Sounds like the XTR III might be on par with the Leupold Mk V wrt light gathering. Illumination may be moot.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Burris XTR3!!!
- Thread starter D_TROS
- Start date
I'll get a good opportunity to compare to the MK 5 HD 5-25 on Saturday. A friend of mine runs one and we are squadded up for a match.
My BR is still getting rebarreled so I'm running my 223 trainer. So not taking the match very serious. But I'm looking forward to using the new scope in match conditions and putting it side by side with some other optics.
Just heard the Illum will not be avail until beginning of 2020. So expect to see one at Shot and Id guess avail for sale right after that.
Other than that super exciting as the 3-18 will be a match in heaven on my hunting rifle as well as carbine and rimfire. crap I need 3...this is going to get expensive lol
regards,
DT
Other than that super exciting as the 3-18 will be a match in heaven on my hunting rifle as well as carbine and rimfire. crap I need 3...this is going to get expensive lol
regards,
DT
I'm with you there. I need at least one 18x and another 30x. Ideally though I should get two of the 18x.
I would'nt let illumination be a deciding factor for me. I'll probably try to get one for next year with it included. But the simple fact of the matter is I've been avidly hunting everything that runs, jumps, or swims since 1978. I used to take 3 weeks off every year with my dad and haul the horses from Idaho, to Wyoming, and Montana, hunting Elk and mulies. I've chased coyotes and wolves, lions, bears, you name it. If it lives in the northwest and you can buy a tag, I've hunted it.
In all that time my illumination has been turned on for a total of five minutes. I used it once about 3 years ago on a black bear at about 400 yards in heavy timber, first thing in the morning. I dont think I needed it even then. I've found the "low light" dusk and dawn scenario to not really play out in real life the way it does on forums. Low light glass technology is becoming awfully good these days, which helps offset the need for it.
But I understand people wanting it. Its another tool in the bag. And it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Maybe I'll eat my words someday and have a shot opportunity at first light heading for No Tell'em Ridge and fill my tag before I've finished my first cup of coffee.
Agreed! I've been hunting for over a couple decades and never once needed/wanted illumination. I've only owned a couple scopes with illumination over the years, and those were only turned on when I first purchased to make sure it worked.....then never needed it. Same as you, maybe I'll eat these words, but I'd rather save a few bucks and forego illumination. Frankly, if illumination is the make or break on a shot, I'm not doing my job well enough anyways.I'm with you there. I need at least one 18x and another 30x. Ideally though I should get two of the 18x.
I would'nt let illumination be a deciding factor for me. I'll probably try to get one for next year with it included. But the simple fact of the matter is I've been avidly hunting everything that runs, jumps, or swims since 1978. I used to take 3 weeks off every year with my dad and haul the horses from Idaho, to Wyoming, and Montana, hunting Elk and mulies. I've chased coyotes and wolves, lions, bears, you name it. If it lives in the northwest and you can buy a tag, I've hunted it.
In all that time my illumination has been turned on for a total of five minutes. I used it once about 3 years ago on a black bear at about 400 yards in heavy timber, first thing in the morning. I dont think I needed it even then. I've found the "low light" dusk and dawn scenario to not really play out in real life the way it does on forums. Low light glass technology is becoming awfully good these days, which helps offset the need for it.
But I understand people wanting it. Its another tool in the bag. And it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Maybe I'll eat my words someday and have a shot opportunity at first light heading for No Tell'em Ridge and fill my tag before I've finished my first cup of coffee.
I'm getting excited for the 3.3-18 to be released for a hunting rifle build I currently have in the works.
2 legs and 4...?? lol
In all seriousness, I havnt either other than when using NV and even then I usually have an illuminator and freakin laser so its a moot pt.
Really excited for the 3-18 tho. Not gonna lie.
Regards,
DT
Californians are always in season here in Idaho..
I just cant figure out how to get a green score on them..
I finally got the opportunity to shoot a match using the XTR3. I was going to skip it with my BR getting rebarreled, but then decided to just head out with my 223 trainer that I had it mounted on and just have fun. I ended finishing very well on the day.
I got to set it alongside some good scopes during the day. In a nutshell, it stacks up very well! Fellas in my squad had a Gen II Razor, a couple 7-35 ATACRs, and a 25x MK5 HD Leupy. Along with an optic casualty.. luckily he he had a back up rifle..
