Rifle Scopes Burris XTR3!!!

[HousePlant]

Being in sales/marketing myself, perception of "being able to" holds extraordinary value with a product. The XTR III's price is "so close" to the cut off that it doesn't make sense why Burris wouldn't cap the MSRP and even taut that this scope is a "new option for any class of competitive precision shooting".

I go out, I get a RPR in 6.5 or 6, grab me a Burris XTR III, practice a little. Then nut up and show up to a PRS match and do well enough to want to do it again... then spread the word about Burris and probably remain loyal to them with a incredible scope for a very long time. Or, I get an RPR and grab me an Vortex PST Gen II and never think about Burris again because by the time I realize I could do better, I totally skip over the Burris XTR III and it's pseudo price point.

Regardless, I'm sorry, but a $2,200 MSRP scope should have some form of illumination. 99% of people won't use it, but the competition has it.

A $1999.99 scope with uniquely excellent glass (i.e., large FOV) without illumination can do well if it's allowed to generate a following.

Especially since the XTR II is so much cheaper, to many people are going to assume a generational iteration, not a totally different class of scope.

XTR III Pro is what this should be called. And we need to stop charging more for tree reticles, especially if there's only one. Common now.

Rant over.

 

[matchbook454]

The intent of the first release XTR3 has always been as a target/competition optic. Thus the lack of illumination and the thinner reticle.

From a first-hand perspective in the PRS , I love the thin reticle of the SCR2. It's perfectly suited for 10x to 30x magnification on targets in daylight. It is ideal for their intended usage.

The illuminated version was always intended as a follow up release once the competition version got off the ground. It's coming, it just wasnt the focus. The also wanted to get the RT6 Long Range scopes with the SCR2 out into the market place. So both of these products are out now.

I think the illumination and thicker reticle will be extremely well-received when it comes to market. It's going to be a great crossover optic.

I continually see on this forum and others that people like the XTR3 better than the G2 Razor, MK5HD, and NX8. Once illumination hits the market, this is going to be a pretty tough to beat option in the sub $2k price point.

I’m holding out for the thicker reticle and/or illuminated reticle for a hunting rifle I’m currently having built. Any idea when these might be available?

 

[TrevK]

I’m holding out for the thicker reticle and/or illuminated reticle for a hunting rifle I’m currently having built. Any idea when these might be available?

I just emailed Burris 2 days ago hoping to find out this exact info and then I just said Fuggit and bought the non illuminated SCR2 from Liberty Optics!

 

[matchbook454]

I’m holding out for the thicker reticle and/or illuminated reticle for a hunting rifle I’m currently having built. Any idea when these might be available?

I’m not in a hurry so I’ll wait. Rifle won’t be ready until November and if I don’t get a scope on it till Jan./Feb. it wouldn’t be the end of the world.

 

[McMillan]

The standard scr mil is noticeably heavier in the center than the scr2 if that helps.

Scr is what I would run on a low power hunting rifle

 

[Birddog6424]

Scr is what I would run on a low power hunting rifle

I agree. I have a couple XTRIIs on hunting rifles. The SCR is an excellent reticle for a hunting rig.

I personally just cant imagine a scenario where I would use the grid to take a shot out hunting. Anything longer in range that would require a holdover would be a slow down, dial it and do it right situation. It's just not the place to rush a shot.

But I get it if folks want to double it up as a target optic as well. The SCR performs well there too.

 

[346ci]

Thought I would give a review of of a 3.3x18 XTR3/SCR2 I just bought out of the PX. Went with a shooting buddy to Coleman's Creek where we went out to 1240yds, didn't try the mile due to wind. On 18x, while more is better, it was still enough to see plates that far.

Overall, impressed by what they have done with the 3 vs the 2. My other high end scopes were NF NXS's and while old, still a good scope. The 3's glass is much better though but haven't had it long enough to see if it is as tough.

The turrets feel good, nice clicks and played with the elevation a lot. The zero stop worked fine, loved this feature on my NXS.

