Vortex Diamondback HP 4-16x42 + MTC Optics Mamba Lite 4-16x42 IR

[mrben2475]

I haven't been into the game all that long so very limited experience but here's my 2p

I purchased a secondhand Hunsman Regal .177 which came with a Hawke Eclipse 4-16x50 AO IR mildot which did a fine job but wanted something lighter and didn't really need x50 objective.

I then purchased an MTC Optics Mamba Lite 4-16x42 IR which was better than the Hawke.

MTC Optics Mamba Lite 4-16x42 IR

Positives

Lighter than the Hawke with nice clear optics and good at low light level.
Reticle looks great
Supplied objective/eyepiece covers screwed in so they were flush/neat
Good range of parallax adjustment
Magnification and parallax adjustment rings were smooth with nice resistance.
The magnified view window on the eyepiece lens cover is a nice idea. Magnifies the turret numbers so they're easier to read.

Negatives

First scope the turret covers were so tight I could get them off.
Replacement scope the elevation turret wouldn't sit on zero (notched off center either side of zero).
The reticle looked great but after trying it out I just found it too busy, too fine and overkill.
I liked the fact that the supplied objective/eyepiece covers screwed in so they were flush/neat but wasn't so keen on the fact that the eyepiece rotated with the reticle focus which results in the cover hinge sitting at an angle off center, which bugged me.
Using max zoom presented an outer edge hazing unless there was pin point perfect head placement without any slight movement.
Reticle is very much on the fine lines side, to the point where i found myself using IR in daylight depending on the target.
I found the logo on the side turret cover to look a little cheap looking and it didn't line up perfectly level when tightened (was only slightly off so perhaps I'm being picky).

I returned the MTC Optics Mamba Lite 4-16x42 IR and replaced it with the Vortex Diamondback HP 4-16x42

Vortex Diamondback HP 4-16x42

Positives

Even Lighter (and shorter) with brilliantly clear optics and excellent at low light level.
Reticle is clear, un-fussy and has everything that i need.
Feels really well made, well finished and solid. Inspires confidence.
Nice quality but subtle knurling on the turret caps.
The turret clicks are, well, very satisfying to use. They just feel good, solid and precise.
The the logo on the windage turret cover lines up perfectly level when tightened.
The Magnification and parallax adjustment rings were very smooth with a nice level of resistance.
The Magnification ring numbers face toward you.
x16 magnification is as clear as the x10, no hazing and more forgiving with slight head movement.
a sunshade is supplied.
I've read amazing feedback about their customer service and unconditional lifetime warranty.

Negatives

Parallax adjustment only goes down to 30 yards, but then again I don't really shoot less than that anyway.


The MTC Mamba lite was a definite step up from the Hawke and for the money it's probably up there with the best in that bracket.

When I got it a thought it was great (niggles aside). Since having and using the Vortex Diamondback I look back and the MTC was OK. The Vortex is a £100 more expensive but It's twice the scope in my eyes.

[mjr1983]

I certainly agree with your review on the Vortex Diamondback HP. I have the exact same scope on my .22 rimfire and It Is Indeed a great piece of kit. For the price and the scopes all round quality, combined with the Vortex lifetime warranty, you really can't go wrong

[jumbuck]

I have the Diamondback 4-16 on my 17HMR and is an excellent bit of clear glass. Being made in the Philippines quality is to be expected and doesn't dissapoint. The only point for me is the reticule is a bit fine which I'm not too keen on but that seems to be the modern trend at the moment

[edcm]

Hi all
Wow you guys have a different experience to be regarding the HP. Quite a few years ago I purchased (without looking through one first) the standard Diamondback to Go on my 17HMR. I was more than happy with its performance the BDC reticle fitted the ballistics perfectly (Zero at 100, first hash 150 yds, second hash 200) and the view was bright with no tunnelling.

So when money was available a few years later, I purchased the HP version for my .243. I should have sent it back there and then, It was so dark compared to its cheaper stablemate, and it was lie looking through a carpet tube as far as tunnelling went.

Disappointment wasn't the word for it! but I fitted it anyway.

I have had non shooting friends look through both side by side and they are surprised that the HP is the more expensive scope.

Eddie

[rapidresponse1]

good review bud