Best scope around $450??

[eric1115]

I think you've made some excellent decisions.

 

[craigrh13]

Well. The SWFA 12x42 came in today. I spent some time comparing it against this Burris. I’m gonna return the SWFA. I actually liked the Burris better. Glass seemed just as great. Plus I like the focus, lighted reticle and the ability to adjust magnification that much better. Nothing against the SWFA. I simply don’t see the need for it when put up against the Burris.

 

[nobody]

Well. The SWFA 12x42 came in today. I spent some time comparing it against this Burris. I’m gonna return the SWFA. I actually liked the Burris better. Glass seemed just as great. Plus I like the focus, lighted reticle and the ability to adjust magnification that much better. Nothing against the SWFA. I simply don’t see the need for it when put up against the Burris.

Did you compare it in metrics that matter for a scope? IE tracking, zero holding ability, reliability? You’re buying an aiming device, not an observation optic.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Did you compare it in metrics that matter for a scope? IE tracking, zero holding ability, reliability? You’re buying an aiming device, not an observation optic.

Where has this Burris has failed you with respect to your metrics? A good view is not an important metric?

Bonus is you'll save money on ammo, since you won't be rezeroing every range trip. Win-win

Has that been your personal experience with Burris scopes?

 

[nobody]

I'd be interested to know where the Burris has failed with respect to your metrics? A good view is not an important metric?


Has that been your personal experience with Burris scopes?

I’m actually genuinely interested to know if he did, I would love to hear there’s another great budget option other than SWFA. My question wasn’t rhetorical, it was sincere. If the glass is comparable between the two, and the Burris is as mechanically sound as an SWFA, that’s a major win for us all.

As far as my original post, SWFA is the only Scope I have ever had experience with in the sub $500 price bracket that performs as a scope should. In fact, in my experience, its mechanical performance far exceeds the majority of scopes that cost a great deal more. So, if there really is another option, that’s great to hear.

 

[35WhelenAI]

I appreciate what you said. I take your response to mean you have not had personal experience with a Burris scope and have not wasted any ammo re-zeroing every trip to the range.

It's good information that your experience shows the SWFA to work as you expect it to.

I agree that extra features if they compromise the reliability in order to hit a price point is a factor to heavily consider. Just wondering if that particular Burris has a high rate of failure in those metrics (which your post alludes to) based on how you have framed it.

 

[craigrh13]

Did you compare it in metrics that matter for a scope? IE tracking, zero holding ability, reliability? You’re buying an aiming device, not an observation optic.

Nope. I certainly didn’t. I read the label that came with it that said they won’t accept returns with ring marks or anything like that so i’m not even gonna mess with it. As far as pure looking through it and the eye box goes I give the nod to the Burris. I completely understand what you’re saying though. I won’t be beating the piss out of this gun so whether or not it can be used as a hammer doesn’t matter to me. For the most part I will set it and forget it. So again, tracking isn’t that big of an issue to me. If I do encounter an issue though I have no worries that Burris will stand being their product and make it good.

 

[nobody]

I appreciate what you said. I take your response to mean you have not had personal experience with a Burris scope and have not wasted any ammo re-zeroing every trip to the range.

It's good information that your experience shows the SWFA to work as you expect it to.

I agree that extra features if they compromise the reliability in order to hit a price point is a factor to heavily consider. Just wondering if that particular Burris has a high rate of failure in those metrics (which your post alludes to) based on how you have framed it.

Yeah sorry about the confusion, I can see where my wording would’ve thrown things off.

 

[nobody]

Nope. I certainly didn’t. I read the label that came with it that said they won’t accept returns with ring marks or anything like that so i’m not even gonna mess with it. As far as pure looking through it and the eye box goes I give the nod to the Burris. I completely understand what you’re saying though. I won’t be beating the piss out of this gun so whether or not it can be used as a hammer doesn’t matter to me. For the most part I will set it and forget it. So again, tracking isn’t that big of an issue to me. If I do encounter an issue though I have no worries that Burris will stand being their product and make it good.

Playing devil’s advocate, but what if the scope goes down during a hunt and costs you a hunt? What good does the warranty do you if the scope goes down and costs you an animal?