I got to make multiple comparisons throughout the day. Lots of guys were getting behind the XTR3 to see how it stacked up. For me the scope performed flawlessly. I had zero issues with one of the targets that was blended in and several squad mates struggled to see. I cleaned that stage and invited a couple of guys to look at the target through my scope, they were pretty impressed.
I intentionally ran the magnification a little higher than normal just to see how it would work out. I had no issues with it. I pretty much averaged 16 to 20x all day versus my usually 12 to 16x. I tossed up to 25x for some long stuff in this video from the rocks and went 7 for 10. These were some long shots with some full value wind for my 223. The last 4 shots were actually into my sub range, but managed all 4 hits on it. You can hear the disbelief the first time they call impact on the 3rd target.
I pulled 7 for 10 here on the rooftop. This stage ate some lunch. It looks like 3 to 4 was average on the day. Pretty small targets.
So a pretty fun day getting familiar with the new scope. I wont get in to which one did better at what. I'll tell you that general consensus was that the XTR3 is looking like a very nice scope, it was as good or better than some pretty popular optics in some very key categories. I simply dont want to break down and give it to you as my opinion, I want you guys to reach your own conclusions. They are in the wild, I know two guys here locally that purchased one, so feedback will be coming in soon.
I got to set it alongside some good scopes during the day. In a nutshell, it stacks up very well! Fellas in my squad had a Gen II Razor, a couple 7-35 ATACRs, and a 25x MK5 HD Leupy. Along with an optic casualty.. luckily he he had a back up rifle..
I got to make multiple comparisons throughout the day. Lots of guys were getting behind the XTR3 to see how it stacked up. For me the scope performed flawlessly. I had zero issues with one of the targets that was blended in and several squad mates struggled to see. I cleaned that stage and invited a couple of guys to look at the target through my scope, they were pretty impressed.
I intentionally ran the magnification a little higher than normal just to see how it would work out. I had no issues with it. I pretty much averaged 16 to 20x all day versus my usually 12 to 16x. I tossed up to 25x for some long stuff in this video from the rocks and went 7 for 10. These were some long shots with some full value wind for my 223. The last 4 shots were actually into my sub range, but managed all 4 hits on it. You can hear the disbelief the first time they call impact on the 3rd target.
I pulled 7 for 10 here on the rooftop. This stage ate some lunch. It looks like 3 to 4 was average on the day. Pretty small targets.
So a pretty fun day getting familiar with the new scope. I wont get in to which one did better at what. I'll tell you that general consensus was that the XTR3 is looking like a very nice scope, it was as good or better than some pretty popular optics in some very key categories. I simply dont want to break down and give it to you as my opinion, I want you guys to reach your own conclusions. They are in the wild, I know two guys here locally that purchased one, so feedback will be coming in soon.
Last edited:
Was that a Vortex that took a shit? It's all good. They've got an unlimited lifetime warranty. You don't even need the receipt!
Haha, do I sense sarcasm?
Thanks for letting me use your ATACR for scope comparisons. Solid optic!
Always great shooting with you brother..
That's a Gen II. Luckily he did have a back up rifle. He just had to drop from a 6.5 Creedmoor to .223 .
Last edited:
You must be able to shed some light?
Some of us live in places (or countries) where it'll be years before we ever see one of these in person, in fact I have never seen anyone with a Mark 5 or Mark 6, and have seen a single Razor G2 in matches I have attended.
Mark 4s and NF NXSs are still top dog in my neck of the woods.
I'll give you my thoughts. And @FALex has looked through it, maybe he'll chime in with his thoughts. He once owned the XTRII but the eyebox drove home nuts.
So I got to spend time with the 4 scopes mentioned above. Mostly early morning except for the Nightforce which I also got behind some in the afternoon when the mirage had increased. I'll start with glass, because this is the Hide.
With all the scopes set at 25x, the best glass was the ATACR. No surprise. Good brightness, color, it resolved really well.
Both myself and my buddy put the XTR3 in second. You could tell it apart from the ATACR, but glass looks really good in this scope. Its bright with no visible CA.
Close 3rd was the Razor. Also well controlled CA, but it was a little less bright than the XTR3. But it also resolved the targets and shrubbery well.
4th was the MK5. It had some CA giving it a yellowish tinge that was exacerbated by the early morning sunlight. Parallax resolved quickly on this scope, it was easy to get behind, but this particular MK5 just didnt have that bright pop that the other three had.
