Hey,
I'm from Denmark, and there isn't really many Burris Scopes here. I dont even think there is a dealer here. I once had one. But I would like to hear about your experince with this brand.

What do you think of it in comparison with Leupold?

Johannes

get the Leupold.

quote:

I'm from Denmark, and there isn't really many Burris Scopes here. I dont even think there is a dealer here

I think that would be called luck on your part. Stick with the Leupold

I have not owned a Burris rifle scope, but in the last year or two I have purchased a Burris spotting scope. I am very impressed with it, So much so that my next scope purchase will be a Burris. I have a couple of Leupolds that I have no complaints with all, but I could not see a difference looking through them in a side by side comparison. There is enough of a price difference here in the U.S. that I am willing to try one & see how it works for me.

I've had rather good luck with Burris. I had to send one back (parallax was set at 60 yards instead of 100), and had it back in 10 days, counting shipping.

In all I now have four, all on 270 class rifles. All seem to serve well.

I also have a Leupold on my 358, and it, in all truth, is by far the poorest quality optic I own. And I own Sightrons, Weavers, even Simmons.... JMO, Dutch.

While I am partial to the Nikon lineup, the Burris scopes are solidly built, bright, reliable optics -- and a good value for the money. I have several, including the Fullfield II, Signature and Signature Select models, on guns right now and have no complaints at all. And under low-light situations, if I can't have my beloved Nikon Monarchs, by all means, I want a Burris.

Don't let the rabid Leupold loving fraternity sway you away from Burris. To me, those gold rings only mean one thing: that someone paid more for less performance than a comparable Nikon Monarch, Burris or Zeiss could have provided.

Bobby Tomek said: "Don't let the rabid Leupold loving fraternity sway you away from Burris. To me, those gold rings only mean one thing: that someone paid more for less performance than a comparable Nikon Monarch, Burris or Zeiss could have provided."

I own a bunch of Leupolds. To me, they are well worth every dollar I spent on every one of them.

Now to the Burris brand: I bought a fixed 6X HBR off eBay several months back to put on a muzzleloader. One trip to the range told me the scope would not hold zero. Happens with all brands, I suspect. So I sent the scope to Burris, with a request to repair the scope, and a credit card number. I got a letter from Burris about a week later, along with a catalog and a price list. The letter stated that the scope was over 12 years old, and that although it was in warranty and would be repaired at no charge, they requested I allow them to retire it and replace it with another scope from their line. The price list was for 75% off every piece of optics Burris offers, with the exception of the Titanium Black Diamond. (It was 65% off.)

Long story longer, there is now a 2.8 X 10 X 44 Euro Diamond in my gun vault, awaiting a finished custom .35 Whelen.

I don't believe you can go wrong buying either brand, but Burris made a new customer by dealing with me the way they did...

I have 2 Fullfield II's and they have been working good on a 270 and a 300 winnie. I took one out at dusk with one of my Conquests and it lasted just as long as the Conquest which surprised me for half the money. Actually less than half because now you also get a Free pair of Burris Landmark binos with the purchase of a 3x9 Fullfield II with ballistic plex reticle. They are all over EBAY.

I own both Leo and Bur in many different sizes and both have worked well for me. I have had Burris longer so I have had to use customer service and they were willing to do what was needed to resolve the situation.
I know others that have had to deal with Leopold and were satisfied with the service they recieved.
Riflescopes.com is a good place to take a look around. As you know, like everything else, the better their product the more it is worth.

Smedley

I've had two Burris Signature scopes. a fixed 6x, and a 3-12x (heavy scope in weight though). Both have been great to use, with no problems in function or holding zero. Both were on a Rem 700 308 Win (not a lot of recoil). Very clear glass, excellent resolution, edge to edge crispness. No faults seen, or experienced.

I've had three Leupolds: 3x fixed (still have it), a fixed 6x, and a 6.5-20x. No problems with any of these either. The 6x was a nice scope on my 222 Rem. The 3x is on a Savage 99 in 300 Savage. I sold the 6.5-20x, as eye relief was too critical at various power settings. I wasn't impressed with it (I thought it was dark). No problems, just sold it, and I used a fixed 8x Lyman all american, and Weaver T-10 in its place.

Leupold evidently has a fantastic customer service department. I have heard some slow response from Burris customer service-but in all fairness-I haven't personally had to deal with either company in this regard. Both good scopes, as are Nikon and many others.

