Rifle Scopes Burris XTR III 3.3-18x50 mini review and comparison to Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50

[Jigstick]

Bump

any word on the illuminated Xmas tree reticle avaibility?

what one piece mounts are you guys running on gas guns? I’m assuming some cantilever will be needed

 

[Glassaholic]

Bump

any word on the illuminated Xmas tree reticle avaibility?

what one piece mounts are you guys running on gas guns? I’m assuming some cantilever will be needed

Still waiting on illumination... Rumor had it they'd release some info over SHOT, or rather when SHOT was supposed to be last month, but still nothing but crickets.

Mounts are subjective, cantilever almost always for AR-15 but depending on your stock/LOP and cheekweld, you might be able to get away with a standard mount, I have an SPR rig with a Luth MBA adjustable stock and I can get away with a standard mount, I just got a Spuhr SCP-3001 with a DPP plate for the top, I wanted something lighter with attachments and this seemed to fit the bill.

Scope Mounts - Spuhr Hunting Series - Mile High Shooting

Spuhr Scope Rings for your Hunting Rifle. Lightweight, Durable, and the same features you have come to expect from Spuhr. Shop our Selection at Mile High Shooting!

www.milehighshooting.com

The new Badger Condition One (C1) series has my interest as well for cantilever

Condition One Modular Mounts - Condition One - Shop

For over 30 years, Badger Ordnance has been an innovator in precision mounting systems and military grade weapon enhancements, and we’re just getting started..

www.badgerordnance.com

Still trying to get my hands on a Scalarworks Leap

Scalarworks Leap Mount for 30mm Scopes

The Scalarworks Leap Mount is the lightest, strongest, and easiest to use quick-detach 30mm Scope mount in existence.

scalarworks.com

 

[Jigstick]

Yeah I’m thinking of putting an XTR3 on my Seekins SP10. Have to figure out the mount.

 

[Glassaholic]

Yeah I’m thinking of putting an XTR3 on my Seekins SP10. Have to figure out the mount.

SP10 is a large frame with a pretty long stock so you might be able to get away with a standard mount vs. cantilever which opens the door to more possibilities. The XTR III 3.3-18 has a pretty forgiving tube when it comes to mounting position so that is in your favor as well.

This was with my Sig 716

And here's a couple more, all standard (non-cantilever) mounts on large frames

YMMV, keep in mind this is for my preferred setup, everyone is different and so you need to figure out what is most comfortable for you

 

[Jigstick]

Is that the XTR3 on the bottom rifle? Is that a low mount?

 

[Glassaholic]

Is that the XTR3 on the bottom rifle? Is that a low mount?

No, that is actually an XTR II 4-20 on the bottom rifle with an ARC M10 QD-L 1.35" high mount

 

[D_TROS]

I put on a cantilever mount. If the rear of the scope isnt near the back of the upper you might not have good eye relief.

Ive also had great luck with the Burris PEPR mount. I know Burris released a QD one piece cantilevr mount but I havnt used it yet. I like nuts and bolts. The PEPR is rock solid.

I also have a Geisle (sp) one piece that is rock solid, but I keep going back to PEPR mounts for my AR's as they are really afforadable.

GL
DT

 

[D_TROS]

Forgot to add the Burris PEPR mount has 20moa of cant built in so that is very nice as well.

GL
DT

 

[Birddog6424]

Last word I heard on illumination is that the prototype models looked great. So I think they are where they want to be with it.

Its just a matter of working it into the production schedule in Greeley.

 

[JDB55]

Hey guys, really interested if anyone has heard anything new on the illuminated model coming out? Really want this scope but waiting for illumination...

 

[Birddog6424]

Hey guys, really interested if anyone has heard anything new on the illuminated model coming out? Really want this scope but waiting for illumination...

A production date is scheduled. End of the year at the latest is the official word I got.

Though I dont know how they will juggle 30x versus 18x. On the Comp version they did a production run of 200 of the 30x, followed by 200 of the 18x.

 

[JDB55]

A production date is scheduled. End of the year at the latest is the official word I got.

Though I dont know how they will juggle 30x versus 18x. On the Comp version they did a production run of 200 of the 30x, followed by 200 of the 18x.

