Rifle Scopes Burris XTR3 vs XTR Pro Initial Showdown

[screaminweasil]

I have looked at every scope on the market below a ZCO. Currently, I've settled on the Burris XTR3 5.5-30x56 with SCR Mil Reticle.
I have three of these, they all have excellent glass. Compared side x side with three different 3.3-18x50 SCR Mil versions, the 5.5-30's have a "nicer picture" with more clear glass at all mag levels. At least that is the way it was with my 6 Burris XTR3 scopes.

I recently purchased a Zeiss LRP 3.6-18x50 and compared it with my two Leupold Mark 5 HD 3.6-18x50 PR-1 Mil scopes. The after hours of adjustment, the Zeiss was "barely" nicer in resolution, contrast and color were identical.

I had two of my 5.5-30 XTR 3 scopes that weren't mounted, so I compared those both to the Zeiss. My XTR3's were better in every way.

I sold the Zeiss.

I just got a great deal on a Burris XTR Pro with SCR 1/4 Mil. Just arrived today from Sportoptics. I spent a good portion of today, off and on comparing it directly on a tripod from ranges of 70 yards to 1200 yards from the front of my house to the mountainside in my neighborhood.

I know that my examples of the Standard XTR3 5.5-30 have OUTSTANDING glass, i've tuned the eye piece perfectly for optimum resolution for my eyes. They must be "good ones" because they are incredible.

The Pro initially "didn't look as good". I played with the eye piece "reticle focus" some more and tuned it to where things started to come together. I also realized that the parallax on the Pro is more "finicky" than the standard XTR3. You have to fine tune it more than the regular XTR3 to get the parallax out and resolution perfect.

After spending a good portion of today looking through these, and fucking with adjustments on the pro.

Here is the conclusion.

XTR Pro
Parallax adjustment is more finicky, more critical to "tune". 1200 yards parallax was "out" with setting just past 750 yard mark on dial. Closer to 750 than infinity mark. When set to infinity, parallax was present and clarity suffered at 1200 yards. I'm assuming this may be good set at infinity at ranges closer to a mile.
Colors.......Deeper Green, Darker Browns(notably "different" than the XTR3)
Resolution.......Excellent, BARELY better than my standard XTR3, (depending on what I looked at)
Contrast.........Excellent, notably better than my standard XTR3 (still very close optically)
Brightness.........Both, bright as hell

XTR3
Parallax adjustment very forgiving......set to infinity, 700 to 1200 yds objects seemed focused well.
Colors......a little lighter looking, one might think "brighter", but not really, just not as deep color
Resolution......Excellent, slightly less than XTR Pro
Contrast.........Excellent, slightly less than XTR Pro
Brightness..........colors seem lighter, greens are a lighter green, browns are a lighter brown.


I think I have 3 excellent 5.5-30x56 standard XTR3's. The one that currently isn't mounted, is probably the "best" of the bunch.

It is the only one that isn't mounted, so It's the only one I compared the pro to.

In my examples................they are fucking close.

They are both fucking awesome.

As far as the pro, the illumination choice of Red, or Green is awesome. (it's not daylight bright), which is fine for me.
The SCR 1/4 Mil reticle is AWESOME!!
The elevation Turret is AWESOME.



P.S...................
I've compared this standard 5.5-30x56 XTR3 to my Vortex Razor Gen 3 6-36 and on 25x and 30x the Vortex was slightly better.

So, without having the Vortex available to put on the tripod, it didn't get a direct comparison to the pro. I know from experience though, that the Vortex will be slightly "nicer" than the pro.


Conclusion...........

The $1100 Camerland deal on the Burris XTR3 5.5-30x56 (If you can live with the SCR reticle)................is a FUCKING STEAL.

I'm happy with the Pro though (for under $1900 shipped NEW) .....................it's sticking around. Well done Burris, and thanks to SportOptics for the hookup.

P.S.
For those who don't think it's worth dicking around with the "reticle focus" to "tune resolution", your missing out. EVERY scope I've put on a tripod and spent time with has benefited, sometimes greatly by a slight tune to the "fast focus" reticle adjustment.