In the eyebox department I lean a little towards personal preference. I liked the Razor and the XTR3 the best. In reality, they were all easy to get behind and had user friendly eyebox. Even the Razor that was on a rifle with a long stock and low cheek riser. The exact opposite of what I use. The only thing that separated these for me was that edge to edge glass look at the ocular lenses. The Razor and XTR3 have a thin black ring created by the scope body. The ATACR and MK5 was more pronounced and thick. Like looking through a tunnel once you become used to a little thin ring. But again, all were perfectly useable and generous.
I didnt mess with anyone's diopter settings, this was just before a match, but parallax resolved well for all of them. The XTR3 looked pretty good in the afternoon when mirage was up compared to the ATACR. Conditions were difficult for everything at that point. The XTR3 parallax is very quick and easy to use. The depth of field is generous and I had no difficulty moving through targets at differing ranges without going back to my parallax knob. I cant really say that one scope was clearly superior than another in this category. They all seemed fairly similar in how well focused the targets were at various yardages. I didnt spend a lot of time comparing this. But what I did see looked close through the 4 scopes.
As my turret has broken in over the last week I have come to like it more. After using it in a match I'm very pleased with it. It started out too stiff, now it feels great. It's very tactile, feedback is excellent. This is a personal preference or what you are used to kinda category, so I wont comment on the other brands. Good turrets and tracking should be a given at this price point.
The XTR3 owned field of view. It pretty much had 2.5 to 3 mils of visible optic over the others. For example, on one comparison, the 7mil mark was on the edge, but in the XTR3 on the same magnification it was showing to 8.5 mils. It's a noticeable feature.
So that's just my quick down and dirty. It will be interesting to see more opinions on this as they hit the wild. I think what I've seen so far has been pretty impressive. I'll tell you honestly that I was nervous about it falling flat in comparison to other quality optics. But it didn't, it goes head to head with some pretty good scopes. Having seen how they compare to at least the few optics I put along side it, I can honestly say that it's a very strong contender at its price point.
Last edited:
In some aspects, other parts of day to day life are stuck in 1970.
Thanks for the evaluation Birddog, those are some good scopes to compare to and vary in price range with the XTR III being the "cheapest" of all, one would not expect it to compete with a scope at 2x the price so not a huge surprise there, but the fact it held its own and did better in some areas than the others would seem to indicate Burris has listened and listened well to the community. FOV, DOF/Parallax and eyebox forgiveness are finally getting a more prominent from shooters as they realize some scopes can really limit the field use.
Sounds like illumination copies may not come available until 2020 which is a bummer and I read what you wrote about your experience which is similar to mine - in most situations I have not needed illumination, but the older I get the worse my eyes get and I'm finding the thinner reticles are assisted by illumination in more and more situations. It's probably more of a mental thing but as long as my brain keeps telling me I need illumination my pocketbook will follow
This was an excellent review, @Birddog6424. Always appreciate your perspective, brother! I love my ATACR, but I am going to scope my 6MM Creedmoor with an XTRIII I think. That reticle (SCR2) and the quality of the glass, turrets, etc. have convinced me to give it a serious look. Much appreciated and great shooting, btw. Keep hammering them.
Thanks fellas. I tried to leave out the brand loyalty and tell it like it is. Those are all great scopes, and it was a relief to me to see that the XTR3 was right there in the hunt against a couple of the scopes at its price point. The XTR3 and the Razor were really close. The deciding factor was a slightly brighter sight picture in the Burris. The Razor has been a top performing scope for years. So it's great to see the long wait has been worth it, and the potential is there for this to be a really good scope line.
I'm going to keep my eyes out for another MK5 to compare to. See if I can find one a little more clear than my sample of one. Not saying it was bad glass by any stretch. It wasnt. It just had that slight off color look to it that made it less clean looking. Based on the feedback I have seen I doubt they all have that.
The ATACR was decidedly better glass. Nightforce does a great job with that optic. But it was still a good comparison for the XTR3 from the perspective of eyebox usability and parallax, and all the other user features that make for a good scope. Burris has definitely listened to XTRII feedback and overcome those issues in this optic.
I'm going to keep my eyes out for another MK5 to compare to. See if I can find one a little more clear than my sample of one. Not saying it was bad glass by any stretch. It wasnt. It just had that slight off color look to it that made it less clean looking. Based on the feedback I have seen I doubt they all have that.
