I've broke down and bought a new rifle, a Winchester Stainless in 300wsm which I'm having a Bansner Hightech put on. I've ordered Win. brass, Redding dies, and both 180gr Barnes XTS and 200gr Barnes XTS, now I'm trying to decide on a scope. I've sort of narrowed it down to a Leupold XV-III 3.5-10x40, a Burris Signature Select 3-12x44, or a Burris Signature Select 3-10x40. I've owned many Leupolds but never a Burris. My plans are to hunt antelope to bison with this one rifle and scope. So which one would you recommend? I like the Burris Ballistic Plex and the fact that its around a $150 less than the Leupold, but is it as good a scope?

Burris is a Great Scope and it is very comparable to the Leupold in Quality. Many (even me) say that the Burris is better than the Leupold.

They are Both good optics and I don't think one or the other would let you down. It is just a matter of personal preference.

Although, that 150 dollar difference would determine the choice for me.

Good Luck!

Reloader

I like your choice though I'd probably go with a 165grain X bullet. As for the scope, I'm a firm believer in Leupolds. You just can't beat a lifetime warrenty. With the new B&C reticle I think you'd be set. It will cost you more than a Burris. But, if this is to be your "go to" rifle for the next 20 years, average it out over that time and it starts looking pretty cheap. Twenty years? Hell, average it out over the rest of the time you expect to be here. 'Cause that's how long Leupold will warrenty that scope for. Don't know if Burris will do the same. Knowing you though, this won't be the last rifle you get and you will probably have a chance to check out a Burris on the next one!

NoCAL

I have leupolds, but I am a burris man. No BS wrnty and they are very crisp to my eyes. I buy leupolds when I do not have a chioce for a burris that I want. For the money burris is the best IMO

I own and have used both scopes and they are very comparable. Select the one you like best, because most likely you will not have problems with them. Both companies backup their products very well.

Either one, though I'd give the slight nod to Burris.

In fact, I'd get the now-discontinued Signature model you list. For my money, the Signature Selects are still unproven. You'll still get transferable lifetime support on the regular ol' Signature. They are fine, fine scopes.

RSY

I uded to have Burris scopes, but still have Leupold's I like the eye relief on the Leupold more. I have a 6.5 x 20 on my 300WM for Deer hunting people say its to much scope for Deer but it works very nicely where I hunt. You might check into the Bushnell Elite 4200 Scope they are a very good scope for the money. I have one of there 8x32 on my 22-250 it is a very clear scope for varmints and punching paper IMHO.

I know you didn't ask, but you may want to consider the higher grade Nikon scopes as well (Monarch and up). While I like all three brands, I think I prefer Nikons in general. JMO...

Good luck.

Leupold makes fine scopes, but so does Burris. I have 2 ea. 3X9 and one 2.5X14, all with the balistic plex reticle. Really like that reticle and the scopes are very repeatable on the adjustments. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Burris, and yes, they do have the lifetime warranty, too.

Regards,
hm

I have both and I really like the Burris' I have. Take a look at their ballistic-plex reticle. Easy to use and came in handy on the last deer I got.

I've got a 3.5x10 leupold on my 300wsm. I've had more bad luck with Burris got three of their scopes. I'm sending 6x24 back next week had the other two back . Problem I've had is won't hold zero or reticles goes out thats what happen on the one I'm sending back next week. Their service dept is great etc same as leupold. I've got over 30 leupold and only had one new scope that when out so I seem to have a better average with leupold and for me I won't own another Burris. The first leupold I got in the 60's was kind of turning purple color so about 1992 decided to send it back and have them check everything out well got a new scope in the mail. Called them to find out why and was told had good service out of that old scope and nothing was wrong but they didn't want to take a chance so just replaced the scope. Cann't beat that. Another good point with going with a leupold you can just about get any thing changed by the factory or by Seibert,Ackerman or Premier Reticles, Splading (spelling)out of Texas Creek in Colorado will put any camo or color on you leupold to match rifle and Warranty from leupold is still good. I've got acouple of the old weaver t scope plus acouple scopechief and have had no problem with them my old weaver 4x on my 722 222remmag just go old and had weaver redo it. Well good luck with the 300wsm.