I agree with the others on the SCR2, not usable in the low power ranges but once you are up to max, easy to use.
Edit: been using this some deer hunting and must say at low power the reticle is good enough to take one at 200-ish yards.

Compared to his Razor Gen2, I thought the 3 gave a more defined image, he didn't agree and it could have been each other's focus as we didn't adjust that while swapping. I like the razor but could not see paying $1600 for one, would not pay that for the Burris either but I'm always looking for deals.

If you have a chance to look through a 3, try it. I have Gen 1, 2 and 3 of the XTR and they have made a really nice scope this time.

 

[PracticalTactical]

I feel like the manufacturers are working to competing objectives by increasing the zoom range to almost 6x the low power and that reeks havoc with the reticle size on an FFP scope. For 2FP its fine but just unusable at low power with FFP.

I would rather have the old 3 X range on an FFP scope and forget about anything over about 24 power. That way the reticle thickness could be more idealized to be reasonable throughout the zoom range.

I feel like instead they try and give the sales department a feature they can exploit as a benefit but it isn't really a benefit in practical terms on an FFP scope.

As long as they do this, we will never be happy with the line thickness, and its especially true if its not ideal at the zoom setting we are most likely to use.

 

[Chasing3]

I’ll be curious to see the illuminated version/thicker reticle and see if it helps the usability in the lower magnification on the 3-18x50 model. Either way though the XTR3 is a nice scope.

 

[Birddog6424]

I feel like the manufacturers are working to competing objectives by increasing the zoom range to almost 6x the low power and that reeks havoc with the reticle size on an FFP scope. For 2FP its fine but just unusable at low power with FFP.

I would rather have the old 3 X range on an FFP scope and forget about anything over about 24 power. That way the reticle thickness could be more idealized to be reasonable throughout the zoom range.

I feel like instead they try and give the sales department a feature they can exploit as a benefit but it isn't really a benefit in practical terms on an FFP scope.

As long as they do this, we will never be happy with the line thickness, and its especially true if its not ideal at the zoom setting we are most likely to use.

I'm not sure its a manufacturer thing. If consumers didn't want it, it would get squashed pretty quick. But the demand from scope buyers is there.

I think as the high zoom ratio optics are becoming more prevalent we are beginning to see the weaknesses associated with them. Reticles in FFP simply can't be optimized throughout the magnification ratio. They are either too thick or too thin at the top or bottom. Also we see finicky parallax, shallow depth of field, and flaws in the glass. The NX8 is a perfect example of a symptomatic high zoom ratio.

The XTR3 is actually designed as a 7x ratio. They could take that scope to 35x. But they saw things they didn't like and decided to limit it to 30x. I do believe the thicker SCR2 that they are going to use for the illuminated version will be much more useable at the lower magnifications. Making it a very good choice as a crossover hunting/competition optic. But it will definitely be thicker at max zoom.

 

[Rebels010]

I’ve been intrigued about this scope and all the glowing reviews on it. Would love to see one with a center dot reticle.

 

[346ci]

The SCR2 has a floating dot.

 

[Rebels010]

SCR2

Nice. I thought it had a floating cross but may have confused it with a different reticle.

 

[Birddog6424]

Nice. I thought it had a floating cross but may have confused it with a different reticle.

It is a floating cross. But it's very small. Smaller than the SCR.

Having used both the floating cross of the SCR2 and the floating dot of the H59, I do like the cross. Just a little more meat on it in difficult to see backdrops, but still fine enough that it provides excellent detail while shooting groups on paper.

 

[McMillan]

I’ve been intrigued about this scope and all the glowing reviews on it. Would love to see one with a center dot reticle.

What can you do with the floating centre dot that you can't do with the tiny cross

 

[Rebels010]

What can you do with the floating centre for that you can't do with the tiny cross

Sleep easier at night.

 

[McMillan]

Sleep easier at night.

