Delta Titanium

[Sherlock]

Having looked through the Delta as a potential buyer , I must say I was underwhelmed and I'm struggling to understand all the hype on this thread is about.

The image through the Delta looked identical to my Bushnell 6500 2.5-16x50. That's pretty damn good, but certainly not approaching world class. Mind-you , its hardly surprising as they are probably made on the same factory line using similar components.

 

Everything about the Delta - from its build quality - its aesthetic appearance and its optical abilities , screams " MID PRICED JAP SCOPE ". No More / no less

 

Whilst not a huge Sightron fan - My buddies 6-24 Sightron was sharper than the Delta with better resolution... Plus the Sightron has a much better mag range for LR shooting... it would be interesting to see how the Delta stacked up against the Sightron STAC which has similar mag range.

 

 

Personally I think its up against some stiff competition priced around £700. For example - a new Zeiss 5-25x50 is now £695 from OW . The German scope has a much better mag range - better optics - oh , and it says Zeiss on the side..

 

 

VarmLR - If you think that a Night force scope has the "ultimate in resolution" - for god sake don't start looking through a S&B , Zeiss - IOR or Swarovski glass - it will only depress you.

 

 

 

Just my twopennith

 

S

[VarmLR]

No offence, but my opinion of the Delta is much different to yours. Everything about the glass screams "high priced" and no way is it comparable to most mid priced glass, imho. I've owned Bushnell Elite scopes and they weren't a patch on the Delta optically, although recently I had cause to try a new (top of the range) Bushnell Tactical Elite which seemed an improvement on the older 6500s. There's a world of difference looking through a scope in the shop and actually trying one in the field in varying light conditions, so I speak with experience of the latter. The discounted Zeiss is a good buy, and that probably would give the Delta a run for its money by all accounts, but it's in a very small class of probably just two or three scopes that I can think of in that price range. Personally, I couldn't give a monkeys what brand is on the side of a scope (that's just another example of shooting snobbery) as it's the product that matters, and I choose by performance and build providing solid vfm, not on brand. Top Euro brands of course are about the best in the business, but at their lower end (and I have looked through plenty of lower priced Zeiss scopes and been left more than a little underwhelmed) they're no better than the competition.

 

I agree that Sightron are good and probably up there with the best of the mid priced Japanese optics. I prefer the Delta though. The Sightrons are a better long range scope but I didn't buy the Delta for (principally) LR shooting.

 

I did NOT state that the NF was the ultimate resolution glass (re-read what I said and the context in which it was written), but said that the Delta did not have the ultimate resolution of the NF...badly worded as I should have typed "ultimately it isn't with the NF in resolution" if that makes you happier. I've looked through plenty of top class European scopes and yes, there's plenty that do better the NF but, boy, do you pay a premium for them.

 

I am in no way depressed by the NF thank you sherlock (that is a laughable comment and unnecessarily derisory) , it is a fantastic scope and will probably out last me. It does what it's meant to do very well and has excellent optics. There's usually always better at more £££££'s and there's always someone to be critical of other's points of view. Bash away if it makes you feel any happier a person ...

 

I stand by what I wrote. The Delta to my mind is a fabulous scope for the money and I recommend it heartily as one of the best choices at the price for fox/deer/vermin control to reasonable distances. If you can find a better scope for less money, I'm all ears, but I doubt that you will.

[MikeJ]

Hi VarmLR,

Was just wondering whether you have had any further thoughts on your Delta? After two visits to "Orion" I have concluded that the Vortex PST on my .308 is really not all it's hyped up to be (indistinct side focus, glass not particularly clear at 800 yards) and is no better optically than a Hawke 'Sidewinder'.

Can't afford a Swarovski or high-end Night Force, but I did look through a couple of Bushnell http://opticswarehouse.co.uk/product/bushnell-elite-tactical-dmr-3-5-21x50-riflescope/ and thought they were rather good. I'm no longer so sure having seen Richard Utting's (and your) comments on the Delta.

I'm not sure whether the Bushnell described above is one with which you may have compared to the Delta? Any thoughts on this please?

[VarmLR]

Hi VarmLR,

Was just wondering whether you have had any further thoughts on your Delta? After two visits to "Orion" I have concluded that the Vortex PST on my .308 is really not all it's hyped up to be (indistinct side focus, glass not particularly clear at 800 yards) and is no better optically than a Hawke 'Sidewinder'.