 

[beetroot]

Do you notice the reticle being thicker in the Pro vs XTR3?

 

[enichols]

Nice review. I've been very tempted to pick up one of the 3.3-18 XTR3s for my .22. You're definitely pushing me in that direction if those are anything like your 5.5-30s.

 

[screaminweasil]

Do you notice the reticle being thicker in the Pro vs XTR3?

Seems about the same thickness as the SCR.....
So if you have a SCR 2.......which is thinner than the SCR in the standard XTR3, the pro may be slightly thicker.

 

[screaminweasil]

Nice review. I've been very tempted to pick up one of the 3.3-18 XTR3s for my .22. You're definitely pushing me in that direction if those are anything like your 5.5-30s.

I'd skip the 18x......I had three and sold them because the 5.5-30 is much better optically. Seems the 18x have more variation in the glass. For $100 more the 30x is the way to go, even for a 22

 

[enichols]

I'd skip the 18x......I had three and sold them because the 5.5-30 is much better optically. Seems the 18x have more variation in the glass. For $100 more the 30x is the way to go, even for a 22

Good to know. Thanks.

 

[screaminweasil]

Good to know. Thanks.

I've got two mark 5HD 3.6-18 and they were noticably nicer (other than field of view), compared directly with the three 18x XTR3s.
Additionally, the 5.5-30 smokes the 18x Leupolds.
The 5.5-30 is a longer scope and more forgiving optical design, coupled with 56mm objective, it's an obvious upgrade.

Though the 18x Burris scopes are not bad by any means. Sticking them side x side on a tripod is where things get real. But, like I said...knowing what I know and have seen.....I'd never get another 18x XTR 3. The SCR reticle is usable in good light from 8x to 30x......I never shoot below 8x, so no advantage in going with the 18x for me.
Hope that helps

 

[springer01]

I have a great XTR3 5.5-30 and Pro, and I agree they are both great scopes. I really like the elevation turret on the Pro, I have had a couple of months behind it now, and it continues to impress me. Both scopes really do have great glass, and you have to really get behind both for a bit to start picking out the differences IMO. I am really hoping the new XTR3 with Illumination are as good as the Greeley made XTR3 because I plan on getting one as soon as they hit the streets.

 

[screaminweasil]

I have a great XTR3 5.5-30 and Pro, and I agree they are both great scopes. I really like the elevation turret on the Pro, I have had a couple of months behind it now, and it continues to impress me. Both scopes really do have great glass, and you have to really get behind both for a bit to start picking out the differences IMO. I am really hoping the new XTR3 with Illumination are as good as the Greeley made XTR3 because I plan on getting one as soon as they hit the streets.

Glass is very, very close. Glad I'm not the only one who sees it that way.

 

[RFutch]

P.S.
For those who don't think it's worth dicking around with the "reticle focus" to "tune resolution", your missing out. EVERY scope I've put on a tripod and spent time with has benefited, sometimes greatly by a slight tune to the "fast focus" reticle adjustment.

When doing this do you set parrallax to infinity or are you focused on an object at a particular distance first? I have an 18X I'd like to see if I could fine tune a little better.

 

[screaminweasil]

I back out the ocular reticle focus until the reticle is blurry. Then, turn in clockwise until the reticle starts to become in focus. On the highest power of the scope. Usually start at 100 yards with parallax adjusted to same. Once reticle is focused enough and image is clear enough, ensure parallax is removed. Then temporarily mark the ocular so you have a reference and turn it inward 1/8 turns or less at a time and see how the image looks. Then do this at farther distance, like 800 yd or farther. You'll notice a sweet spot, and can adjust within that sweet spot to optimize the view for your eye ball. Be sure to adjust and eliminate parallax periodically, depending on how far you move the reticle focus. Then turn down to lower powers to check and see if reticle is still bold on lower powers.