Did the joke go over my head? Seriously tho o the small cross is so so much better. It's small enough for shooting groups on paper in the .0s and you can still see 8t on low zoom. When you get down to low power it then looks like a dot unlike most dots that basicly dissapears on low zoom

 

[Rebels010]

I have come to prefer a dot, therefore I would sleep easier at night knowing the reticle is of my preference.

That’s good feedback, I need to get behind one and to try it out and see what I think.

 

[hunter8793]

Haha, I do wish I had a little more pull with them to make things happen for you guys. I contact them every now and then and pull strings for the guys here on the Hide, but I wish I could do more.

I'm just a shooter though. I feel pretty privileged to have been on the Burris shooting team for the last five years. They treat me fantastic, they are great people trying their best to continue to bring a good product to everyone.

A few glitches on a new scope release doesnt really worry me, though I feel bad for the guys who are the recipient of a scope that needs to be returned. I remember when the XTRII came to market. It was plagued with issues, and it ended up being a very successful, extremely durable optic.

I have faith that Burris will unfuck themselves




As mentioned above, Khuber went through this issue. I contacted the people I know on his behalf and they told me what the problem was. It was complicated, and I quite honestly dont understand scope engineering well enough to understand what they were telling me. That's why Khuber mentioned he thought it was a BS answer. I dont believe they were BSing us personally. If the reticle was broken or jumping, they simply could have said so. No big deal. The guy I spoke to about it wouldnt have any reason to make anything up. But long story short, you got a malfunctioning scope right out of the box, which sucks, and I feel badly for you.

Best option is just reach out to them and give them the opportunity to take care of it. It's still an excellent optic at a great price. Once they get you taken care of you'll be happy you picked it.

And dont worry about putting it on a heavy recoiling rifle. I've run two different XTR3s on a 300 Norma Mag and a 338 Lapua Mag.

As soon as I can get out of work today I'm headed out with a buddy and slapping one on a 50BMG. We have several rifles today that we are going to start at 1200 yards, and work our way out to 2200 yards.

If you run into any issues with Burris, shoot me a PM. I'll make a call for you.

Man, that’s really nice of you.

But people shouldn’t have to come to an Internet forum and find some guy to call the manufacturer of their scope to get problems resolved for them.

They better hurry up and “unfuck” themselves or they might be the next Quigley Ford.

 

[PracticalTactical]

I'm not sure its a manufacturer thing. If consumers didn't want it, it would get squashed pretty quick. But the demand from scope buyers is there.

I think as the high zoom ratio optics are becoming more prevalent we are beginning to see the weaknesses associated with them. Reticles in FFP simply can't be optimized throughout the magnification ratio. They are either too thick or too thin at the top or bottom. Also we see finicky parallax, shallow depth of field, and flaws in the glass. The NX8 is a perfect example of a symptomatic high zoom ratio.

The XTR3 is actually designed as a 7x ratio. They could take that scope to 35x. But they saw things they didn't like and decided to limit it to 30x. I do believe the thicker SCR2 that they are going to use for the illuminated version will be much more useable at the lower magnifications. Making it a very good choice as a crossover hunting/competition optic. But it will definitely be thicker at max zoom.

There are even some 10x out there and that just makes the problem even worse.

I get it though, manufacturers are responding to what the consumers "think" they want, but consumers are real slow on the up take as to the down side of the request.

Manufacturers must be conflicted on this where it approaches malicious obedience.

I looked all over the SWFA web site and couldn't find anything with the old 3x ratio. Everything seems to be 4x and up.

 

[Birddog6424]

Man, that’s really nice of you.

But people shouldn’t have to come to an Internet forum and find some guy to call the manufacturer of their scope to get problems resolved for them.

They better hurry up and “unfuck” themselves or they might be the next Quigley Ford.

I was offering to help,, that was all.. No one needed me to make a call for them. For the handful of issues that presented themselves out of the first batch of 200 to 400 XTR3s that left Colorado, Burris resolved them all with the customers without any help from me.