The ATACR was decidedly better glass. Nightforce does a great job with that optic. But it was still a good comparison for the XTR3 from the perspective of eyebox usability and parallax, and all the other user features that make for a good scope. Burris has definitely listened to XTRII feedback and overcome those issues in this optic.
Yes. Field of view is noticeably very good.
I was seeing 2.5 to 3 mils more glass than my comparison scopes on the same magnification.
The comparison to the Razor is the one I'm most interested in, and it seems like the XTR3 is on par if not better than and weighs 18oz less.
I'm hanging out to see how the 3.3-18 compares to the RZR 3-18 and MK5 3.6-18, as on paper it looks like it'll be the perfect crossover hunting/tactical scope. I would've bought a RZR years ago if it were not for the weight, so the XTR3 looks like the bees knees.
@Birddog6424 isn't telling any BS stories. I really wanted to like the XTR II's when they came out. I bought one and shot it for about a month, but the eyebox drove me crazy, and I'm not too sensitive about eyeboxes. I also was not the biggest fan of the SCR reticle.
I got to shoot in @Birddog6424's squad, and so I had the benefit of looking through the XTR III and I got to twist the elevation knob a bit too (wasn't getting too wild, this was before the match...although I should've moved the fucker up a full rev, or two Anyhow, I am one of the guy's with the ATACR (have a 7-35x with a Mil-XT). I am a huge proponent of Nightforce for several reasons, but the primaries are the robustness, glass quality and their turrets. I think NF has some of the best turrets in the game.
Anyhow, the XTRIII is basically half the price of that ATACR, so I'm not comparing the XTR to the ATACR. I will say that the XTR III is vastly improved with regards to the eyebox. I feel it's a damn near 100% improvement, but I know that's a bit of an overstatement. Regardless, much improved. The glass seemed damn good. I did not compare like Birddog6424 did, just didn't have the time for that. The turrets were also pretty good. Again, I'm a NF guy, so I always have their turrets on my mind.
As far as the reticle goes, I am a fan of Christmas tree type reticles. I think they did a fine job with the SCR 2 also. I've become a big fan of the target dot in a majority of these reticles.
All in all, I think Burris did really well with this scope. You guys know I am not a fan of Vortex (as evidenced by our fellow competitor's Gen 2 PST shitting the bed. It is super shitty to see something like that and think about how relatively common that is). I think Burris has created some excellent competition for them, especially when it's paired against the Razor. The Vortex warranty bit has seemingly been a double-edged sword. It's been great because it has forced damn near every other optics company to get on board, but let's face it, it's also how they sell their scopes too, I'm sure a big chunk are due to that warranty. At the end of the day, I think many are willing to look beyond issues because their CS is so good.
Back to the XTR III...just buy it already
I got to shoot in @Birddog6424's squad, and so I had the benefit of looking through the XTR III and I got to twist the elevation knob a bit too (wasn't getting too wild, this was before the match...although I should've moved the fucker up a full rev, or two
Anyhow, I am one of the guy's with the ATACR (have a 7-35x with a Mil-XT). I am a huge proponent of Nightforce for several reasons, but the primaries are the robustness, glass quality and their turrets. I think NF has some of the best turrets in the game. Anyhow, the XTRIII is basically half the price of that ATACR, so I'm not comparing the XTR to the ATACR. I will say that the XTR III is vastly improved with regards to the eyebox. I feel it's a damn near 100% improvement, but I know that's a bit of an overstatement. Regardless, much improved. The glass seemed damn good. I did not compare like Birddog6424 did, just didn't have the time for that. The turrets were also pretty good. Again, I'm a NF guy, so I always have their turrets on my mind.
As far as the reticle goes, I am a fan of Christmas tree type reticles. I think they did a fine job with the SCR 2 also. I've become a big fan of the target dot in a majority of these reticles.
All in all, I think Burris did really well with this scope. You guys know I am not a fan of Vortex (as evidenced by our fellow competitor's Gen 2 PST shitting the bed. It is super shitty to see something like that and think about how relatively common that is). I think Burris has created some excellent competition for them, especially when it's paired against the Razor. The Vortex warranty bit has seemingly been a double-edged sword. It's been great because it has forced damn near every other optics company to get on board, but let's face it, it's also how they sell their scopes too, I'm sure a big chunk are due to that warranty. At the end of the day, I think many are willing to look beyond issues because their CS is so good.