 

[screaminweasil]

After each adjustment, give your eye a break and be sure you micro adjust, then look into the scope. You can't really do it while looking through the scope and turning at the same time.
Think "eye test" at the eye doctor.........
Quick looks, then adjust, then more quick looks

 

[Chickentoast]

Glad I didn't sell my regular XTR3 SCR2's for Pro's. I also have Razor G3's, and agree they are better, but also heavier, so I simply run them on heavier rifles.

 

[RFutch]

I have noticed that while my 18x is damn good at close distances, its harder to focus perfectly at farther distances beyond say 600 yards. I've heard this is partly due to the large DOF but I think mine may need some fine tuning as well.

For now I've put it on my .22 match rifle and its suited perfectly for that. The DOF is awesome for matches when you don't have time to sit there and mess with the parallax knob during a stage.

I have a Pro on back order, hope it gets here soon...

 

[db2000]

Nice review. Thanks

I believe it’s just a typo but wanted to clarify. When you mentioned you “just purchased a Steiner LRP 3.6-18x50, I think you mean Zeiss, correct?

 

[screaminweasil]

Nice review. Thanks

I believe it’s just a typo but wanted to clarify. When you mentioned you “just purchased a Steiner LRP 3.6-18x50, I think you mean Zeiss, correct?

Yeah, let me edit that. It's the brand new Zeiss, I meant.

 

[aaronk]

I'd skip the 18x......I had three and sold them because the 5.5-30 is much better optically. Seems the 18x have more variation in the glass. For $100 more the 30x is the way to go, even for a 22

Having purchased an 18x XTR3 after looking through a 30x XTR3 I can confirm this is absolutely true.

 

[kupper]

I just ordered a razor Gen 3 off a guy for $2400. I’m doing the same thing I always do in the interim between buying and having the scope show up where I pour over reviews trying to justify my purchase. I’m upgrading from a mark 5 which served me well but I’m wanting to move over to mills. I was between the XTR pro, the minox ZP5, a used kahles, or the Gen 3. With you having looked through the Gen 3 and the xtr pro would you say the extra $700 over the pro was worth it? My specific application will be minor elr (all prone 700-2500yds). I wasn’t in love with any of the ret choices for the PRO. Honestly wish I could have done the vortex Ret without the tree also.

 

[screaminweasil]

I just ordered a razor Gen 3 off a guy for $2400. I’m doing the same thing I always do in the interim between buying and having the scope show up where I pour over reviews trying to justify my purchase. I’m upgrading from a mark 5 which served me well but I’m wanting to move over to mills. I was between the XTR pro, the minox ZP5, a used kahles, or the Gen 3. With you having looked through the Gen 3 and the xtr pro would you say the extra $700 over the pro was worth it? My specific application will be minor elr (all prone 700-2500yds). I wasn’t in love with any of the ret choices for the PRO. Honestly wish I could have done the vortex Ret without the tree also.

The cost upgrade is relative. From a Pure Glass Quality perspective the Razor Gen 3 is amazing. I'll put it on the tripod here shortly and make a post comparing the two.

Reticles are subjective, I like the SCR 1/4 Mil quite a bit better than the EBR7 whatever is in the Vortex. I never shoot above 25x anyway, so for me the Pro is nice enough, I may end up getting another one and tripping my Razor in the future.

Glass is amazing in both scopes. Razor is definitely nice, I'll have to directly compare to the XTR Pro. The glass in the XTR Pro is really, really good.

Another scope with incredible glass that doesn't get mentioned much is the new XRS3 from Bushnell. It's awesome for a 6-36. Sold mine for Burris XTR3's because I like the SCR Mil reticle (Not really a fan of trees). Glass quality was pretty much as good in the bushnell as in the XTR3. It was super clean with Zero Chromatic abberation.

The Pro, doesn't have any Chromatic Abberation, neither does the Razor Gen3


The Gen 3 Razor weighs a shitload....................The XTR Pro is balanced nicely and not too heavy.

Was the extra cost for the razor worth it? Not really, If it had the SCR 1/4 Mil reticle in it...............then I would say maybe, I'll have to put them both on the tripod to directly compare.
Everything is personal preference. However, the glass quality is very, very good in the Razor, best I've ever seen, before getting my XTR Pro. LIke I said, I have to compare them directly to know for sure what I think between the Gen3 and XTR pro.

