Anyone Using Burris?

[golfer]

I have been happy with Burris. I have experience with the veracity series. I would very pleased with the build quality and glass, only negative I saw was the weight and size of the scope (big and Heavy)... but it was excellent build quality.

Which Veracity scope do you have? I am looking at these and just cant decide on the 3-15 or th 4-20 to put on the 300WM.

 

[sbhooper]

[/QUOTE]
Careful, you are posting links to another good dealer. Taboo here. Cameraland (Doug) is a good guy to deal with.

 

[AggieCowboy]

I had a fullfield 2. It was alright, but I don’t regret going up to the viper.

 

[wyflyguy]

I have a Fullfied II on my Browning A-bolt .270
Don't have any complaints about the scope. I have killed many animals with that setup. The reticle has been nice as well. The drops have been fairly close for my rifle.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Thanks for the info, but posting links to other vendors is a no no.

Leupold keeps the lights on around here, doesn’t mean we can’t discuss and advocate for other brands, but it does mean we need to be respectful of who’s paying our tab.

I think the reasonable ground is to say hey xyz has a sale, or if discussing a specific product just post a pic.

 

[GearJunky]

Which Veracity scope do you have? I am looking at these and just cant decide on the 3-15 or th 4-20 to put on the 300WM.

I had the 4-20 and really did like it. I mounted it onto a tikka t3 in .270. The scope was too big, I felt, for that gun and it seemed to make it off-balanced. But, it shot extremely well and I hunted with the setup for a full season. I now have a 3-15x42 leupold Vx-5hd, that seems to fit the gun better... honestly, there are times I miss the burris. I really liked the FFP reticle and although the image was slightly darker on the Burris, compared to the Vx5, something about the eye box on the Burris just made it a really nice scope to sit behind. I tend to get eye fatigue out at the range when I am using the Leupold, it seems like it's too bright.

If you plan to shoot out past 500 yards (and the bulkier scope isn't a deal killer), then I would go with the extra magnification. I have a Christen Arms .300WM and I run the Gen II Viper PST 5-25 and really like all that zoom range... but I also rarely walk in the field with that setup.

 

[schmalts]

Thanks for the info, but posting links to other vendors is a no no.

Leupold keeps the lights on around here, doesn’t mean we can’t discuss and advocate for other brands, but it does mean we need to be respectful of who’s paying our tab.

I think the reasonable ground is to say hey xyz has a sale, or if discussing a specific product just post a pic.

Correct, discussion is fine, but links to outside sales pages is sticky. Also keep in mind I will sell Burris, and usually lower than anywhere else. PM. Me for a price

 

[Washington Hunter]

Okay, so I didn't know it was against the rules to post links to optics dealers. But if you go to Cameraland you can find the Burris Fullfield E1 4.5-14x42 for $189.99. I just recently bought that same scope, except I got mine on eBay, and it was a package deal with an additional scope- a Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40, and I paid $242. What a deal for two scopes. Now I haven't ever used a Burris 4.5-14 so I can't say if I like them or not, but I have had the Fullfield II 3-9x40 on a couple different rifles over the years and they're great. I love the Ballistic Plex reticle. I also have a couple of Leupolds with the Long Range Duplex reticle, and it's similar to the Ballistic Plex, but it's hard to find a Leupold with that reticle anymore. That's mainly why I went with the Burris. You can get a Leupold with the Boone and Crockett reticle, but not at any price even close to the Burris. If I had more money I'd always go with Leupold because they're made in the USA, but this time I went with what I could afford.

 

[buffybr]

I replaced the Burris Fullfield E1 4.5-14x42 that I had on my 7 mm Rem mag with a Leupold VX 3i 4.5-14x40 CDS side focus scope. I would like to have that same Leupold scope on all of my rifles. Anyone want to buy the Burris?

 

[Washington Hunter]

I replaced the Burris Fullfield E1 4.5-14x42 that I had on my 7 mm Rem mag with a Leupold VX 3i 4.5-14x40 CDS side focus scope. I would like to have that same Leupold scope on all of my rifles. Anyone want to buy the Burris?

What didn't you like about the Burris?

 

[tzone]

I have the burris fullfield 2... it's big and heavy, but other than that I can't complain.

I replaced the Burris Fullfield E1 4.5-14x42 that I had on my 7 mm Rem mag with a Leupold VX 3i 4.5-14x40 CDS side focus scope. I would like to have that same Leupold scope on all of my rifles. Anyone want to buy the Burris?

Well, I also would love to have that on all my rifles but.... this is for my son and his price point is lower than a VX3i.

 

[Tjay]

tzone

I have a new 3x9 FFII he can have. I have a bunch just sitting around.