Oh great, thanks for the response! Is there any rumors you've heard about an xtrIII LPVO upcoming that you can mention? I just picked up the xtrII 1-8 thats been discontinued at a great price, would love to see an xtrIII! Thanks

 

[Glassaholic]

A production date is scheduled. End of the year at the latest is the official word I got.

Though I dont know how they will juggle 30x versus 18x. On the Comp version they did a production run of 200 of the 30x, followed by 200 of the 18x.

If Burris is listening, my vote is to start illumination with the 3.3-18 with thicker SCR2 reticle, it “needs” it more than the 5.5-30, especially for the target rifle options like AR’s and crossovers.

 

[Birddog6424]

Oh great, thanks for the response! Is there any rumors you've heard about an xtrIII LPVO upcoming that you can mention? I just picked up the xtrII 1-8 thats been discontinued at a great price, would love to see an xtrIII! Thanks

Yes, I had a pretty good conversation about the direction Burris was going with LPVOs. With the cancelation of the RT8, they pretty much removed themselves from the market for a while.

My push was for a 1-10×28 XTR3. They already had a 28mm objective tube design in the XTRII 1.5-8×28. At least get us an 8x.

What came up as a limiting factor is the fact that $1k and up LPVOs is a very small market. The 8x XTRII was a very nice LPVO, but it never really blew out. They sell 20 full size scopes for every one of those,, if not more.. the NX8, the Kahles, the more expensive LPVOs just don't sell at a brisk pace. They are a very niche market. I think Burris has gotten to where they are by selling a high quality, feature rich optic, at a great price, great value.

So I'm not sure what they are going to do yet.

If Burris is listening, my vote is to start illumination with the 3.3-18 with thicker SCR2 reticle, it “needs” it more than the 5.5-30, especially for the target rifle options like AR’s and crossovers.

I absolutely agree with this. The 18x is going to be the crossover optic that folks are going to want to check off the illumination box for required features.

I think the 30x will still sell, simply for the guys that want the thicker reticle and the crossover option. But I bet once these hit the market, nearly every 18x they sell will be illuminated.

 

[JDB55]

Yes, I had a pretty good conversation about the direction Burris was going with LPVOs. With the cancelation of the RT8, they pretty much removed themselves from the market for a while.

My push was for a 1-10×28 XTR3. They already had a 28mm objective tube design in the XTRII 1.5-8×28. At least get us an 8x.

What came up as a limiting factor is the fact that $1k and up LPVOs is a very small market. The 8x XTRII was a very nice LPVO, but it never really blew out. They sell 20 full size scopes for every one of those,, if not more.. the NX8, the Kahles, the more expensive LPVOs just don't sell at a brisk pace. They are a very niche market. I think Burris has gotten to where they are by selling a high quality, feature rich optic, at a great price, great value.

So I'm not sure what they are going to do yet.

I absolutely agree with this. The 18x is going to be the crossover optic that folks are going to want to check off the illumination box for required features.

I think the 30x will still sell, simply for the guys that want the thicker reticle and the crossover option. But I bet once these hit the market, nearly every 18x they sell will be illuminated.

Wow, well that makes me kinda sad honestly. Haha. A 1-10x28 xtrIII would have been exactly what I was looking for. I would have started saving for it tonight! I hope they take up the LPVO again, maybe if they assemble it in the USA like the other XTRIIIs they could capture more of the market, especially some of the tactical guys who are pushing American made so much (which I'm in favor of). No one talks about Burris LPVOs enough, or hardly at all. If they could push the American assembled aspect, especially as the LPVO is really being transitioned to in the military and so many people from the red dot, maybe they could find a niche. Especially if they can undercut the competition price wise a bit like the other XTRIIIs, just my 2 cents. Really appreciate the feedback and if you catch wind of anything, regarding the illuminated xtrIII 3.3-18 or an LPVO update would appreciate you posting it in here if you think about it. I'm kinda becoming a Burris fan after the xtrII 1-8 experience.

 

[beetroot]

Yes, I had a pretty good conversation about the direction Burris was going with LPVOs. With the cancelation of the RT8, they pretty much removed themselves from the market for a while.