I have a fixed 4x IOR Valdada which is very bright, and sharp..Thought I'd mention it.

I have swapped a few vari-x III leupies for burris sigantures and have not regreted it. My experience with them is top notch in the field as well as customer service. I bought one with busted crosshairs here on this board, and told them that when I returned it. I got new turret covers (scratched) and a BMD reticle as well as new bikini covers and all I had to pay was the upgrade for the BMD reticle. The scope was back to me in 2 weeks.

Count me in as another Burris fan. Don't get me wrong, I think Leupold makes a fine scope, but I don't think they're worth the extra $200 or whatever that you're going to pay over the Burris. All of my big rifles wear Burris Signature's and the same goes for my father. Between the two of us we probably have a dozen Signatures in either 6-24 or 8-32. All of them on are big heavy recoiling rifles, and we've never had a single problem with any of them. That's enough reason for me to keep buying them.

quote:

Originally posted by WGM:
get the Leupold.

Whats a Leupold? Get the BURRIS, much better value. Compared, Burris hands down. Maybe thats why I got 7, make that 8 of them. Jay

I've had mixed results with the Burris Fullfields. One was an older one that I could just never get to focus correctly. I traded it off.

I now have one of the newer 3X9 Fullfield II, with the european adjustable eyepiece. So far I've just used it on the range but I plan on hunting deer with it this year. I'm very happy with it...so far.

I've had both Leupold and Burris compacts and am happy with both. I slightly prefer Leupold, but would not scoff at the Burris by any means.

Same story as everyone else. I have Zeiss, Leupold, and Burris scopes. All work well, and quite frankly my eyes can't tell the difference between them. All have held up well. I would buy another Burris Fullfield II without hesitation.

Burris and Leupold, my two favorite scopes.

I buy used Leupolds and new Burris.

Anyone who uses a blanket statement like "Just get the leup(old)" is not knowledgeable about scope value and performance. These folks invested alot of $$$ in these dinasours and feel the need to justify the bad purchases they have made. Get the Burris,they are a finer scope and a much better value than the leup(old).

quote:

Originally posted by small fish:
Anyone who uses a blanket statement......

We are painfully aware.

Bobby Tomek is correct.
I have 2 Burris FFII's and they are clear, bright and function extremely well.
One has lived a tough life on a Tikka 300WSM (6.4lb rifle and recoil is, um, noticeable)
Nikon Monarchs are on closeout right now and the best deal in optics at these prices.
I just bought two and love them.

Another vote for the Burris.

I recently bought a Fullfield II with the ballistic plex and have no complaints. I have only used it on the range, but it is very clear and bright. I have a leupold on my 7mmMag and the Burris is every bit as bright and clear.

Last year I got a deal on an american made 3x9 ffII & a 4.5x14 ffII from a salesman friend. I mounted the 3x9 on a very accurate 25'06 & it changed POI every other trip to the range. In the south where I hunt most deer are shot early in low light situations and I don't see how balplex will be effective in those conditions. My hunting partner has FFII on 3 of his hunting rifles but only 1 of them goes to the farm.

I am not a Burris hater as I have all my rimfires fitted with r/a scopes and have used the old 4 &6x signiture scopes on my using rifles. I would not take a FFII into the field unless I had put enough rounds through it to be sure it will work. I agree with all of the above about Nikon close outs.. I have bought 2 3x9's & 2 2x7's.

Get the Burris. I have the Signatures and a couple of FFlls and I'm still amazed with the quality and brightness.

The only problem I've had with a scope was with a Leupold 2.5-8X pistol scope. It was mounted on a T/C Contender in 270 Ren - a straight-walled 22 hornet case. During a match, the scope came apart at the turrets. They don't use 1 piece tubes on all their scopes! Leupold replaced it and I sold it. Won't touch a Leupold again.

I have 3 Leupolds and am satisfied with them all. One of my hunting buddies brought over 2 of his Burris scopes, we looked throught them at dark - and IMO the Burris gathered light better, but the Leupolds were very crisp especially around the edges.

I GLADLY swapped a 3-12x44 Burris Signature AO for a 3-12x42 Sightron SII Non-AO on my "26 IOD", B-78 25-06. (And got $200 FMV boot on an ancillary gun deal).

The SII has much better resolution IMHO and my "goat gun" really doesn't need the AO.

OTOH ... the other guy is happy too ... so ... take it all with the poverbial grain of salt.