You will like the Gen3 , if you like the reticle. It's an awesome scope.

 

[4O6shootist]

I just ordered a razor Gen 3 off a guy for $2400. I’m doing the same thing I always do in the interim between buying and having the scope show up where I pour over reviews trying to justify my purchase. I’m upgrading from a mark 5 which served me well but I’m wanting to move over to mills. I was between the XTR pro, the minox ZP5, a used kahles, or the Gen 3. With you having looked through the Gen 3 and the xtr pro would you say the extra $700 over the pro was worth it? My specific application will be minor elr (all prone 700-2500yds). I wasn’t in love with any of the ret choices for the PRO. Honestly wish I could have done the vortex Ret without the tree also.

The minox and gen3 have better glass than anything but a theta or a zco. Cant go wrong with either in the sub 2500$ bracket.

 

[Lightning8]

You sold me - ordered a XTRIII 5.5-30 SCR MIL from Cameraland to replace my XTR II

 

[screaminweasil]

Shit......coming from an XTR2......you might shit your pants

 

[TheHebrewHammer]

I have one extra new illuminated XTR III listed in the PX if anyone wants it.

 

[nickw]

I have one extra new illuminated XTR III listed in the PX if anyone wants it.

Cameraland of NY will also be getting some in. I ordered 2 today. Looks like Burris is releasing them to dealers. Doug was great to deal with.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

Cameraland of NY will also be getting some in. I ordered 2 today. Looks like Burris is releasing them to dealers. Doug was great to deal with.

We've got 1 of the Burris XTR III Illuminated 5.5-30x56mm SCR 2 #201214 coming in that is not spoken for yet, so if you're looking let us know. Thanks

 

[RFutch]

Any of you guys have a 30x XTR3 and plan on ordering a new 30x XTR3i?

 

[TheHebrewHammer]

I think the new XTR3i is sweet.

 

[Lightning8]

You sold me - ordered a XTRIII 5.5-30 SCR MIL from Cameraland to replace my XTR II

XTRIII in and mounted on my 6BR (replacing my XTRII) - very nice and yes optics noticeably better.

 

[screaminweasil]

XTRIII in and mounted on my 6BR (replacing my XTRII) - very nice and yes optics noticeably better.

Glad you like it

 

[my87csx481]

Hope this isn't against the rules....I have a 5.5-30 non-illuminated in the PX.

Edit: rules say I can't post it for sale outside the PX....but nothing about not being able to post about an ad in the PX. Sorry for the hijack.

 

[Chasing3]

So is the Pro worth the extra money compared to the XTR3i 5.5-30???

 

[viking78]

Is this made in US, or Philippines?

 

[srt-4_uk]

Pro = US
XRT3i = Philippines
XTR3 (discontinued) = US

 

[NateAdams13]

You said the 5.5-30 has a better picture than the 3.3-18. Is it a drastic difference? Any idea how the picture on the 3.3-18 xtr3 compares to the 5-25 mk5hd?

 

[TheSunPope]

You said the 5.5-30 has a better picture than the 3.3-18. Is it a drastic difference? Any idea how the picture on the 3.3-18 xtr3 compares to the 5-25 mk5hd?

There may be some sample variation at play. But I was never disappointed with my 3.3-18 XTR3 going back and forth between it and my 5-25 Mark 5HD. The biggest thing is the field of view difference is immediately noticable. My Mark 5 had better resolution but you had to be looking for it.

 

[Baron85]

My 3-18 is not as good as my 5-30 but it is still very good.

 

[NateAdams13]

I’ve throughly enjoyed my xtr3 5.5-30. My only real complaint is the parallax adjustment never seems to be “right”. 200 yards I have to adjust to between 3 and 400. I may need to just sit and play with my focus. I’d like to try a g3 razor at some point, but I’m not sure it’s worth the cost difference

 

[db2000]

I’ve throughly enjoyed my xtr3 5.5-30. My only real complaint is the parallax adjustment never seems to be “right”. 200 yards I have to adjust to between 3 and 400. I may need to just sit and play with my focus. I’d like to try a g3 razor at some point, but I’m not sure it’s worth the cost difference

It happens. I’d send it back, especially if you think you might ever sell it. Also, MKM parallax wheel makes it spin as smooth as butter.