My push was for a 1-10×28 XTR3. They already had a 28mm objective tube design in the XTRII 1.5-8×28. At least get us an 8x.

What came up as a limiting factor is the fact that $1k and up LPVOs is a very small market. The 8x XTRII was a very nice LPVO, but it never really blew out. They sell 20 full size scopes for every one of those,, if not more.. the NX8, the Kahles, the more expensive LPVOs just don't sell at a brisk pace. They are a very niche market. I think Burris has gotten to where they are by selling a high quality, feature rich optic, at a great price, great value.

So I'm not sure what they are going to do yet.

Interesting that the high end LVPO market is that small, wouldn't have guessed it based on every other manufacturer.

Maybe Burris could do a 2.5-14x36 / 2.2-12x36 type scope instead, with the super wide FOV it would be like the 1.5-8 on steroids.
If they could use all of 7x erector and make a 2-14 that would be bloody cool!

No idea if anyone else would buy one but if they did a mini tree SCR2/EBR-9 combined type reticle I certainly would!

 

[JDB55]

Interesting that the high end LVPO market is that small, wouldn't have guessed it based on every other manufacturer.

Maybe Burris could do a 2.5-14x36 / 2.2-12x36 type scope instead, with the super wide FOV it would be like the 1.5-8 on steroids.
If they could use all of 7x erector and make a 2-14 that would be bloody cool!

No idea if anyone else would buy one but if they did a mini tree SCR2/EBR-9 combined type reticle I certainly would!

Great idea. I would equally purchase one, and if anyone knows a quality one similar let me know and I'll buy that one haha

 

[koshkin]

High end LPVO market is not that small and it is growing. However, it has a few very strong competitors, so Burris/Steiner have to decide where exactly they want to play.

Personally, I think, that they will have to come out with a 1-7x28 FFP LPVO as a part of the XTR3 line eventually. The big question is with the type of reticle illumination to use and how to price it. Given that excellent FOV is the outstanding feature of the existing XTR3 scopes, it will have to carryover to the LPVO. I am confident they can pull it off. Price-wise, if they can come out with such a design that is assembled in the US and retails for under $1500, it will sell well. I am not sure if I would necessarily push for the 1-10x. If they compete base don magnification ratio, they are playing on someone else's terms.

For the sub-$1k market, they will have to come up with an RT model of some sort, but that will be an OEM product of some sort and there are tons of options there.

ILya

 

[JDB55]

High end LPVO market is not that small and it is growing. However, it has a few very strong competitors, so Burris/Steiner have to decide where exactly they want to play.

Personally, I think, that they will have to come out with a 1-7x28 FFP LPVO as a part of the XTR3 line eventually. The big question is with the type of reticle illumination to use and how to price it. Given that excellent FOV is the outstanding feature of the existing XTR3 scopes, it will have to carryover to the LPVO. I am confident they can pull it off. Price-wise, if they can come out with such a design that is assembled in the US and retails for under $1500, it will sell well. I am not sure if I would necessarily push for the 1-10x. If they compete base don magnification ratio, they are playing on someone else's terms.

For the sub-$1k market, they will have to come up with an RT model of some sort, but that will be an OEM product of some sort and there are tons of options there.

ILya

I agree with this 100%, I think the LPVO market is only going to grow from here as people transition from red dots to them. Not saying red dots aren't relevant at all, but the LPVOs perks are going to continue to be seen and sought. The military transitioning to them will, I believe, convince many who have been unwilling to go that way to try it and will help drive the market. Just my 2 cents, I don't know much. Haha.

 

[Birddog6424]

I think everything gun related is growing right now. A rising tide lifts all boats.

At the time Burris decided to drop the 8x XTRII that they were having made by LOW, it just wasn't moving. Not really much of anything was really moving. Theres a difference between moving some scopes and keeping them on the shelves, versus having your entire year's production allotments spoken for and blowing them out the doors..

I do hope they decide where they wish to place themselves within the market and develop the right product for it. I agree that I think they'll need to revisit the RT line up, as an LPVO compliment to the RT Long Range scopes. And they'll need some sort of XTR3.

