Scope advice - Burris 2-7 & 3-9 ballistic plex.

JCnAR

JCnAR

New member
Guys, I'd like a little advice. I'm looking at getting a couple of Burris scopes. One for my deer rifle, and one for a coyote gun that I have yet to buy (probably 243, maybe 22-250).

I like the Burris with the ballistic plex reticle. I'm thinking I like the 2-7 35mm for my deer rifle, because I have rarely used or needed higher than about 6x or 7x for deer, and I like the wide field of view that 2x offers for close up shots. I think I'll go with the 3-9x 40mm for the coyote gun.

Would you go with this setup or would you go with 3-9 on both to maintain consistency? One thing about the 2-7 that I'm unsure about, is that it uses 1/2 MOA adjustments instead of 1/4 MOA. I'm not sure if that should be a concern or not. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif
 
I have two 3x9 Burris BP scopes one on a Encore 209x50 and the other on my 22-250 Ruger 77 varmint also have two 4.5x14 BP on 243wssm and 243 Encore. I would like to switch to a 2x7 for my deer rifle, I've shot every deer with the scope on 3x. I also like the wide field of view that the 2x7 has, I wouldn't think the 1/2 MOA would be a problem.
 
I am putting the 3-9 model on a model 7 .223 I just bought.Keep in mind that these scopes are set to shoot at the highest magnification for the different yardage marks in the reticle.
 
For Large game hunting I like the 2x7 or 2.5x8 for the field of view, but for varmint my 22-250 wears a Leupold 3x9.

I still favor the leupolds but Burris runs a close second!
 
I shoot with a Pentax 4.5 to 14 on a .223 tc it is wonderful. Same scope as a Burris Fullfield II but about 60.00 dollars less. Same ballistic plex, everything. I also shoot a Lepold 4-14 VX 2 on a 25-06. I can not see a whit of difference in the clarity of either scope Pentax vs Lepold, except the 300.00 difference in price. Don't get me wrong Leo is a great scope and may be better but it is just that I can't see any real difference in quality or clarity. So to get back to the orig question I think your choices would be great.
 
I can see a big difference in quality and clarity between any of my Leupolds and my Fullfield II. Of course, the Leupold is US made and the Burris isn't. I wouldn't buy another. I like the ballistic plex though. I've got the Fullfield with the ballistic plex on a .270 and the hash marks are very very close out to 400 yards. IMO, the 2X7 is ideal for most all big game hunting. The only reason I'd consider going for more magnification is to zero in on antlers, especially if your hunting in an area with point restrictions.
 
I'm also looking at the 2x7x35 Burris for a light calling rifle in 6mm/.223. I understand that the Burris will not be availible until the end of April. I was also looking at a Swift Premier 2x7x40 but is nearly a 1/4# heavier.

AWS
 
Sounds like this may be a pretty good set up for me. I've looked at Leupolds several times and I like them, but for an extra $60 I can have "2" Burris Fullfields. I think the Burris optics will suit me just fine.

AWS, I did not know the 2-7x35 wasn't available yet! I've just about made up my mind to go ahead and order both.

Thanks for all the feedback!
 
Last edited:
Quote:
I can see a big difference in quality and clarity between any of my Leupolds and my Fullfield II



You and I have different eyes I'm sure. But so far I am real happy with the Pentax.

Also of the two hunting partners I have showed the scope to, both aggreed that that there wasn't much difference if at all.

To each his own. I don't mean to knock your choices. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Quote:
I can see a big difference in quality and clarity between any of my Leupolds and my Fullfield II. Of course, the Leupold is US made and the Burris isn't.



The only difference I see in Leupold over Burris is better eye relief. But in low power range this isn't an issue as they are about the same. But all my Burris say "Made in USA" so maybe that is the difference.

If you want to make things easier on yourself, go with a low power range for the coyote gun. No, it doesn't impress anyone when you say "oh, it's just a 1x4" but the quick acquisition of moving targets that are often at close range makes the low power a better choice, imo. Save the big stuff for small, stationary targets at long range. Take advantage of the fact coyote calibers shoot very flat.
I have worked down the range from 4x16 to where this last season I went 1x4 and LOVED it. I have found I need to shoot quick (he spooked at 30 yards, come on the run, etc.) a lot more than I need to determine if what I see is a stick or leg at 300 yards. Just my 2 cents.
 
Quote:
If you want to make things easier on yourself, go with a low power range for the coyote gun. No, it doesn't impress anyone when you say "oh, it's just a 1x4" but the quick acquisition of moving targets that are often at close range makes the low power a better choice, imo. Save the big stuff for small, stationary targets at long range. Take advantage of the fact coyote calibers shoot very flat.
I have worked down the range from 4x16 to where this last season I went 1x4 and LOVED it. I have found I need to shoot quick (he spooked at 30 yards, come on the run, etc.) a lot more than I need to determine if what I see is a stick or leg at 300 yards. Just my 2 cents.