Can't afford a Swarovski or high-end Night Force, but I did look through a couple of Bushnell http://opticswarehouse.co.uk/product/bushnell-elite-tactical-dmr-3-5-21x50-riflescope/ and thought they were rather good. I'm no longer so sure having seen Richard Utting's (and your) comments on the Delta.

I'm not sure whether the Bushnell described above is one with which you may have compared to the Delta? Any thoughts on this please?

 

Well, it's now had some pretty extensive use in the field and on the range and optically, it continues to impress. What I like is the wide FOV and image brightness when hunting, and out after muntjac I seldom screw the mag up past 4 or 5 times. Used it for 200 yd crow and also for gong shooting at 400 yds in mixed lighting. In poor light it has come into its own, and to me, betters most of the Vortex range unless you start spending on their high end scopes against which I'd rather put that level of money towards a Zeiss or S&B anyway.

 

The illumination is great. The central spot is small enough and helps rapid acquisition on even small targets.

 

I only have one niggle with the scope. If used without the caps on, the (lift up to re-set) target type elevation and windage adjusters lift out too easily and when carrying the rifle slung on my back, It tends to either knock the elevation or windage off zero or it lifts the locking turrets and spins them round without losing zero...trouble is you don't know which so zero has to be re-established when this happens. Its not a problem with the caps fitted as the turrets can't shake loose enough to lift out and turn. It does though mean that when dialling in the field, you do have to unscrew the caps, dial for your range and windage, then replace the caps, not forgetting to return to zero when you've finished.

 

I do of course have the option of returning the scope as the turret adjusters should fit snugly due to the o-rings used when locking in the close position, and mine has clearly failed on the windage adjuster, possible a duff one from new as it was loose out of the box, but as I now keep the caps on its not a problem.

 

The benefits of optical performance an light weight outweigh by far this one niggle, so the scope's a keeper. Yes, if you go IOR or with something like a Nighforce NSX the target turrets are better quality and you don't need to faff around with caps, but you pay the weight penalty.

 

As an all round vermin control and stalking scope, the Delta is still imho the one to beat in its price range, having tried many others.

 

If you regularly shoot to 800 yds, the Delta will do the job but for precision, you really need to be looking at the Bushnell Elite Tac DMR 3.5-21 x 50. Its a great scope. For similar money on the used market, the Nighforce NSX 5.5-22 x 56 is also an excellent choice. I would recommend either of those over the Delta for LR field applications. For stalking and vermin control but with the odd longer shot, the Delta would be the way to go. The only other which had comparable glass for the money was the discounted Zeiss conquest 25mm tube HD5 scope. That might be a better choice as a bridge between the Delta and the Bushnell/NSX for LR field shooting.

[MikeJ]

 

 

 

If you regularly shoot to 800 yds, the Delta will do the job but for precision, you really need to be looking at the Bushnell Elite Tac DMR 3.5-21 x 50. Its a great scope. For similar money on the used market, the Nighforce NSX 5.5-22 x 56 is also an excellent choice. I would recommend either of those over the Delta for LR field applications. For stalking and vermin control but with the odd longer shot, the Delta would be the way to go. The only other which had comparable glass for the money was the discounted Zeiss conquest 25mm tube HD5 scope. That might be a better choice as a bridge between the Delta and the Bushnell/NSX for LR field shooting.

 

Hi VarmLR. Thanks very much for your observations and thoughts on the matter. I've had a look through a couple of the Bushnells and thought they were OK, and I have taken delivery of one today. A very quick look through it this afternoon left me a little underwhelmed; although it's got an edge on the Vortex 4-16 x 50 PST in terms of the mag, the glass doesn't seem much better at all, with focus poor at the edge of the lens and a distinct yellow 'halo' around targets if they are silhouetted against a bright sky. Seems OK looking into the woods though. I've mounted it on the .308 and will take it out for a shoot at the weekend. The cheap old Hawke Sidewinder has a far more expansive "eye box" and good clarity - a shame that it runs out of focus after around 400 yards other wise it would be staying on the rifle.

I look forward to giving the Bushnell a good try out though.

[RobertH]

Hi VarmLR, just stumbled on this thread and as a relative beginner, am unacquainted with Delta Optics, but appreciate your comprehensive and open-minded review. Are you still happy with it?