 

[Mike_in_FL]

What came up as a limiting factor is the fact that $1k and up LPVOs is a very small market. The 8x XTRII was a very nice LPVO, but it never really blew out.

I would ask Burris if that's what they truly believe or it was the fact that the bottom end was 1.5 rather than a true 1.0.

 

[Birddog6424]

I would ask Burris if that's what they truly believe or it was the fact that the bottom end was 1.5 rather than a true 1.0.

Thats two different scopes. They first released a 1.5-8×28 DFP made in the Phillipines. Then they released a true 1x 1-8×24 FFP or SFP made by LOW in Japan about a year and a half later.

Even though the Japanese made optic was a solid scope at its price point, it didn't really sell well until retailers put it on sale. It just didn't move well at $1000. Looking at the market they realized very few scopes were selling well. The NX8 and Kahles are not big movers at >$1000. The GII Razor does well there. But its just not a strong market. I quote a good friend of mine who is an MD for a lot of 3 Gun matches for the last decade. He says expensive LPVOs is lipstick on a pig. The large majority of shooters shoot <300 yards with those optics, never dial, and don't require a sophisticated reticle. Having used everything from a MK8 CQBSS with a Horus reticle, a GII Razor with the JM, four different Burris 8x XTRIIs, and a variety of less expensive low magnification optics, I tend to agree with him. From a performance perspective of the average buyer, there isn't much to be gained.

Shooting 3 Gun really shows what scopes sell well. I would put the average price point at around $400 to $700 based on what i see those guys using.

 

[Mike_in_FL]

They already had a 28mm objective tube design in the XTRII 1.5-8×28.

Thanks for the clarification but you tricked me with this. The XTRII 1-8 is/was x24, not 28. So you were asking to produce a 34mm 1-10x? Or am I still confused, lol.

 

[Birddog6424]

Thanks for the clarification but you tricked me with this. The XTRII 1-8 is/was x24, not 28. So you were asking to produce a 34mm 1-10x? Or am I still confused, lol.

Sorry, didn't mean to add to the confusion.

The 1.5-8 dual focal plane XTRII that released onto the market first had a 28mm objective in a 34mm tube.

When they released the 1-8 in first and second focal plane, it was a 24mm objective in a 34mm tube.

My comment was meant to convey that I think they should bring back the 28mm objective in a 34mm tube for either an 8x or 10x XTR3, as they already have experience at using that objective size.

They also have had a 1-6 MTAC on the market with a 28mm objective in a 30mm tube, and they flared the objective bell housing slightly to accommodate it.

So they have optical engineering experience they can draw from.

 

[Glassaholic]

I recently obtained another NX8 2.5-20x50 Nightforce scope and this "new" version does not exhibit any of the edge distortion that was prevalent in my original copy, in fact, the differences are so great I almost feel like NF changed their optical formula, it felt like two different scopes. This was either a QC issue that my early model had, or this is representative of some pretty significant sample variance. This would also explain why some NX8 2.5-20 users have declared their scopes to be similar to my original copy (significant edge distortion) while others have not had this issue.

In lieu of this "new" observation and based on the latest NX8 model, I am inclined to say that the NX8 now offers more viable competition for the XTR III; however, with the recent price drop and added illumination, the XTR IIIi continues to offer greater value due to a much lower price point. That being said, I feel the latest NX8 models offer performance justified by their price as compared to the competition at this price. And for the new XTR IIIi, if the scope holds up to the same quality as the original will offer a value that is unmatched at its price point.

 

[Jcaplinger199]

I recently obtained another NX8 2.5-20x50 Nightforce scope and this "new" version does not exhibit any of the edge distortion that was prevalent in my original copy, in fact, the differences are so great I almost feel like NF changed their optical formula, it felt like two different scopes. This was either a QC issue that my early model had, or this is representative of some pretty significant sample variance. This would also explain why some NX8 2.5-20 users have declared their scopes to be similar to my original copy (significant edge distortion) while others have not had this issue.