 

[NateAdams13]

It happens. I’d send it back, especially if you think you might ever sell it. Also, MKM parallax wheel makes it spin as smooth as butter.

I have the parallax wheel, doesn’t fit with my chosen mount lol. I may send it to Burris and see what they say about the parallax. I’m taking it back out tomorrow and I’ll spend some time playing with the focus and parallax and see if it’s actually an issue or if it’s just me.

 

[db2000]

I have the parallax wheel, doesn’t fit with my chosen mount lol. I may send it to Burris and see what they say about the parallax. I’m taking it back out tomorrow and I’ll spend some time playing with the focus and parallax and see if it’s actually an issue or if it’s just me.

Mine is just south of 100 at 100 and then pretty close at other distances which seems consistent other comparable scopes I owned besides my ZCO’s…which aren’t comparable, so a moot point I guess.

 

[Rob01]

Yardage numbers on the parallax knob are not set for the yardages listed and there just for a reference point. That's not just on these scopes but any. If they line up then consider yourself very lucky as a vast majority don't. That said if there is a problem, not mirage related, getting parallax set at longer ranges then I would get with Burris and have them take a look.

 

[NateAdams13]

Yardage numbers on the parallax knob are not set for the yardages listed and there just for a reference point. That's not just on these scopes but any. If they line up then consider yourself very lucky as a vast majority don't. That said if there is a problem, not mirage related, getting parallax set at longer ranges then I would get with Burris and have them take a look.

I know the yardages are never exact (my mk5 and razor were very close however, and my atacr was spot on), but I’m talking I’m set close to 400 at 200 yards, 250 at 100. They’re way off lol

 

[Baron85]

My Burris scopes are relatively close within 100 yards I would say, probably closer to 50 yards

 

[Rob01]

I know the yardages are never exact (my mk5 and razor were very close however, and my atacr was spot on), but I’m talking I’m set close to 400 at 200 yards, 250 at 100. They’re way off lol

Then send it in if you feel it’s a problem. Have them look at it.

 

[Baron85]

Burris customer service has been great the little bit I have used it.

 

[NateAdams13]

Playing a little more with my focus piece, I got it a lot nicer and the parallax adjustment seemed to chill out a bit to that fifty-ish margin of error and I’m happy with that. Great optic for sure. May end up selling it however to fund an f class optic for this rifle

 

[DurangoAl]

I'd skip the 18x......I had three and sold them because the 5.5-30 is much better optically. Seems the 18x have more variation in the glass. For $100 more the 30x is the way to go, even for a 22

Dang, I just sat down at the computer to order the 18x, but that pretty convincing advice. I'm putting together a new Bergara b14 R trainer in .17 HMR. I really don't need the extra power, but I'll go for it.

I'm going to use their XTR rings, Talley 20 MOA rail, do I need the high 1.5" size of those rings for the 30x?

Thanks for the info!

 

[Rob01]

Dang, I just sat down at the computer to order the 18x, but that pretty convincing advice. I'm putting together a new Bergara b14 R trainer in .17 HMR. I really don't need the extra power, but I'll go for it.

I'm going to use their XTR rings, Talley 20 MOA rail, do I need the high 1.5" size of those rings for the 30x?

Thanks for the info!

I wouldn’t go that high on a Bergara. 1.1-1.26” area will be good.

 

[screaminweasil]

I agree with Rob. I actually use seekins low .92 on my HMR, but you wouldn't be able to run plastic caps. Highs are way overkill though.

 

[Rob01]

Oh and order from @LibertyOptics as Scott has some great prices. Put in cart to get the price.

Here’s an idea of height. This is a 1.18” height mount and a 56mm scope on my Vudoo. That barrel is heavier than the Bergara factory barrel. Plenty of height.