Back to the XTR III...just buy it already
[QUOTE="FALex, post: [quote
I got to shoot in @Birddog6424's squad, and so I had the benefit of looking through the XTR III and I got to twist the elevation knob a bit too (wasn't getting too wild, this was before the match...although I should've moved the fucker up a full rev, or two
Haha, if you ever feel tempted to sabotage my scope, just remember, I'm the guy who went diving for your pack and ran you more bullets...
But feel free to dick up Brady's scope
Last I heard they had a bunch of them in production with a mid September delivery date.
If they are on schedule, they could be available at retailers by months end.
I will be happy to see these actually hit the market. I was trying to wait on them but couldn’t wait any longer and ended up buying two other optics instead. Hopefully I can get one for my next build if they can produce them fast enough to actually keep them in stock at retailers.
Haha, if you ever feel tempted to sabotage my scope, just remember, I'm the guy who went diving for your pack and ran you more bullets...
But feel free to dick up Brady's scope
I love it man! Thanks again for doing that...I think I got two extra points because of that move. And to think, I was on my way to cleaning that stage...still pissed!!!
Got the ol Rimfire mounted up on JP chassi and XTR3
Pretty excited to fire some rounds at elk camp!!
Regards
DT
Pretty excited to fire some rounds at elk camp!!
Regards
DT
Looks great. The one i ordered came in yesterday. Plan to get it mounted after my match this weekend. I've had a XTR II for two years, looking forward to a big improvement.
It's a great box.
I kept mine.
Looks like folks are finally taking delivery. It's been a long wait. I know it's impossible to please everyone, and some folks wont like it. But I think for the most part that people are going to like the scope.
It's nice looking, solid, comes with an extra windage dial, and i think it's heavier than my original.
Attachments
That is a sweet rig, but I don’t think 22LR has enough oomph for elk ?
I'm out shooting an NRL 22 match this morning with the XTR3 mounted on a CZ 455. Lots of fun..
Got to compare to the 32x NX8 this morning and another Razor. NF did a good job with this scope, as expected. I can see the issues pointed out by @wjm308 , but the glass looks great in this scope. FOV comparison on 24x, the NF was at 8 mils per side, the Burris was at 8.6 mils. This is the closest I have seen a scope come to matching the FOV of the XTR3.
I got a lot of feedback from some shooters here. The owner of the NF was very impressed with the Burris after bouncing back and forth between his and mine. I'm curious to see some of the results other people see, but my sample of one continues to compare very well.
Got to compare to the 32x NX8 this morning and another Razor. NF did a good job with this scope, as expected. I can see the issues pointed out by @wjm308 , but the glass looks great in this scope. FOV comparison on 24x, the NF was at 8 mils per side, the Burris was at 8.6 mils. This is the closest I have seen a scope come to matching the FOV of the XTR3.
I got a lot of feedback from some shooters here. The owner of the NF was very impressed with the Burris after bouncing back and forth between his and mine. I'm curious to see some of the results other people see, but my sample of one continues to compare very well.
Last edited:
Just curious Ja, in the 4th image, were you shooting at the guys in the 3rd image, I hope they were running fast. Seriously though, I keep getting tempted by the Area 419 custom CZ 455 rifle or do I want to build a Vudoo 22. Also, with regard to the NX8 4-32x50 vs. XTR III 5.5-30x56, did you notice that the XTR III was a bit brighter at higher magnification, or did the NX8 hold its own?
Haha, kinda looks that way..
Those old fat guys start moving pretty fast when you start shooting at them..
I was able to see the issues you discussed in your evaluation of the NX8. The edge of the glass has this curving, fish bowl effect at closer yardages. It's still kinda there at greater distances. But far less noticeable. Noticeably more shallow DOV, which brought the very finicky parallax into play. Especially in the .22 game where you're on the parallax knob for every target array. But the glass looks really good. It's a definite strength of the scope.
Up to 20x it was pretty close to a dead heat, at 30x the XTR3 had brighter glass. Not to say the NX8 doesn't still look good, it does. It still resolves well. But the XTR3 was definitely pulling in more light.
So I think the 18x XTR3 and 20x NX8 will be an interesting match up.
And that CZ is great value. This was a buddy's rifle, and its VERY accurate. We were RO'ing a stage together at a local NRL match this spring. In between squads we were hitting a tpost with it at just over 200 yards. Not exactly sure how wide a tpost is, but it's not very.
We were hitting all those little .25" targets today at 40 yards.
Those old fat guys start moving pretty fast when you start shooting at them..