And for any one paying attention, those posts were 6 months ago, there hasn't been a single issue with the XTR3 since. I've seen nothing but positive feedback for months now. It's a hell of a nice scope, the people that are buying them like it.

 

[akmike47]

I was offering to help,, that was all.. No one needed me to make a call for them. For the handful of issues that presented themselves out of the first batch of 200 to 400 XTR3s that left Colorado, Burris resolved them all with the customers without any help from me.

And for any one paying attention, those posts were 6 months ago, there hasn't been a single issue with the XTR3 since. I've seen nothing but positive feedback for months now. It's a hell of a nice scope, the people that are buying them like it.

How about some of them sweet sweet employee discount prices for hide members already running Burris

 

[D_TROS]

THIS POST IS WORTHLESS WITHOUT PICS.

sorry for caps lol. last weekend at Cameo range in Grand Junction. Took 2nd place shooting a 223 and factory ammo. Good times!! scope is a beast.

have to add. I seriously crack up when people say, the retc isnt usable at 3 power....really??? its not meant to be! its the FOV you use at low power to find your target/animal that makes this scope amazing.

...did I mention MADE IN AMERICA?!?!? yeeeeeeeeeeeyaw after rock solid tacking nothing else really needs said.

rant over. lol.

 

[levi8599]

Who’s used the scr 3-18 as a crossover hunting scope?
what power was the reticle usable on? Looked at my buddies scr2 and it was too small for me for hunting use.

 

[D_TROS]

I love thin retc and my wife doesnt like them. That being said her last deer and antyelope were both taken with a 3-18. one on high power LR shot (410 yards) and one at point blank (50yds)

she nvr complained about not being able to see the retc.


everyones eyes are diff. but this is a killer package more for FOV for my wife than anything. it will be used for my son when he hunts fo the first time next yr.

Wifes public land Muley this yr. taken with 3-18 scr2

GL
DT

 

[Chickentoast]

I picked one up - FOV and thin reticle are the distinguishing features at the price point. I like the center cross over a dot - use the top of the cross as my aiming point, just as precise as a dot, but more usable for judging misses, and essentially becomes a dot at lower mag.

 

[schockley]

Does anyone care to offer a comparison of the XTR3 to the current generation Cronus? I have a Cronus and it’s fine, but for the sake of discussion.

 

[Chasing3]

I liked my Burris XTR3 3-18, bought used for good deal. I sold and sad I did.

 

[D_TROS]

Does anyone care to offer a comparison of the XTR3 to the current generation Cronus? I have a Cronus and it’s fine, but for the sake of discussion.

MADE IN AMERICA > made in cheena



God Bless
DT

 

[schockley]

Made in USA is a factor, but the Cronus is made in Japan.

 

[Protondecay123]

What about lowering the MSRP on the Manufacturers website so they could be used in PRS Production Class? You can buy them off the Burris website for less than 2k but the MSRP is listed as $2149.

 

[McMillan]

Does anyone care to offer a comparison of the XTR3 to the current generation Cronus? I have a Cronus and it’s fine, but for the sake of discussion.

the xtr 3 from what I've seen has it beat in every single way. Way better field of view. More elevation. Better eye box. better glass(this is only from people comparing the cronus glass to a gen 2 razor and then me comparing xtr3 glass to a gen 2 razor). Made in USA. Basicly better everything. Only part that's equal is the warranty

What about lowering the MSRP on the Manufacturers website so they could be used in PRS Production Class? You can buy them off the Burris website for less than 2k but the MSRP is listed as $2149.

I think this is burrises stupidest mistake as it remove a a whole market even if it's not a huge market.
Edit. Seems it does fit into production class now

 

[jzerfoss]

 

[Glassaholic]

^^^ About time!!! All of us know the Mfr's list prices no one would ever pay. Not sure how many actually compete in the "Production" division but this is good news nonetheless.