This is good stuff! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif I like your way of thinking, and that's mostly the reason I was looking at 2x7 for my deer rifle. I'm new to coyote hunting and was thinking the higher power may offer a better advantage on the smaller targets. But I agree, for close encounters, a wider FOV would be much better.
 
The difference between my Leupold's and my Burris was most evident after sighting in rifles at 200 yards. After putting several shots through the .270 with the Burris I switched to another rifle with a Leupold and I was struck by how much clearer the target diamond was at that range. Much easier on my eye as well. I went back and tried to focus the burris but I could not improve on clarity. The sales clerk marketed the scope as American made, but a little research revealed that it was not. This was one that came with the free spotting scope.

The Burris is fine, its just that for a similar price I think the quality of the Leupold is superior. Don't know if this Fullfield is the same as a Pentax. I have Pentax binos and the quality is outstanding.
 
Engine6 is right, imo. I have two .223's, one with 3x9 Burris and the other with 2.5x8 Leupold. I have shot both, side by side at the range and the Leupold is much clearer and easier on the eye. I have used many scopes over the years, some with much higher power and have concluded that the 2.5x8 is more than adequate for any shooting I do. The vast majority of the time, the 2.5 setting is where I use it.
 
Still have a bad taste in my mouth from the poor customer support I recieved from Burris. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/angry-smiley-055.gif I agree with the rest on clarity and eye relief diffs. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif RR
 
Awww man, just when I think I've figured out what to get, y'all make me start having doubts about my decision. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif

Engine6, which model Leupolds do you have that you're comparing to the Fullfield II?
 
I can't remember so I got them out (Fullfield II, VX-I, and a VX-III). At 350 yards at dusk I could make out individual drilled holes in a piece of angle iron with both the Leupolds. With the Burris I could see a line of holes, but not individual holes. The VX-III was a little brighter than the VX-I. Is that a significant difference??? I don't know, for hunting probably not. But, as I said before, the differences become more apparent and easier on the eye after several shots at targets, IMO. Truthfully I thought there would be more of a difference, and after several shots maybe there is.
With the rifles side by side I noticed that the Burris is mounted further back than the Leupolds. The eye relief is more a factor than I thought.
Please don't get me wrong, I think the Burris is a good scope and I have no plans of taking it off the .270 (If you knew me you'd know that's high praise), but, if I had it to do over again I'd buy a Leupold VX-1 in 3X9.

I have to admit that I am biased towards Leupolds, but I think for good reasons. First, I've had a few hunts messed up with poor scopes (fogged up, zero won't hold). I've had bad Bushnell's, Tasco's, Stightrons, Redfields, Swift's, but never a bad Leupold. The VX-III on the 300 went with me when I was thrown by a horse on the way into elk camp and was dead on for opening day. The VX-I on my .243 gets the crap beat our of it on my four wheeler and it is always dead on, unlike the Sightron SII that was on that rifle previously.
I must also admit that I like to buy products made in the U.S. How many times do U.S. consumers have an opportunity to buy a competitively priced product that is homemade with comparable and argueably superior quality than an overseas product????? Very seldom!!!

elkcampcolorado2005002.jpg

If it comes out right, this is a cow I shot last year with a .257 Roberts and a Leupold VX-III 2.5 X 8 that I bought 23 years ago. I've got my money's worth from that scope.
 
hello, you know i wonder about the burris scopes that come with the free spotting scope, its interesting that when looking at prices the ones with the free spotting scope are the same price or within $5.00 of just the scope alone ? i wonder if two fullfields are produced a cheapie & regular ? the reason i say that is there seems to be questions where these are really made ? i have looked at these & was lead to believe they where usa made by the salesman at the counter maybe thats what he thinks ? the one i looked thru wasn't the promo pkg & in the store not outside it was impressive to look thru,i"m in the market for a scope & am tempted but not sure i trust these guys,the nikon is phillipines but at least no one is deceptive about that.i"m with engine6 i think the vx-1 is probably the way to go in that price range even though the advertised light transmission is less they are good to look thru.
 
I heard some negative comments about the VX-I and Rifleman scopes so I haven't really given them much of a look. I'll try and gather some more info on them. I thought the Fullfield II was on the same level as the VX-II.

That's a nice cow ya got there! That VX-III 2-8x36 is a scope I've drooled over for a long time. Maybe I should quit being such a tightwad and get what I really want, instead of settling for something because of cost.
 
Thanks. I'm in the market for another scope myself. I found a load for the 300 that put seven rounds in a 4" group at 300 yards yesterday, so I think I'm gonna get some higher magnification. Probably a VX-III in 4.5X14, and I might try the Boone and Crocket reticle. Depending on how much overtime I work. I'm tired of playing musical scopes.

Dave, you must have been at Sportsman's Warehouse!! I think they were pushing them. Had I researched the origin of that scope a little further I would have returned it. I was a pretty [beeep] when I found out they in fact are not US made. So far its held its zero though.
 
engine6, yes i was at sportsmans warehouse & the gentleman mentioned us made & i said i think some or most burris products are us but i had heard the ff11's are exported.
 
Back
Top