 

[craigrh13]

Playing devil’s advocate, but what if the scope goes down during a hunt and costs you a hunt? What good does the warranty do you if the scope goes down and costs you an animal?

This gun will be mostly shooting steel. However, I have never ever had a scope go down. EVER. BUT if it did then such is life. It’s not the end of the world.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Playing devil’s advocate, but what if the scope goes down during a hunt and costs you a hunt? What good does the warranty do you if the scope goes down and costs you an animal?

That's good thinking, no one wants to lose a hunt.

Hard to help anyone overcome a fear of what they read on potential failures. I'm glad I have 30 years of experience that tells me what I need to know and it won't change how I'm looking at the scopes I choose.

Many different brands of scopes on my rifles, never had one go down as well. I have a 28 year old Leupold that has taken well over 1000 rounds out of a 300 Win Mag and steady as the day I got it. Bausch and Lomb scopes, Redfield, Burris, and mostly Leupolds have never gone down in that time.

With that, I think that Burris will do well.

 

[craigrh13]

That's good thinking, no one wants to lose a hunt.

Hard to help anyone overcome a fear of what they read on potential failures. I'm glad I have 30 years of experience that tells me what I need to know and it won't change how I'm looking at the scopes I choose.

Many different brands of scopes on my rifles, never had one go down as well. I have a 28 year old Leupold that has taken well over 1000 rounds out of a 300 Win Mag and steady as the day I got it. Bausch and Lomb scopes, Redfield, Burris, and mostly Leupolds have never gone down in that time.

With that, I think that Burris will do well.

We will see. They have never let me down in the past. Then again, this scope won’t be going through war, getting tossed down the side of a mountain or being used alternatively as a sledge hammer. Absolutely nothing about it screams cheap. From the glass, to the adjustments to the positive and audible turrets that actually feel better than my Trijicon credo. I think based on initial assessment I’ll be ok.

Then like I said looking at the return policy for the SWFA I didn’t want to risk mounting it, putting scratches or ring marks on it and them refusing refund. Plus I didn’t care for the eye box. Just my opinion. Other than that it seems like a nice scope.

 

[IALoder]

I just picked up another Athlon Midas HMR 2.5-15x50 for one of my rifles, and am still very impressed. Great glass, very tactile and positive clicks on the dials, and the 15x is great for target shooting. They can be had for $450-500 if you look. I'm sure I'll get another one to replace a diamondback tactical that I'm not a big fan of soon

 

[craigrh13]

I just picked up another Athlon Midas HMR 2.5-15x50 for one of my rifles, and am still very impressed. Great glass, very tactile and positive clicks on the dials, and the 15x is great for target shooting. They can be had for $450-500 if you look. I'm sure I'll get another one to replace a diamondback tactical that I'm not a big fan of soon

One day I would like to try Athlon. I hear good things about them.

 

[Agross]

I’ve only spent more than $200 on a scope once($250) and I’ve never had a scope fail. I’ve had a couple leupold, several redfields, and recently picked up a Burris for a great price. I liked it so much I bought a second one for my 300 prc. They r just the fullfield ii . For the price, and just in general, they r great. I paid $125 for the 3-9 and like $150 for the 4-12, both new.

 

[DG75]

 

[Valsport]

One day I would like to try Athlon. I hear good things about them.

+1

 

[bow puller]

Several Burris fullfield II's, E1's on family/friends rifles. I haven't seen a scope yet as bright and clear for the money up to 2x+ the cost (cough vortex). None have failed but none have been abused either.

Wouldn't go to war with one (fullfields) but I'd hunt with one and not think twice based on what I've seen.

 

[craigrh13]

I finally went and shot the new Bergara 308 with the Burris 4-16. I’m impressed so far. Only shot to 300 yards after zero but I like the glass, eye box, focus, positive and audible windage and elevation adjustments, and the reticle. Using the reticle calculator on the burris website is pretty cool too. So far I have no regrets.

 

[mydogsmonkey]

I'd consider the Primary Arms line of scopes or Bushnell Match Pro ED, it seems to be what people rave about for that price range.