Burris xtr3 3-18 vs leupold mark 4hd

[Baron85]

Has anyone compared a xtr3 3-18 vs the new leupold mark 4hd 4-18?

Have a new build coming and need a new scope. I’m a self proclaimed Burris fan currently. I have 3 xtr pros and a US xtr3 3-18. I have had a few other pros and xtr3’s. I really like the Burris’s and the only reason I am considering the mark 4hd is because I have fallen in love with 1/4 mil reticles and Burris does not offer a 1/4 mil in the xtr3 line.

Use will be a light weight 16” 22br, kelbly nanook, proof carbon, xlr magnesium. Rifle will be used for pdogs, coyotes, and maybe play at one of my local matches that only goes to 600 yards. Also will be used for deer and hog hunting in texas every year or so.

I’m open to other options. Namely the nx8 and the vortex lht 4-22 but the leupold and Burris are my main focus.

 

[FuhQ]

Stick with what you know... Get the XTR-III 5.5-30x56 SCR2 for the prairie dogs.

Another excellent option would be the Zeiss LRP S3 4-25x50 ZF-MRi MIL.

 

[Baron85]

What I wish I could have is a xtr pro scr 2 1/4 3-18. If Burris had the 2 1/4 in the xtr3 or a 3-18 pro I would be in love.

I haven’t heard of the zeiss, I will check it out, thanks.

 

[dirtybores]

I have a rifle of similar build and purpose. It wears the 4hd, and I'm VERY satisfied for daytime work.

I tried the XTR3i, was not thrilled with the turrets and let it go based on that. That said, if you plan to run a thermal, the Burris has no illum upcharge and can go slightly lower mag, plus green illum on red hot is awesome.

There is some price point separation at this time, with a strong used Burris market and the 4hd still being very new. I don't think you'll get your money back in optical performance but might in preferred features (reticle).

I have the Zeiss too...its wrong for your described purpose. Bigger, heavier, a thicker and more complex reticle at highest mag. Optically its fantastic, a step above the others discussed here: I just wouldn't ever put one on a rifle like you described.

 

[Baron85]

I have a rifle of similar build and purpose. It wears the 4hd, and I'm VERY satisfied for daytime work.

I tried the XTR3i, was not thrilled with the turrets and let it go based on that. That said, if you plan to run a thermal, the Burris has no illum upcharge and can go slightly lower mag, plus green illum on red hot is awesome.

There is some price point separation at this time, with a strong used Burris market and the 4hd still being very new. I don't think you'll get your money back in optical performance but might in preferred features (reticle).

I have the Zeiss too...its wrong for your described purpose. Bigger, heavier, a thicker and more complex reticle at highest mag. Optically its fantastic, a step above the others discussed here: I just wouldn't ever put one on a rifle like you described.

Since you have had both. How did the eye box, depth of focus, and glass resolution compare?

One thing I really like about the xtr3 series is the depth of focus ( not sure proper term but I don’t really need to fiddle with the focus unless making big changes in target distance.) I also like how easy it is to get behind the scope, the eye box doesn’t seem very finicky with the xtr3.

I strongly prefer the pr2 reticle since it’s 1/4 mil. My
Match rifles all have pros with the 2 1/4 and I like the less clutter and going to my last scope with scr2 it is a bit slower and a little more mental work to use.

 

[dirtybores]

It been a while since the Burris was in my hands, but I recall eyebox and depth of field being good. They were in the positive category and I had no complaints there. Eyebox on the 4hd is great, but I have been tuning out parallax more than with some of my other scopes. So for me: eyebox = wash, dof = burris gets nod.

Now glass...I personally like the 4hd better. Sample size of 1, but I like the turrets, reticle, and its enjoyable glass in use, so its my overall nod. Illum and use with a clip-on aside.

I prefer .2 mil hashing actually. I think the Burris had an MSR or MSR2 reticle, which is a favorite of mine. However, the PR2 is no slouch. I'm coming around to how to put it into best use, and the open aimpoints with a 22 cal is bueno.

edit: it was the SCR2, not MSR. It was fine, I guess because I've clearly forgotten what it looked like lol.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

I think you should try one of the MK4's and do a comparison and provide feedback. They're new enough that if you don't like it you'd be able to sell it pretty easily. I bet if you ask @CSTactical really nice he'd cut you a good deal on one too and they have them in stock.

I don't see how they could be bad scopes, they basically have the pedigree of the MK5 which have proven themselves to be extremely reliable but with a 4x erector assembly to cut costs which should also increase optical performance in some regards too. I can tell you that the glass and turrets on a MK5 absolutely blow away the XTR3 from my experience with both.

 

[YotaEer]

Mk4 is superior to the Burris scopes except for FOV and DOF

 

[BCP]

Has anyone compared a xtr3 3-18 vs the new leupold mark 4hd 4-18?

Have a new build coming and need a new scope. I’m a self proclaimed Burris fan currently. I have 3 xtr pros and a US xtr3 3-18. I have had a few other pros and xtr3’s. I really like the Burris’s and the only reason I am considering the mark 4hd is because I have fallen in love with 1/4 mil reticles and Burris does not offer a 1/4 mil in the xtr3 line.

Use will be a light weight 16” 22br, kelbly nanook, proof carbon, xlr magnesium. Rifle will be used for pdogs, coyotes, and maybe play at one of my local matches that only goes to 600 yards. Also will be used for deer and hog hunting in texas every year or so.

I’m open to other options. Namely the nx8 and the vortex lht 4-22 but the leupold and Burris are my main focus.

You could probably find a used leupold mk5 on the forums here for the same or similar price as the new 4. On paper the razor lht 3-15 looks about perfect for your rifle but I've no experience with them sorry.

 

[Baron85]

I don’t want to go mark 5 because I don’t want to get new rings. I have access to ffl pricing so can get both for quite a bit below msrp.

I do like the 3-15 vortex other than it’s not FFP. I find my self in the middle of power ranges pretty often.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

I had a couple LHT’s and they weren’t as bad as some claim, but I wasn’t super impressed with them. Nice glass and I don’t regret giving them a try but I don’t think I’d buy another one.