In lieu of this "new" observation and based on the latest NX8 model, I am inclined to say that the NX8 now offers more viable competition for the XTR III; however, with the recent price drop and added illumination, the XTR IIIi continues to offer greater value due to a much lower price point. That being said, I feel the latest NX8 models offer performance justified by their price as compared to the competition at this price. And for the new XTR IIIi, if the scope holds up to the same quality as the original will offer a value that is unmatched at its price point.

How is the eyebox on this “new version” ? Same.?
Building another rifle that is a more traditional rifle with Mcmillian HTG Hawkins bdl with fixed comb. I want a good scope under 2k I can get behind easily and I realize I may still have to a stock pack. I feel a 30mm tube will help keep it lower to the bore. I love my NX8 4-32 but that rifle has an adjustable cheek riser. This makes me want to try the 2.5-20 but the eyebox comments people have made concern me.

 

[beetroot]

How is the eyebox on this “new version” ? Same.?
Building another rifle that is a more traditional rifle with Mcmillian HTG Hawkins bdl with fixed comb. I want a good scope under 2k I can get behind easily and I realize I may still have to a stock pack. I feel a 30mm tube will help keep it lower to the bore. I love my NX8 4-32 but that rifle has an adjustable cheek riser. This makes me want to try the 2.5-20 but the eyebox comments people have made concern me.

Tube size won't make a difference to mount height, 34mm rings come in low heights by many manufacturers, certainly low enough to mount a 50mm objective scope as low as practical.

 

[Glassaholic]

How is the eyebox on this “new version” ? Same.?
Building another rifle that is a more traditional rifle with Mcmillian HTG Hawkins bdl with fixed comb. I want a good scope under 2k I can get behind easily and I realize I may still have to a stock pack. I feel a 30mm tube will help keep it lower to the bore. I love my NX8 4-32 but that rifle has an adjustable cheek riser. This makes me want to try the 2.5-20 but the eyebox comments people have made concern me.

Like most scopes it’s more forgiving at lower magnifications and gets tighter as you increase, I can’t say for certain it was any different from my original. With proper fundamentals you should be okay, but if you think you’ll be out of position a lot then I might steer you to the XTR III.

 

[Jcaplinger199]

Like most scopes it’s more forgiving at lower magnifications and gets tighter as you increase, I can’t say for certain it was any different from my original. With proper fundamentals you should be okay, but if you think you’ll be out of position a lot then I might steer you to the XTR III.

Just curious If scope weight and xtr3 cost for the illuminated model were not an issue would you go xtr3 or razor g2 3-18?

 

[RFutch]

I recently obtained another NX8 2.5-20x50 Nightforce scope and this "new" version does not exhibit any of the edge distortion that was prevalent in my original copy, in fact, the differences are so great I almost feel like NF changed their optical formula, it felt like two different scopes. This was either a QC issue that my early model had, or this is representative of some pretty significant sample variance. This would also explain why some NX8 2.5-20 users have declared their scopes to be similar to my original copy (significant edge distortion) while others have not had this issue.

In lieu of this "new" observation and based on the latest NX8 model, I am inclined to say that the NX8 now offers more viable competition for the XTR III; however, with the recent price drop and added illumination, the XTR IIIi continues to offer greater value due to a much lower price point. That being said, I feel the latest NX8 models offer performance justified by their price as compared to the competition at this price. And for the new XTR IIIi, if the scope holds up to the same quality as the original will offer a value that is unmatched at its price point.

What made you try another one out?

 

[Glassaholic]

What made you try another one out?

A friend had one and kept talking about how good it was so I asked if I could check it out and he said “sure”, mostly it was my own curiosity as I know sample variance tends to play a bigger factor in “cheaper” scopes. In hindsight I ought to have sent my original scope back to Nightforce and asked “is this scope okay?” Live and learn, would have been curious how NF would have responded.

 

[Cascade Hemi]

A friend had one and kept talking about how good it was so I asked if I could check it out and he said “sure”, mostly it was my own curiosity as I know sample variance tends to play a bigger factor in “cheaper” scopes. In hindsight I ought to have sent my original scope back to Nightforce and asked “is this scope okay?” Live and learn, would have been curious how NF would have responded.

With an NDA.

 

[Glassaholic]

With an NDA.

