Why Is The Vortex Strike Eagle More Expensive Than The Vortex Crossfire 2?

[adn258]

So looking at the specs of two scopes. The Vortex Strike Eagle 1-8x24 Riflescope is on average substantially more expensive than the Vortex Crossfire II Rifle Scope - 4-16X50mm scope. Both are SFP Second Focal Plane scopes, but the latter I.E. The Crossfire 2 seems to exceed the Strike Eagle in every way possible based on the stats and specifications of the scope, so why is the Strike Eagle more expensive?

Correct me if I'm wrong, maybe I am missing here, but the Crossfire seems like a better scope yet costs less?

[ghbucky]

My research into Vortex some time back lead me to believe their lower priced optics were all manufactured in China. So, maybe the country of manufacture is what is effecting the price point.

It has been some time since I looked into them, and I'm not specifically familiar with those models, but you'd have to actually see the 'made in' stamp on the box to determine that, I believe. The manuals don't tell.

[ballardw]

The magnification range (not sure what the actual technical term would be), all else being equal, is bit more work to make acceptable images. The Eagle has 8 , the Crossfire II has 4 (4 times 4=16).
Different lenses and would not be surprised if you find a crosscut image of the Eagle that it has more lenses.

Just like fixed power scopes are less expensive than variables, all else being close to equal.

[handlerer2]

I have observed that the lower power zoom optics in small objective platforms are as or more expensive than larger objectives.

I have no real knowledge, but I have a hunch that it takes more work and precision to get the magnification in 24mm objective than a 50mm objective.

[jmr40]

For one thing you're comparing apples to oranges. Those are 2 very different scopes designed for different uses.

The biggest difference is in the quality of the glass. That determines how clear the scope is, especially in poor light. And there are no clear numbers that can be used to compare them. Probably the best is light transmission and even that is hard to use since there is no industry standard. Every manufacturer uses their own methods.

The very best scopes use glass that will transmit light in the upper 90% range, approaching 98-99%. But those scopes will be in the $2000-$3000 range.

Most of the scopes in the $500-$1000 range will be somewhere near 95%. The most common scopes that most of us use are the $200-$500 scopes and most of them will fall somewhere in the 90-95% range. Most budget scopes like the Crossfire will be under 90%, some as low as 85%.

At mid day, in good light a $150 budget scope may well appear just as good as a $2000 scope. But as it gets darker the difference becomes more apparent.

Other factors are ruggedness and precise adjustment. Most scopes are designed to move the POI 1/4 MOA for each click of the scope. Good ones do that precisely. Cheaper scopes may be all over the place when it comes time to get them zeroed.

[adn258]

Originally Posted by handlerer2

I have observed that the lower power zoom optics in small objective platforms are as or more expensive than larger objectives.

I have no real knowledge, but I have a hunch that it takes more work and precision to get the magnification in 24mm objective than a 50mm objective.

Someone above me said 24mm in lower magnification costs more than 50mm 50mm in higher magnifications. I thought higher mm scopes were all else being equal better? They are transmitting larger images.

[Scorch]

At mid day, in good light a $150 budget scope may well appear just as good as a $2000 scope. But as it gets darker the difference becomes more apparent.

Not necessarily. In brighter light you can see color aberrations and haloing around objects with lower quality lenses. Higher light transmission may make a scope brighter at dusk or dawn, but there is definitely a difference in bright light as well. Lenses are traded as an international commodity, so better lenses cost more no matter what. Among other qualities, lenses are rated on composition (what is the glass made of), hardness (crystal is harder than glass), clarity (free of defects, just like a diamond), light transmission (% of light that goes all the way through the lens measured with a light meter), color aberration (is the yellow brown or the red orange or the blue purple or green?), dispersion (sharpness of a point of light or haloing), and lens color shift (does the lens itself have a color to it?).

So one scope is cheaper than another. That usually means they use cheaper lenses. Now you may not be able to see the difference, but they are cheaper. Why does a Swarovski cost more than a Simmons scope? The most expensive thing in each scope is the lenses.