I was able to see the issues you discussed in your evaluation of the NX8. The edge of the glass has this curving, fish bowl effect at closer yardages. It's still kinda there at greater distances. But far less noticeable. Noticeably more shallow DOV, which brought the very finicky parallax into play. Especially in the .22 game where you're on the parallax knob for every target array. But the glass looks really good. It's a definite strength of the scope.
Up to 20x it was pretty close to a dead heat, at 30x the XTR3 had brighter glass. Not to say the NX8 doesn't still look good, it does. It still resolves well. But the XTR3 was definitely pulling in more light.
So I think the 18x XTR3 and 20x NX8 will be an interesting match up.
And that CZ is great value. This was a buddy's rifle, and its VERY accurate. We were RO'ing a stage together at a local NRL match this spring. In between squads we were hitting a tpost with it at just over 200 yards. Not exactly sure how wide a tpost is, but it's not very.
We were hitting all those little .25" targets today at 40 yards.
Last edited:
I just made a quick video so you guys can see and hear the turrets on this scope. As mentioned several times, its stiff when new. But it breaks in very nicely, and it's by no means ridiculous or unusable right out of the box.
So take a look...
So take a look...
Power ring is very smooth. No stiffness there. I think @Tyler Kemp mentioned his was smooth as well in his brief review.
He's spent a little more time with it since. Maybe he'll chime in with his thoughts.
I'm with you there. I need at least one 18x and another 30x. Ideally though I should get two of the 18x.
I would'nt let illumination be a deciding factor for me. I'll probably try to get one for next year with it included. But the simple fact of the matter is I've been avidly hunting everything that runs, jumps, or swims since 1978. I used to take 3 weeks off every year with my dad and haul the horses from Idaho, to Wyoming, and Montana, hunting Elk and mulies. I've chased coyotes and wolves, lions, bears, you name it. If it lives in the northwest and you can buy a tag, I've hunted it.
In all that time my illumination has been turned on for a total of five minutes. I used it once about 3 years ago on a black bear at about 400 yards in heavy timber, first thing in the morning. I dont think I needed it even then. I've found the "low light" dusk and dawn scenario to not really play out in real life the way it does on forums. Low light glass technology is becoming awfully good these days, which helps offset the need for it.
But I understand people wanting it. Its another tool in the bag. And it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Maybe I'll eat my words someday and have a shot opportunity at first light heading for No Tell'em Ridge and fill my tag before I've finished my first cup of coffee.
With SFP scopes to,where the reticle is always usable, I have never seen the need for illumination. I will agree with you guys there. On these FFP scopes especially with the trend of thinner and thinner reticles better suited for higher magnification shooting this is not the case. I have been burned on a group of hogs. At 175 yards last year. When I turned the mag up to see the reticle, I couldn’t see through the scope. Turn it down to where I could make out the pigs, and I couldn’t see the reticle. I took a pot shot and missed.
99% of the time illumination is not needed, but I think of it as 4wheel drive on my truck. Not used often at all but I will always have it for those few times that I REALLY need it.
I got to play with one on Sunday. I know a guy who is sponsored by Burris and he showed me the XTR3 on his rifle. I was really impressed with the glass. It was bright, clear, and far better than I expected from Burris. I didn't notice any CA. I couldn't see any tunneling going through there mag range. The clicks felt nice. I don't know how I feel about the windage being capped, but honestly, once windage is zeroed, how often do you dial? The windage knob was a bit tight. Might be because it's new, might be because the windage knob is smaller than the elevation knob. What really impressed me was the FOV. At 30x, the FOV was incredibly large.
I also got to use one this weekend. I liked it alot. Glass was very good in low light, Tracking was very good. Turrets are pretty hard to turn but others have mentioned that they loosen up after use. My XTR 2 had turrets that were also hard to turn but I didn't feel that it was un-usable. FOV is noticeably bigger than my AMG but I still prefer the EBR-7 reticle in the AMG. Glass is slightly better in the AMG as well. I did notice some CA or "ghosting" on high power around the white painted target with the XTR 3 that I didn't notice with my AMG.
Overall I think its a very good competition scope. I wouldn't mind putting one on a rifle at all but I hunt more than I shoot matches so the AMG fits my purpose better at this time. I like it.
Overall I think its a very good competition scope. I wouldn't mind putting one on a rifle at all but I hunt more than I shoot matches so the AMG fits my purpose better at this time. I like it.
Similar threads
