Ted. Guy puts a fancy guarantee on a box 'cause he wants you to feel all warm and toasty inside.
Ted Nelson, Customer : Yeah, makes a man feel good.
Tommy : 'Course it does. Why shouldn't it? Ya figure you put that little box under your pillow at night, the Guarantee Fairy might come by and leave a quarter, am I right, Ted?
Ted Nelson, Customer : What's your point?
Tommy : The point is, how do you know the fairy isn't a crazy glue sniffer? "Building model airplanes" says the little fairy; well, we're not buying it. He sneaks into your house once, that's all it takes. The next thing you know, there's money missing off the dresser, and your daughter's knocked up. I seen it a hundred times.
Ted Nelson, Customer : But why do they put a guarantee on the box?
Tommy : Because they know all they sold ya was a guaranteed piece of chit. That's all it is, isn't it? Hey, if you want me to take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed, I will. I got spare time. But for now, for your customer's sake, for your daughter's sake, ya might wanna think about buying a quality product from me.

 

[longbow51]

Say a guy is taking a shot at 600 yards requiring roughly 12 MOA in elevation. If you get 1.09 MOA movement for every MOA dialed, you're off by over 6".

I can see 6" on a target and an error of over 6" from point of aim due to the device that is supposed to aid in aiming isn't acceptable. Especially for a boat anchor 3lb scope designed for such things.

Just go to mil-dots then.

 

[winmag]

In that scenario, just find your correction amount in MOA, divide by 1.09, dial to that. It's just math. That's really not a big deal.

You should really test to see what your scope actually dials vs what its supposed to dial, even if its a $3000 Schmidt Bender. So I can't REALLY hate on Vortex for that.

But I can hate on them for not holding zero or otherwise falling apart.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Just go to mil-dots then.

We're talking about a scope that retails for over $2k, weighs 48 ounces, and is designed for dialing. Not something one should have to avoid using in one of the most basic manners that it was intended for. It's been covered that you can adjust for this adjustment error within your verified dope and ballistic apps but at the same time critiquing it isn't unreasonable.

Really the bigger issue is when you have someone who doesn't shoot enough to diagnose and prove out the error (vast majority of shooting community) who just counts on a ballistic app and scope to work. Evidence: the vast adoption of leupold's CDS system.