 

[Glassaholic]

I was offering to help,, that was all.. No one needed me to make a call for them. For the handful of issues that presented themselves out of the first batch of 200 to 400 XTR3s that left Colorado, Burris resolved them all with the customers without any help from me.

And for any one paying attention, those posts were 6 months ago, there hasn't been a single issue with the XTR3 since. I've seen nothing but positive feedback for months now. It's a hell of a nice scope, the people that are buying them like it.

For what it's worth, I was one of the ones who got a sub-par XTR III in that first batch; however, Burris took care of me in less than a week and got me a brand new scope that was outstanding optically. Not too long ago I saw a great deal in the classifieds on a 5.5-30 and decided it was time to replace my PST II 5-25 on my trainer hoping the XTR III would exceed my expectations, so I purchased a used XTR III that has been phenomenal so far, the scope is punching above its class with regard to optical quality. So having had both a 3.3-18x50 and now the 5.5-30x56 I can say these scopes represent the best glass I've seen at this price and magnification (I haven't tried everything but I've tried quite a few). My only gripe is for Burris to get illumination to market asap.

 

[Long Range 338]

I love thin retc and my wife doesnt like them. That being said her last deer and antyelope were both taken with a 3-18. one on high power LR shot (410 yards) and one at point blank (50yds)

she nvr complained about not being able to see the retc.


everyones eyes are diff. but this is a killer package more for FOV for my wife than anything. it will be used for my son when he hunts fo the first time next yr.

Wifes public land Muley this yr. taken with 3-18 scr2

View attachment 7507930



GL
DT

You must be mistaken, you can't hunt with the XTR3 and that reticle! Its been repeated about a hundred times in this thread. Glad to see you were able to use the XTR3 for hunting and prove the naysayers wrong. Awesome buck to boot! Congrats.

 

[Long Range 338]

For what it's worth, I was one of the ones who got a sub-par XTR III in that first batch; however, Burris took care of me in less than a week and got me a brand new scope that was outstanding optically. Not too long ago I saw a great deal in the classifieds on a 5.5-30 and decided it was time to replace my PST II 5-25 on my trainer hoping the XTR III would exceed my expectations, so I purchased a used XTR III that has been phenomenal so far, the scope is punching above its class with regard to optical quality. So having had both a 3.3-18x50 and now the 5.5-30x56 I can say these scopes represent the best glass I've seen at this price and magnification (I haven't tried everything but I've tried quite a few). My only gripe is for Burris to get illumination to market asap.

Maybe its just because its exterior reminds me of the Nightforce but IMO the XTR3 is a Nightforce killer if anybody is really looking. The Burris has clean lines, great features and glass, and feels very high quality even compared to Tier 1 optics - however I wouldn't put it in the same class as the Alpha stuff. The only complaints I'm seeing are the lack of illumination but honestly that's a feature I have yet to need in a scope. For those concerned about the thin reticle I guess it could make the difference.

 

[Birddog6424]

I killed 3 big game animals last year with a broken xtr3 scr2 3.3-18x50 lol still did the job. Wish the replacement scope had the glass and turrets of the faulty original delivery

I remember that issue you had with yours. I know of one other person who got one like that out of the first batch as well.

It was nice to see them correct those new product bugs so quickly. As I mentioned above, I havent heard of an issue with an XTR3 in 6 months on any of the forums I follow.

Bummed to hear your glass isn't as good in your replacement. And I do think they made a change to the turrets on later releases. My first scope was super stiff out of the box. But after break in, was absolutely perfect. Tactile with just the right amount of pressure. Newer scopes aren't so stiff out of the box, but they aren't quite as tactile either. They are decent after you break them in, they start feeling better after you work them over, but they are different than the original.

 

[Glassaholic]

I killed 3 big game animals last year with a broken xtr3 scr2 3.3-18x50 lol still did the job. Wish the replacement scope had the glass and turrets of the faulty original delivery

If the glass is not as good you should send back to Burris, I would have difficulty settling for something I know could be better.

 

[Birddog6424]

If the glass is not as good you should send back to Burris, I would have difficulty settling for something I know could be better.

