Burris scopes- good, bad?

[Bis]

My son is getting a new rifle (300 Win. Mag.) and needs a scope. He has done a lot of research and is hearing good things about the Burris scopes. He does not have unlimited income so he wants the most bang for the buck. I though it would be better to hear from real world people that have used these scopes. So please let me know what you think about them. He is not looking for exotic just a 3X9 probably 40mm with some type of mil type reticles.

Thanks

Ken

[madman4570]

Have a Burris fixed power 4X Short Mag on a 45-70 I like a lot!
It is a fine scope.

[Don McDowell]

If he gets one of the combo deals with the scope and the binoculars he will be quite satisfied with both....
I like Burris optics and the only time I had to have something fixed, they did not fix it they replaced it...

[Sixgun]

The best way to find out the quality of any scope is to ask a gunshop owner (preferably a friend who owns a gunshop ) and ask him what keeps coming back for warranty work. I have two good friends who own gunshops and they tell me that Leupold no longer is the "King of the Mountain". My buds claim Burris is a decent scope but you know which brand seldom comes back to the shop for warranty work?----------Nikon

They are priced similar with Leupold holding the high ground on price---scope for scope as there is a huge price range on everyone's models.

When I equipped my M1-A, I told my bud I wanted a good long range scope that will take a beating. Without question, he recommended a Nikon mildot 4.5 X 14 which I bought.

Don't buy any $100 scope as its like putting cheap tires on a Vette. Your son will have problems with it sooner than later. $250 or 3 will buy a nice Nikon--------------Sixgun

[Marvin S]

I have had good luck with the pistol and rifle scopes

[Bill in Oregon]

When I worked at a Sportsmans Warehouse, we had several Burris scopes that went back for work, and came back not working. I'm sorry to say it. Leupold may not be perfect, but we never had a case of Leupold not getting a repair right the first time, and their service cannot be beat. Nikon is a good scope, although the least expensive line can be recoil sensitive.

[2ndovc]

I have three Burris and two Leuopold. All have been outstanding optics.
Can't pick a favorite between the two. I ride them both hard and put them away wet.

Jb

[rat patrol]

Burris is a great scope. Had the 3x9x40 on a .338 win mag. I've also owned Swarovski and Schmidt & Bender. IMHO, I would buy a Swarovski before the others...S&B are unreal in clarity and very heavy where as Sworvski and Burris are close in weight for a comparible model but in my experience the Swarovski had better clarity and light capabiltiy when compared to the Burris. Again the S&B was way beyond compare but the weight was the killer....34mm tube, 4x16x50 PM II (I had it mounted on a .338 Lapua).

[Bis]

Thanks everyone for the imputs. I will relay the info.

By the way I like my Nikon and it is on a Ruger #1 45-70 loaded hot.

[86er]

I've been to the Greeley, CO Burris facility and I have one Burris 3x9x40 Compact scope on a 308 Sav99 rifle. The scope has held zero for 5 years since it was sighted in. Every time I decide to use it, I check it and it is spot-on like any good scope should be. The Burris lifetime warranty is pretty good but not quite as "no questions asked" as Leupolds. Also, Burris make at least 3 "levels" of scope in price and quality. The lowest level represents a good value but less quality control and durability. The next two levels tend to be very good.

[Pete44ru]

While Burris scopes aren't bad, they're not good either - they're EXCELLENT ! !

.

[AJMD429]

It seems with scopes, there are two groups of opinions:

a) the folks who say anything but Leupold, no matter how non-critical the application, is junk, and
b) the folks who try to match the criticality and application to the cost/brand.

I'm one of the latter, and have used several Burris scopes over the years with complete satisfaction. I don't perform long-range counter-sniper duties in sub-zero and desert climates after dropping from a helicopter, though (at least not that I can admit to in public ).

[pokey]

(at least not that I can admit to in public ).

[Blaine]

I've been keeping an eye on Redfield since Leupould took over the company....

[1894c]

I don't perform long-range counter-sniper duties in sub-zero and desert climates after dropping from a helicopter, though (at least not that I can admit to in public :o ).

well that explains those extended periods when we don't hear from you...semper fi... :)

[1894c]

I've been keeping an eye on Redfield since Leupould took over the company....

bought one...like it...:)

[new pig hunter]

I have a Burris FFII 2-7x35 on my Marlin 444 ..... works great !!

Cheers,

Carl

[Bill in Oregon]

I have the 2-7 and 3-9 Redfields made here in Oregon. I like them and the reticle.

[Blaine]

I've only heard one story about Nikon: The customer service didn't want to honor the warrenty for a buddy of mine. IMO, most of the scopes are pretty good, but I look for the eye relief...I don't care for scopes to begin with, and getting smacked over the eye makes me real irritated

[COSteve]

The best way to find out the quality of any scope is to ask a gunshop owner (preferably a friend who owns a gunshop ) and ask him what keeps coming back for warranty work. I have two good friends who own gunshops and they tell me that Leupold no longer is the "King of the Mountain". My buds claim Burris is a decent scope but you know which brand seldom comes back to the shop for warranty work?----------Nikon

They are priced similar with Leupold holding the high ground on price---scope for scope as there is a huge price range on everyone's models.

When I equipped my M1-A, I told my bud I wanted a good long range scope that will take a beating. Without question, he recommended a Nikon mildot 4.5 X 14 which I bought.

Don't buy any $100 scope as its like putting cheap tires on a Vette. Your son will have problems with it sooner than later. $250 or 3 will buy a nice Nikon--------------Sixgun

I've got to agree. For the money, the Nikon Monarch series is hard to beat. Similar priced Leupolds just aren't as good. Yes, it will set ya back more than the Burris but the old saying, "Spend as much on the glass as you did on the rifle." still has some merit. I got my son a Nikon Monarch 4-16x50 BDC for his Savage .223 for long range p-dog popping and it is superb.

[samb]

Doc and 336, you guys made me laugh, sitting in Terminal in Toronto. Love that dry humor. I have had good luck with a Nikon Buckmaster and a Vortex Diamondback. Both on 30-06's.

I have no experience with Burris optics.

[dogngun]

I had one that was part of a "package rifle"-a Savage 110. I think I still have the scope even though I sold the rifle. I used it on a .22 LR bolt action, but decided to return to my old Tasco 4x fixed. The Burris never gave me any trouble at all, I just found it was always at the wrong magnification, which does not happen with a fixed power scope.

I actually wish I had kept the rifle, too...I sold it because it was in .243, and I wanted to go to all .308, which I have.

mark

[Bis]

Thanks again everyone for the replies. It was a big help.

Ken