 

[buffybr]

What didn't you like about the Burris?

I like the side focus on the VX 3i better than the Objective lens focus on the Burris, I thought the Ballistic Plex reticle of the Burris was too fine for low light conditions in thick timber, and I really like Leopold's CDS system for dialing in ranges.

I'm thinking of replacing the old 10x Weaver that I have on my .22-250 with the Burris.

 

[Washington Hunter]

I like the side focus on the VX 3i better than the Objective lens focus on the Burris, I thought the Ballistic Plex reticle of the Burris was too fine for low light conditions in thick timber, and I really like Leopold's CDS system for dialing in ranges.

I'm thinking of replacing the old 10x Weaver that I have on my .22-250 with the Burris.

You must not have the E1 version. Mine has side focus, that's one reason I got it. Also, the reticle is fairly heavy. As to the CDS, I question the reliability of that system and I would in Burris scopes as well. With a holdover type reticle you know it's always going to work.

Fullfield E1™ Riflescope 4.5-14x42mm | Burris Optics

www.burrisoptics.com

My scope and reticle:

 

[wayner]

I have a burris fullfield 11 had it on a 270 for ten years, it's been all over the world, shes had a few dings over the years but it has served me well, it was my first scope and couldn't afford a top end scope but it has not let me down and I would get another shes accounted for a lot of game over the years,regards wayne

 

[ImBillT]

Last time I shot with anyone who used Burris they were all still made in the US. They were well liked then. I would be sure to see how people felt about the specific model you were looking at, but I wouldn’t be afraid of them as a brand. All brands these days seem to have some good and bad, and it can be difficult to decipher which is which.

 

[Outlaw99]

I’ve got a 536 on my coyote gun that Just took a crap this am. I’ve had good luck with Burris warranty in the past on a handgun scope thpat my .460 smith “ate”; but pulling out the box for the 536, I see a 1 year warranty card inside... I’ll call them on Monday and see what they say.

 

[sbhooper]

I like the side focus on the VX 3i better than the Objective lens focus on the Burris, I thought the Ballistic Plex reticle of the Burris was too fine for low light conditions in thick timber, and I really like Leopold's CDS system for dialing in ranges.

I'm thinking of replacing the old 10x Weaver that I have on my .22-250 with the Burris.

Why do you need the ballistic plex in timber, in low light? The hold-over is for longer distance and long distance is not conducive to good shooting at last light.

 

[buffybr]

Why do you need the ballistic plex in timber, in low light? The hold-over is for longer distance and long distance is not conducive to good shooting at last light.

You're right. And that's exactly why I took the Burris off the rifle that I had it on. Most of my hunting is spot and stalk. In over 50 years of big game hunting, I can only think of 3 times when I hunted out of a "permanent" blind. When I go out in the morning, I don't know exactly where I'll be when I take a shot at an animal. For example, I might spot an elk a half a mile or more away across a valley or mountain meadow, then when I stalk in for the shot, he could be less than 50 yards away from me in the thick forest.

I have only taken two rifles on one hunt, and that was one in Africa when I took my .375 RUM for Buffalo and a 7 mm RM for Plains Game. On all of my other hunts I only take one rifle. So I have set up most of my hunting rifles for shots at 50 yards or out to 400 yards.

Through out the year I practice almost weekly with one or more of my rifles at targets out to 430 yards. I still have one rifle with a Leupold B&C reticle scope, but most of my other rifles have Leupold scopes with their CDS range adjustment systems. I prefer the CDS systems over the hold-over reticles.

 

[sbhooper]

You're right. And that's exactly why I took the Burris off the rifle that I had it on. Most of my hunting is spot and stalk. In over 50 years of big game hunting, I can only think of 3 times when I hunted out of a "permanent" blind. When I go out in the morning, I don't know exactly where I'll be when I take a shot at an animal. For example, I might spot an elk a half a mile or more away across a valley or mountain meadow, then when I stalk in for the shot, he could be less than 50 yards away from me in the thick forest.

I have only taken two rifles on one hunt, and that was one in Africa when I took my .375 RUM for Buffalo and a 7 mm RM for Plains Game. On all of my other hunts I only take one rifle. So I have set up most of my hunting rifles for shots at 50 yards or out to 400 yards.

Through out the year I practice almost weekly with one or more of my rifles at targets out to 430 yards. I still have one rifle with a Leupold B&C reticle scope, but most of my other rifles have Leupold scopes with their CDS range adjustment systems. I prefer the CDS systems over the hold-over reticles.

I had a Loopy with the B&C reticle and my eyes had a hard time picking up the lines. I get along better with my old Burris, even though the Loopy was brighter at last light.