Agreed..

 

[Bangin]

Designed, machined, and assembled does not mean made in America. Leupold says the same thing.

 

[McMillan]

Designed, machined, and assembled does not mean made in America. Leupold says the same thing.

I guess nothing is made in America then. And I gues all those people going to work making things are just imagining that they have a job

 

[Bangin]

Vortex amg minus the reticle.

 

[McMillan]

Vortex amg minus the reticle.

Designed, machined, and assembled does not mean made in America. Vortex says the same thing.

 

[Bangin]

Designed, machined, and assembled does not mean made in America. Vortex says the same thing.

huh... mine says made in the USA right on the scope

 

[BytorJr]

For what it's worth, I was one of the ones who got a sub-par XTR III in that first batch; however, Burris took care of me in less than a week and got me a brand new scope that was outstanding optically. Not too long ago I saw a great deal in the classifieds on a 5.5-30 and decided it was time to replace my PST II 5-25 on my trainer hoping the XTR III would exceed my expectations, so I purchased a used XTR III that has been phenomenal so far, the scope is punching above its class with regard to optical quality. So having had both a 3.3-18x50 and now the 5.5-30x56 I can say these scopes represent the best glass I've seen at this price and magnification (I haven't tried everything but I've tried quite a few). My only gripe is for Burris to get illumination to market asap.

These would get serious attention by me if the illumination was present. But I've got 2 scopes without it and really wish the had illumination. Granted, they are LHRS's but the point being for 1800+ illumination should be "standard."

 

[opeagle]

Someone who knows more will likely chime in, but Burris / Steiner was reportedly doing some manufacturing in Greely, Colorado.

 

[D_TROS]

Designed, machined, and assembled does not mean made in America. Leupold says the same thing.

Someone who knows more will likely chime in, but Burris / Steiner was reportedly doing some manufacturing in Greely, Colorado.

The XTR 3 is designed, machined, assembled in Greely, CO. I live 30 min away and have been there. Ive seen em put together from solid bar stock to testing in the clean room. The only part not American is the lens. They qualify legally to advertise all over the box MADE IN USA but chose not to as Karens such as yourself get off on nit picking BS.

Some people like supporting US companies and US workers. Some like buying China/Jap crap cause they save $3. Take your soapbox elsewhere.
Even IF they were assembled in USA with all foreign parts that would be enough to support an American company over import scopes. Luckily this scope is Made in good ol America.

I also wholly support the AMG scope. Awesome little hunting package but this is a XTR 3 thread. BUT if you want to compare 2 USA MADE SCOPES that would be a good discussion.


GL
DT

 

[Bangin]

The XTR 3 is designed, machined, assembled in Greely, CO. I live 30 min away and have been there. Ive seen em put together from solid bar stock to testing in the clean room. The only part not American is the lens. They qualify legally to advertise all over the box MADE IN USA but chose not to as Karens such as yourself get off on nit picking BS.

Some people like supporting US companies and US workers. Some like buying China/Jap crap cause they save $3. Take your soapbox elsewhere.
Even IF they were assembled in USA with all foreign parts that would be enough to support an American company over import scopes. Luckily this scope is Made in good ol America.

I also wholly support the AMG scope. Awesome little hunting package but this is a XTR 3 thread. BUT if you want to compare 2 USA MADE SCOPES that would be a good discussion.


GL
DT

Ha no soap box. Im not saying they don’t support American jobs. That’s great. I’m not saying it’s a bad scope nor did I say don’t buy the scope. Designed, manufactured and assembled is lawyer talk. I feel like I read that @lowlight toured Burris and leupold and he didn’t see what you saw. Sorry I hurt your feelings.

 

[Long Range 338]

Designed, machined, and assembled does not mean made in America. Leupold says the same thing.

Sounds like you trying to shit up a thread to me.... Don't worry about my feelings, I couldn't care less about yours. Or your thoughts on Made in America/not Made in America.