I own both. More Burris then Leupolds. I only had to send one back to get fixed it was a burris for that scope Burris customer service sucked. After the 6th time sending it back and 2years worth of time they finnely broke down a sent me a new scope.

If you can get want you want in Leupold buy that.

WE have been using scopes from different manufacturers for many years, and have come to think of Leupold as the ones we use ourselves.

I have very little experience with Burris, so cannot say whether they are comparable to Leupold or not.

But, I would recommend Leupold with the full knowledge that you are going to get the best hunting scope there is.

And their service is second to none.

I have shot a Redfield since 1973 on a .300 Win mag and it served me well from New Mexico to Colorado to Alaska in all kinds of weather and conditions. I have shot two Burris scopes for some years now, from Colorado to Alaska. A 6X24 Signature on a .257 Wby, and a 4 X16 Signature on a .340 Wby. I have taken several animals with each and the .340 in particular has seen all weather that can be found. They have served me well and until I shot Leupolds thought they hung the moon. I would never knock Burris and will never sell or swap those I have and have five grandsons that will use them well over the years. I started shooting Leupolds both 4.5X14 Vari X III's on two .358 STA's that I have now taken to Colorado and Alaska in all weather and conditions. I am now shooting some Ziess scopes on .416 Rem and Rigby and .338 Lapua and have never looked through clearer optics. I said all this to say that if I bought scopes tomorrow for a rifle it would be a Leupold or Ziess with no questions asked. Why those two after thousands of rounds shot yearly, confidence in the scope when the shot of a lifetime may present itself. The actual placing of a crystal clear crosshair on the target in all conditions and putting the bullet where it belongs for that take down shot. Whether I am shooting at a target preparing for the next hunt or on that mountain or plain or tundra or veld my confidence in my scope is paramount, now that open sights are difficult for my aging eyes to focus on. My old 30-30 with open sights in my start up days of big game hunting were all I ever thought I would need, then old man age took over and took care of that. Just my .02 worth. Good shooting.

From another post I did earlier:

I sold optics for years in Tucson. Your initial question is a very valid, yet extemely subjective querry.

How good is your vision? Do you wear corrective lenses to see? Near sighted, far sighted? Any Astigmatism?

What works well for someone else may not work for you. A Leupold scope may transmit light just fine for you but not someone else. The true test is to go shopping during low light conditions, have someone select a few scopes for you without you knowing which is which, observe a target some distance away and see what YOUR eye likes the best. This is the MOST objective way to buy optics.

Scopes are a major purchase and you should take enough time to make a definitive choice. Ex. I like a lot of magnification myself because I have an Astigmatism in my shooting eye in addition to near sightedness.


I have Leupold 4.5x14 on ALL of my rifles.

But my first scope I ever owned was a Nikon 4x12x40 AO. Wished to God I never sold it.

I've tried many of the brands on the market & now all of my rifles have Leup. VXIII (except for a 3-9compact). I have never broken a Leup. but have broken reticles on a Burris (which they fixed straight away) & had Redfield fail to hold a zero. The Nikon I had a few years ago wasn't bright enough for me. For the money Leup. work for me.

I have some of both...A 3-9 VXII on my .338, A MK4 on a .300, two 6.5-20X50 Burris on two other .300s, a 6.5-20X40 on a .220 swift and a VXII 3-9 on another .300....I use this as my varmint gun and have run thousands of rounds through it. Never had a problem with any of them.

I cannot tell the difference in clarity between them except for the MK4.

I like leupolds but I have heard great things about Burris all the same.

I hate forced choices. Ginger and MaryAnn!