 

I look forward to hearing from you,

 

 

[VarmLR]

Hi Robert

 

I've sold it on as the rifle that I had it mounted on is now used for 1000 yd shooting as well as stalking, so I now have a Bushnell DMR mounted, which is excellent. As a stalking/foxing only scope, I wouldn't hesitate to re-fit another Delta Titanium. I haven't looked through anything that betters it for the money and was very pleased with it in the field under very varied lighting conditions.

[Elwood]

Very good scopes for the money.

A friend of mine was looking for a scope to replace his stunningly awful Hawk scope, and I steered him in the Delta direction. The illuminated cross hair with the illumination set on the side is a neat feature, the cross hair itself works well without any unnecessary clutter. The only negative thing I could find was that the clicks on the elevation and windage turrets are a bit wishy washy. I'm more used to a positive feel like you would find on a Nightforce or March.

[plonker dave]

Morning all,forgot that I had posted in here.

Wee the scope was moved on after 1 stalk!

During the day the glass fine,but for me it failed at last light.I know it depends what your use to using but for me it didn't come close to a schmidt and bender 8x56 at last light (£400).

I could barely make a deer out at last light while my friend was taking the piss looking through a s&b 8x56.

For me if it's purely for stalking then there are better and cheaper scopes out there.

Atb dave

[banus02]

i have a delta titainium 2.5x15x56 very good scope BUT the illuminated dot looks more like a lightening fork and not round at all,i have spoken to mm sporting who i bought it from and have spoken to a nice lady at optics warehouse and they both say its my eye sight,not convinced it is though.other than that it works for my needs/stalking foxing vermin etc

[Amleto63]

I mounted a Titanium 4.5-30x50 MCZ reticle on my Tikka T3 Tactical.

Outstanding scope for the price and I love the 1/8 turrets and the tactical reticle with the very small dot for precision shooting.

[RobertH]

I ended up buying the Delta 2.5-15 x 56 to replace a Hawke Endurance 8 x 56, simply because I wanted a side focus and Rich Uttings review seemed too good to be true. (It was!). My land has a maximum range of 100yds and pretty much everything else is at 70 ish yds so the Hawke is a bit soft and mildly parallaxy (can’t think of a better word) at the shorter stuff, but I do prefer the Hawke’s eyebell and it’s clarity and brightness are very good too.

The Delta is very good. But, I must say I too was underwhelmed and perhaps just a teensy teensy bit disappointed with it when it first arrived. I was expecting it to so comprehensively blow the Hawke out of the water that perhaps my initial judgement was coloured. Rich Utting’s praise was so lavish I was perhaps expecting to open the box and find the Hubble telescope.

Nevertheless it is a really nice scope. Overall build quality is solid, I like the turret clicks but the pull-to-zero function feels loose and flimsy when resetting, not that I’ll be using it that way anyway, but the zoom, illumination and side focus knobs are solid, move smoothly, and stay where set. The reticule is particularly nice and the illumination quite excellent. I know what Banus means about the dot, but I wear contacts and also suffer with ‘floaters’ so a good blink and all is well again, and the degree of illumination is so adjustable, there’s always an appropriate level to use. I find the glass is very, very good, especially in poor light. The only high-end scope I can compare it with is a friend’s Zeiss, and we both agree the Delta’s glass is better.

So after my initial disappointment, I am really very happy with it, but it does put the Hawke’s excellent value for money into perspective. But as I said earlier, I’m only a beginner.

[snakeman]

I ended up buying the Delta 2.5-15 x 56 to replace a Hawke Endurance 8 x 56, simply because I wanted a side focus and Rich Uttings review seemed too good to be true. (It was!). My land has a maximum range of 100yds and pretty much everything else is at 70 ish yds so the Hawke is a bit soft and mildly parallaxy (can’t think of a better word) at the shorter stuff, but I do prefer the Hawke’s eyebell and it’s clarity and brightness are very good too.

The Delta is very good. But, I must say I too was underwhelmed and perhaps just a teensy teensy bit disappointed with it when it first arrived. I was expecting it to so comprehensively blow the Hawke out of the water that perhaps my initial judgement was coloured. Rich Utting’s praise was so lavish I was perhaps expecting to open the box and find the Hubble telescope.

