Thread: Prime vs diamond back.

Which has the better optics?

Personally, I stay away from purchasing any Vortex Diamondbacks, as budget Vortexs’ are going downhill very very fast. Quality control is just not there and the last (and only) Diamondback didn't even last 6 months before the reticle windage turret just fell out. Also, the glass quality is not there once you go past 450-500 meters...it started to get burry for my eyes.

The only good thing about budget Vortexs' is the warranty, but that's also a bad thing because they seem to use their warranty in place of good quality control on the factory floor.

I personally would go for the Bushnell Engage 30mm which is one step up from the Bushnell Prime. The Engage has locking turrets with accurate repeatable adjustments (on the 30mm model, don't buy the 1”). The Engage is set up for long-range precision, yet it's lightweight enough to top a hunting rifle. I found the reticle a little thin for low light, but the scope's price, versatility, and overall performance make it a great value scope.

I have several Vortex scopes two are 4 X 16 X 44 Diamondbacks one on my 270 the other on my 7 mm Mag both dial well and so far haven't had a problem with any of my Vortexs. Haven't had anything to do with the prime so can't comment on that one.
Both my Diamondbacks are older models not newer ones so maybe there quality control was better back then.

I had a 3-9 Diamondback on my .270 and was really happy with it. Nice bright clear sight picture and dialed well as far as the limited stuff I was doing. Wouldn’t hesitate to get another one if I was after a scope in that price range

Would go diamondback over prime. Bushnell really shot themselves in the foot by going away from their recognized stuff (bushnell 3500, 6500, elites etc). The new products are so new who knows how they will hold up.
Owned a diamondback 4-12 a few years ago and if I had to go back to a low end scope would happily use one again.

Edit: I would still rather own a Bushnell 3200/3500, 4200/4500 over a diamondback though. Better glass and the infamous rain guard

I mounted a Bushnell Prime 1-4 on my 308 a couple of years back while my Leupold 1-4 was sent back for repair. It was rugged and held zero. Glass didn't seem as high spec as the Leupold, however it has the exo barrier coating which was excellent. It was so useful in fact for the wet bush I typically hunt that it stayed mounted on the rifle even when I got the Leupold back.

Sheets for the input guys.
Actually looking at these as spotting scopes for a house to look out over the harbor. So doesn't need to be extremely tough and the rain guard should be irrelevant.
Really just looking at the optics. Sounds like maybe the vortex has the edge

Bushnell change there line up too frequently. Why?

Originally Posted by Steve123

Bushnell change there line up too frequently. Why?

Who knows. Should have stuck with what they were good at and that is the elites. Probably just trying to bring lower quality scopes onto the market to compete with other companies. Leupold did it too by getting rid of the vx1 and vx2 for the American marksman and freedom scopes, patriotic names which is great for marketing, but IMO they should have again stuck with what they knew and people trusted.

Originally Posted by superdiver

Who knows. Should have stuck with what they were good at and that is the elites. Probably just trying to bring lower quality scopes onto the market to compete with other companies. Leupold did it too by getting rid of the vx1 and vx2 for the American marksman and freedom scopes, patriotic names which is great for marketing, but IMO they should have again stuck with what they knew and people trusted.

I got the hump with Bushnell when they wouldn't let optics planet ship their product here. Pretty sure a certain big box retail chain suggested it. But since then I've noticed the amount of discontinued product lines and have to ask if they were any good why keep discontinuing.