No, the friend is on the Hide. Many of you would know him, he’s especially prominent in the NV and thermal world, username starts with Wig and ends with itus @wigwamitus

 

[RFutch]

I played with a 4-32 today at the range. It was noticeably better than my XTR3. I think it might be my next scope.

 

[Glassaholic]

I played with a 4-32 today at the range. It was noticeably better than my XTR3. I think it might be my next scope.

The 4-32 range doesn’t excite me very much, at least not with a 50mm objective, but it’s design parameters are more conducive to being more forgiving all around vs the 2.5-20

 

[Wysongdog]

I played with a 4-32 today at the range. It was noticeably better than my XTR3. I think it might be my next scope.

What made it stand out for it to be your next scope? I’ve been trying to decide between these 2 for a couple months now to put on my 22 trainer.

 

[RFutch]

Basically a step up in glass over my XTR3, Razor, and NXS without spending ATACR money. I really like the Mil-C reticle.

The XTR3 is still great though especially for a 22.

 

[Birddog6424]

But if you're going to spend NX8 money, you may as well get an XTR Pro. The XTRIII is no longer in this price point. The Pro is the apples to apples competitor.

The Pro is so close to the clarity of the ATACR glass it's hard to pick a winner. And has a larger eyebox than the NX8, more forgiving parallax and DOF. Better glass and features. Better value for your money.

Sounds like they cleaned up the NX8 and finally made it what it should be. Burris rolled out a whole new scope.

 

[RFutch]

I just don’t like the reticles in the Pro but yes that’s another option.

 

[Wysongdog]

Too many good options. Lol. What a problem to have.

 

[aaronk]

I picked up an XTR III in 3.3-18x based largely on this review and Camera Land’s killer deal. Optically quality has been a huge disappointment though, my sample is pretty bad. Something seemed strange when I had to set the parallax to well over 200 yds when sighting in at 100 yds. I could get rid of all the parallax, but the image was not especially clear. I tried re-focusing the reticle and it didn’t help. I notice that the manufacturers print on the plywood that was outside the center of the reticle seemed much clearer then my target in the center, strange.

After sighting in I headed for some clear cuts to stretch it out a bit more. The image clarity still felt out of focus, the picture didn’t have much contrast and was very flat. Chromatic aberration is also pretty bad, I can live with it in a scope, but usually I don’t notice it unless I’m looking for it, it really jumps out at you through the Burris though.

I’m going to give Burris a call on Monday. Something has to be wrong with my sample as I’ve looked through or own the glass that a lot of people say the XTR hangs with and I wouldn’t even mention it in the same sentence as those scopes. At least it tracked solid.

 

[st1650]

I’ve never looked through a XTR III but I was really impressed with the XTR Pro. I know it’s a sample of one and it might have been hand picked for a social media “influencer” but I was really impressed- a definite notch above the Razor Gen 2

 

[Birddog6424]

I picked up an XTR III in 3.3-18x based largely on this review and Camera Land’s killer deal. Optically quality has been a huge disappointment though, my sample is pretty bad. Something seemed strange when I had to set the parallax to well over 200 yds when sighting in at 100 yds. I could get rid of all the parallax, but the image was not especially clear. I tried re-focusing the reticle and it didn’t help. I notice that the manufacturers print on the plywood that was outside the center of the reticle seemed much clearer then my target in the center, strange.

After sighting in I headed for some clear cuts to stretch it out a bit more. The image clarity still felt out of focus, the picture didn’t have much contrast and was very flat. Chromatic aberration is also pretty bad, I can live with it in a scope, but usually I don’t notice it unless I’m looking for it, it really jumps out at you through the Burris though.

I’m going to give Burris a call on Monday. Something has to be wrong with my sample as I’ve looked through or own the glass that a lot of people say the XTR hangs with and I wouldn’t even mention it in the same sentence as those scopes. At least it tracked solid.

That doesn't sound right. I've looked through a lot of XTR3s, the glass performs pretty well.

I think Burris CS is the right step.

 

[Glassaholic]

I picked up an XTR III in 3.3-18x based largely on this review and Camera Land’s killer deal. Optically quality has been a huge disappointment though, my sample is pretty bad. Something seemed strange when I had to set the parallax to well over 200 yds when sighting in at 100 yds. I could get rid of all the parallax, but the image was not especially clear. I tried re-focusing the reticle and it didn’t help. I notice that the manufacturers print on the plywood that was outside the center of the reticle seemed much clearer then my target in the center, strange.