Nevertheless it is a really nice scope. Overall build quality is solid, I like the turret clicks but the pull-to-zero function feels loose and flimsy when resetting, not that I’ll be using it that way anyway, but the zoom, illumination and side focus knobs are solid, move smoothly, and stay where set. The reticule is particularly nice and the illumination quite excellent. I know what Banus means about the dot, but I wear contacts and also suffer with ‘floaters’ so a good blink and all is well again, and the degree of illumination is so adjustable, there’s always an appropriate level to use. I find the glass is very, very good, especially in poor light. The only high-end scope I can compare it with is a friend’s Zeiss, and we both agree the Delta’s glass is better.

So after my initial disappointment, I am really very happy with it, but it does put the Hawke’s excellent value for money into perspective. But as I said earlier, I’m only a beginner.

 

Rob

 

Good god.... By the size of your font it makes me wonder if you really need to use a riflescope!

[RobertH]

 

Rob

 

Good god.... By the size of your font it makes me wonder if you really need to use a riflescope!

 

 

Ha!

[snakeman]

You'll get the hang of it Rob

[RobertH]

Thanks Snakeman, font size edited!

[varmint hunter]

I don't suppose you also have access to or own tubed NV that you could also test it with , in particular against the bushnell.

done it had 5 off the above DELTA scopes can get these cheaper in the EU. with a good 14 or similar gen 3 mono behind they are top notch

[Shootersam]

bought a delta titanium 4.5-30 2 years ago i put it on my hmr and constantly dial from 100 to 225 always tracks and has a lovely floating dot ret illuminated dot is great under the lamp.

new front mounted NV is due soon i have high hopes it will work well on this scope.

very good glass often compared it to my NXS obviously not quite to that level but very very good.

would like to try the new 34mm tube models.

glad i took a gamble with deltas

 

[VarmLR]

I'm a bit puzzled by some of the negative feedback from those trying out the Deltas

 

Although I sold mine on some time ago, I and others did a side by side comparison with this scope against a decent Zeiss and IOR until dusk/dark and it held up as well as the others, bettering the IOR. Granted, there is some yellow fringing at the extremes of the image but you don't use the extremes to aim, you use the centre! Eye relief and eye box was also the best of the bunch making it very easy to acquire a target quickly.

 

The DMRs that I now use are definitely better (and better than the SIII/Vortex PSTs) but are almost twice the cost too.

 

For the money, I must admit, (with a Meopta being the only exception in the same price bracket) I still haven't looked through anything to better them. As some have found, the only real gripe with them was the wishy-washy turret clicks and the fact that you need the caps on once adjusted otherwise the o-rings wont hold them in place and you lose your zero marker.

[Guesty]

I disagree that the Deltas and DMRs are better than Sightrons.

I have just sent back a Delta Stryker which was OK but very similar optically to the DMR. I have kept my S3 LRMOA as it represents better VFM and more useful reticle. None of the above are optically anywhere near my IOR, Z6 or the NF ATACR I just sold.

I had a Vortex PST, and it was easily the worst of the bunch.

[VarmLR]

Each to there own but I wouldn't swap my DMR for any Sightron after comparing both at the range.

 

They're both good, but I prefer the (better) build quality, better FOV and turrets of the DMR and also like the G2 ret. I also thought that it was optically superior. It has other neat features like massive elevation adjustment meaning that no 20moa or whatever rails are needed. It's all probably a personal thing once you get to a certain level so each to their own and I'm not bothered really what others think about the DMRs as I do like them. They're really popular amongst some of the 50 cal shooters and with good reason.

 

Agreed that the better IOR's are great scopes and not at all surprised that an ATCAR is better...it bl**dy well ought to be at the cost! The only other thing that I think we agree on is that the PST is the worst of the bunch

 

The Delta 2.5-15 remains a great scope for the money and does indeed represent fab VFM. We're not comparing like for like chucking in ATCARS and top tier IORs!

 

.

[David will]

I must agree that these Delta scopes are very good indeed, I have recently been gifted the 5-50x56 Stryker and it is most impressive. The optics are right up with the best continental glass and build quality seems to be excellent. I can't wait for my Bergara BMP to a rive to have a real play.

[David Hancock]

David.  Let us know what you think of it.  Richard Utting rates them and I've been looking at the 4.5 - 30 x 56 for my Bergara too