Rifle Scopes Burris XTR ii 4-20x50 vs Vortex PST Gen 2 5-25-50

[Ruger308]

Hey Guys,

I just picked up my 308 ruger PRS and narrowed it down to these 2 scopes after much online research.

I went to my LGS and they had the Burris in stock and offered me a fair price on it. I explained I really wanted to see the Vortex in person and they went on and on how they don't stock them since there are better brands out there and not as good as the Burris. Long story short, I walked out with a new XTR.

A few weeks later, I go into another store on a road trip and they had a gen 2 PST and really liked it. Unfortunately they did not have an XTR to compare side by side and perhaps it was the lighting in the store that "made" it look better.

Either way, I am now questioning my decision and looking for some advice. Should I sell the Burris (the original shop won't take it back) and buy the PST gen 2 or stick with the XTR?

 

[ChadL]

I am but one person with an opinion, so bear that in mind. In my opinion, the Burris XTR ii line of scopes is still better than the Gen 2 PST scopes. The tracking on the XTRii is better. The durability of the XTRii is very well known at this point and is a very rugged scope. The Gen 2 is too new to make any kind of long term durability assessments. The tactile feel of the turrets is better on the XTRii. Glass is comparable. I can't necessarily discern a difference. At least not one that would make me chose one over the other based solely on glass. As mentioned just my opinion. I really wanted a Gen 1 PST, but after all the tracking issues they had I bought an XTRii and glad I did. They are a very, very nice scope in the price market they find themselves in. Now, with that said, had I never owned a XTRii and bought a Gen 2 I'm certain I would be pleased with it. Overall I think the XTRii is a better scope because of the excellent tracking and rugged durability which are very important to me.

 

[patriot07]

I am but one person with an opinion, so bear that in mind. In my opinion, the Burris XTR ii line of scopes is still better than the Gen 2 PST scopes. The tracking on the XTRii is better. The durability of the XTRii is very well known at this point and is a very rugged scope. The Gen 2 is too new to make any kind of long term durability assessments. The tactile feel of the turrets is better on the XTRii. Glass is comparable. I can't necessarily discern a difference. At least not one that would make me chose one over the other based solely on glass. As mentioned just my opinion. I really wanted a Gen 1 PST, but after all the tracking issues they had I bought an XTRii and glad I did. They are a very, very nice scope in the price market they find themselves in. Now, with that said, had I never owned a XTRii and bought a Gen 2 I'm certain I would be pleased with it. Overall I think the XTRii is a better scope because of the excellent tracking and rugged durability which are very important to me.

How can you say that the tracking on the XTR is better?

 

[patriot07]

As for the OP's question, if you're happy with the XTR, then there's no reason to trade. I would try to get the PST2 in hand to compare directly with the XTR2. But if you're going to take a hit on selling the XTR used and you're happy with it, I don't see why you'd go to that amount of trouble.

Now if you handle the PST2 and the glass is significantly better to your eyes (it was to mine) and the other features are equal or better, then it's worth considering. But that's a much bigger price difference now that you're talking about the price difference of a used XTR2 vs a new PST2.

The XTR2 that I held had glass that was just terrible. Really blurry around the edges and very hazy, dim, and unclear in the center. Looking at the PST2 in comparison was night and day. I also loved the turrets, focus knob, illumination, and reticle on the PST2 as much or more than the XTR2, so it was a no-brainer for me. But I'd have to feel pretty strongly about the PST2 to take the financial hit and sell my like-new XTR2 to make the switch.

 

[ChadL]

How can you say that the tracking on the XTR is better?

I have a target I designed with multiple vertical lines (3). I drew up the target in solidworks. Along those vertical lines (36 inches) are targets in 1 to 2 mil increments from one another. Not only can I test vertical tracking, but also windage as each vertical line are 2 mil apart. Given I know the distances I can dial both elevation and windage and see where the bullet hits in relation to where it should. In my observation of shooting both scopes on my rifle the Burris tracked better both horizontally and vertically and returned to zero better than the gen 2. Now, could that be because the xtrii is my personal scope? Entirely possible as I have a lot more time behind it. I have only completed this test once with the gen 2 so bear that in mind too. However, in that one case the XTRii did perform better.

 

[koshkin]

I have a fair amount of mileage with different XTR II models and the mechanical performance on all of them has been absolutely excellent. Given that these scopes have been out for a little bit, there is enough of a track record to be confident in XTR II being very likely to hold up well.

As far as optical performance goes, one thing you want to keep in mind is that with each product family, there are always some scopes that just come together very nicely, while others are not quite as good. For example, with Gen 1 PSTs, the 2.5-10x32 and 6-24x50 are notably better than the other models, with 2.5-10x44 being the worst of the line and 4-16x50 somewhere in the middle.

With XTR II, the 2-10x42 and 1-8x42 are just excellent. 3-15x50 and 1.5-8x28 ares very good as well. Higher power versions (4-20x50, 5-25x50, and 8-32x50) from an optical standpoint, are not quite as good, although all hold up very nicely mechanically. Basically, even though I would have liked better optics, I would not hesitate to buy one, given what I know about their durability (also, I have been to Burris factory and I know how they test them).

Now, that I started looking at a couple of Gen 2 PSTs, while it too early to make any definitive conclusions, the 5-25x50 looks to be a better scope from an optics standpoint than the comparable XTR II. The 3-15x44, however, might actually be the standard bearer of the PST Gen 2 line from an optics standpoint, although more testing needs to be done.
In terms of mechanical quality, PST Gen 2s are new, so I can't tell much yet. This will take time to work out, but my initial impressions are very positive.

I have a lot mileage with Vortex' reticles and the EBR2C is a more modern design (to me) than the SCR reticle. I would have liked thicker outer bars in the 3-15x44, but it works well enough as is.

However, from the standpoint of overall visibility, I really like G2B reticle in XTR II 2-10x42. It is comparatively low tech, but it really works exceedingly well. I remember the days with Gen 2 MilDot was all the rage and major advancement over standard Mil-Dot. We have come a long way since then, but there is still somethign to be said about comparatively simpel reticle and G2B really works well for me.

ILya

 

[patriot07]

I have a target I designed with multiple vertical lines (3). I drew up the target in solidworks. Along those vertical lines (36 inches) are targets in 1 to 2 mil increments from one another. Not only can I test vertical tracking, but also windage as each vertical line are 2 mil apart. Given I know the distances I can dial both elevation and windage and see where the bullet hits in relation to where it should. In my observation of shooting both scopes on my rifle the Burris tracked better both horizontally and vertically and returned to zero better than the gen 2. Now, could that be because the xtrii is my personal scope? Entirely possible as I have a lot more time behind it. I have only completed this test once with the gen 2 so bear that in mind too. However, in that one case the XTRii did perform better.

Gotcha, good test. Thanks for the response.