After sighting in I headed for some clear cuts to stretch it out a bit more. The image clarity still felt out of focus, the picture didn’t have much contrast and was very flat. Chromatic aberration is also pretty bad, I can live with it in a scope, but usually I don’t notice it unless I’m looking for it, it really jumps out at you through the Burris though.

I’m going to give Burris a call on Monday. Something has to be wrong with my sample as I’ve looked through or own the glass that a lot of people say the XTR hangs with and I wouldn’t even mention it in the same sentence as those scopes. At least it tracked solid.

I agree with birddog, unfortunately your copy sounds very similar to the very first copy I had which I sent back to Burris. I just sent in my 5.5-30 to get the magnification loosened up a bit (which they did not do, simply said it was within speck and sent it back) and the turn around time was right around two weeks. You might also contact Doug at Cameralandny, he's a good guy and if you haven't shot the scope he may be willing to accept a return and replace with another unit, at least worth a call. I realize it is a real pain but hopefully Burris will take care of you like they did me when they first began shipping the scopes. Having read my review you've already played around with the diopter, it was really finicky on my 3.3-18 and I had to spend a lot of time getting it just right, but if you'd done all that and it's still underperforming I'd say send back to Burris.

 

[aaronk]

I agree with birddog, unfortunately your copy sounds very similar to the very first copy I had which I sent back to Burris. I just sent in my 5.5-30 to get the magnification loosened up a bit (which they did not do, simply said it was within speck and sent it back) and the turn around time was right around two weeks. You might also contact Doug at Cameralandny, he's a good guy and if you haven't shot the scope he may be willing to accept a return and replace with another unit, at least worth a call. I realize it is a real pain but hopefully Burris will take care of you like they did me when they first began shipping the scopes. Having read my review you've already played around with the diopter, it was really finicky on my 3.3-18 and I had to spend a lot of time getting it just right, but if you'd done all that and it's still underperforming I'd say send back to Burris.

I'm going to spend a little more time playing with it before I give up. I had the gun up in the tripod last night and was playing around with the parallax and diopter focus some more, seemed slightly better. It's on a hunting gun, so I'm not spending a ton of time behind the glass on this particular gun as opposed to my match rifle. I really like everything else about the scope and it seems to track solid and return to zero, so I'm almost willing to give up a little image quality but know that it's functionally solid. That and mounting scopes and zeroing rifles is my absolute least favorite thing to do

 

[Twistid]

Natchez had some of these for $800. Fingers crossed I didn't get a turd

 

[Glassaholic]

Natchez had some of these for $800. Fingers crossed I didn't get a turd

I saw that, great price if you don't need illumination. Keep in mind the parallax, turrets and/or mag ring can be pretty tight on these units, but glass should impress for the price.

 

[headwind]

Anyone know what prevented Burris from putting Made in USA on the pre illuminated models?

 

[Glassaholic]

Anyone know what prevented Burris from putting Made in USA on the pre illuminated models?

There are many rules around "Made in USA", the Greeley XTR III's are "Assembled in USA" from parts obtained outside the USA, I forget what portion of parts were actually made in Greeley. @Birddog6424 likely remembers.

 

[Birddog6424]

There are many rules around "Made in USA", the Greeley XTR III's are "Assembled in USA" from parts obtained outside the USA, I forget what portion of parts were actually made in Greeley. @Birddog6424 likely remembers.

Bill is right. There are a lot of rules surrounding a Made in the USA moniker. I'm pretty sure that Burris could have gotten away with it, Leupold has for years. They toyed with putting Made in Colorado tags on them, but also decided against that as well.

The American made XTRIII/Pro are VERY largely American made. There are some bulk screws that are outsourced that go in lots of different scopes and optics. The glass is sourced from Japan and the reticles are laser etched in Greeley. Everything else is made from scratch in Greeley. I've been through the plant and watched A to Z scope production on XTR Pros. Leupold operates the same way.