Rifle Scopes Burris XTR3!!!

Last I heard they are still shooting for late summer, early fall. We arent there yet.

Its a bit of a conundrum for them. Greeley isn't a huge facility, and they'll have to cease production of the Competition version to work in the illuminated version. But the comp version has gained a lot of traction and is selling really well right now. People are figuring it out that this is as solid as scope as any in its price point.

I would like to see the illuminated version hit the market as much as a lot of people, even though I dont really use it. But I'd like to see the people who want one, get one. But to Burris, or any other manufacturer, a scope sale is a scope sale. They have to make a priority decision.
 
Last edited:
I think the big interest in the illuminated version is to get an scr2 reticle that is just a touch thicker...hopefully
I agree for the 3.3-18x50, the SCR2 is so thin. I own the 5.5-30 and I actually like the SCR2 reticle in that design, makes me think the reticle was designed with the 5.5-30 in mind, and they adjusted it for the 3.3-18 but to me it is too thin for this mag range. Given the crossover nature and DMR style use of the 3.3-18 it could really use a thicker reticle and I know the SCR is available but again, for the use many would like for this scope, a tree would be nice so getting an SCR3 that is thicker and illuminated would be ideal. But this is all personal preference and like birddog mentioned, if the non-illuminated is selling so well and it would require taking down production of the existing model to make the illuminated model then I can see why Burris has made a decision to not do that right away.

Yes, it's possible Bushnell or Vortex (or ?) could come out with something that matches or exceeds the design of the 3.3-18x50, but until we actually see that, I'm not going to hold my breath for it. If birddog is right and the illuminated 3.3-18 makes it within 2021, I still think it will be the best under $2k budget short scope design with regard to glass and FOV.

What is sad (for me) is that the 3.3-18x50 would be the ideal scope for two of my rifles, but I will not get them with the non-illuminated SCR2 reticle for the above stated reasons, that could be two additional sales for Burris, and I'm sure I'm not alone as this thread attests, so while Burris has chosen not to release illumination due to popularity of non-illuminated in the 3.3-18, I also wonder how much they have "lost" with that decision. Just some thoughts that don't actually matter because Burris is going to do what Burris is going to do regardless of my decisions :D
 
I agree for the 3.3-18x50, the SCR2 is so thin. I own the 5.5-30 and I actually like the SCR2 reticle in that design, makes me think the reticle was designed with the 5.5-30 in mind, and they adjusted it for the 3.3-18 but to me it is too thin for this mag range. Given the crossover nature and DMR style use of the 3.3-18 it could really use a thicker reticle and I know the SCR is available but again, for the use many would like for this scope, a tree would be nice so getting an SCR3 that is thicker and illuminated would be ideal. But this is all personal preference and like birddog mentioned, if the non-illuminated is selling so well and it would require taking down production of the existing model to make the illuminated model then I can see why Burris has made a decision to not do that right away.

Yes, it's possible Bushnell or Vortex (or ?) could come out with something that matches or exceeds the design of the 3.3-18x50, but until we actually see that, I'm not going to hold my breath for it. If birddog is right and the illuminated 3.3-18 makes it within 2021, I still think it will be the best under $2k budget short scope design with regard to glass and FOV.

What is sad (for me) is that the 3.3-18x50 would be the ideal scope for two of my rifles, but I will not get them with the non-illuminated SCR2 reticle for the above stated reasons, that could be two additional sales for Burris, and I'm sure I'm not alone as this thread attests, so while Burris has chosen not to release illumination due to popularity of non-illuminated in the 3.3-18, I also wonder how much they have "lost" with that decision. Just some thoughts that don't actually matter because Burris is going to do what Burris is going to do regardless of my decisions :D

That sums it up very nicely.

The illuminated version with a slightly thicker reticle will make this optic more versatile. More well-rounded for a variety of applications.
 
Anyone know what kind of bipod this is and what rail segment he is using to attach to it. Thanks
Screen Shot 2021-05-03 at 2.04.28 PM.png
 
I agree for the 3.3-18x50, the SCR2 is so thin. I own the 5.5-30 and I actually like the SCR2 reticle in that design, makes me think the reticle was designed with the 5.5-30 in mind, and they adjusted it for the 3.3-18 but to me it is too thin for this mag range. Given the crossover nature and DMR style use of the 3.3-18 it could really use a thicker reticle and I know the SCR is available but again, for the use many would like for this scope, a tree would be nice so getting an SCR3 that is thicker and illuminated would be ideal. But this is all personal preference and like birddog mentioned, if the non-illuminated is selling so well and it would require taking down production of the existing model to make the illuminated model then I can see why Burris has made a decision to not do that right away.

Yes, it's possible Bushnell or Vortex (or ?) could come out with something that matches or exceeds the design of the 3.3-18x50, but until we actually see that, I'm not going to hold my breath for it. If birddog is right and the illuminated 3.3-18 makes it within 2021, I still think it will be the best under $2k budget short scope design with regard to glass and FOV.

What is sad (for me) is that the 3.3-18x50 would be the ideal scope for two of my rifles, but I will not get them with the non-illuminated SCR2 reticle for the above stated reasons, that could be two additional sales for Burris, and I'm sure I'm not alone as this thread attests, so while Burris has chosen not to release illumination due to popularity of non-illuminated in the 3.3-18, I also wonder how much they have "lost" with that decision. Just some thoughts that don't actually matter because Burris is going to do what Burris is going to do regardless of my decisions :D
I too want the thicker reticle in the 3.3-18.

If I lived in the US I would've bought a used one already to give it a go as is but I don't and don't want to get stuck with a scope I can't sell wishing I'd waited for the illuminated model.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stoweit
’ve been waiting a long time for illuminated XTR IIIs and they have lost out on multiple scope sales with me. I don’t know who you people are that don’t use illumination but I use it all the time.
I'm that way, I use my scopes for everything which means hunting in the last minutes of legal hours in some hardwood bottom, I use the illumination all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D_TROS
Using the 3-18 on my Hunting rifle and NRL Hunter Series Tikka. Ive got several hundred rounds as well as a couple matches shooting this scope. I dont mind the retc one bit but I love thinnerr stuff generally.

TIKKA UPR.jpg


Last NRL hunter match we shot in 3 separate snow storms and low light and nv once did I feel I wanted or would have used illum.

ymmv!

I was unfortunately unable to make weight with the Ckye-pod double pull (12 lb limit for production class) so used the single pull. It worked very well.


GL!
DT
 
Using the 3-18 on my Hunting rifle and NRL Hunter Series Tikka. Ive got several hundred rounds as well as a couple matches shooting this scope. I dont mind the retc one bit but I love thinnerr stuff generally.

View attachment 7617943

Last NRL hunter match we shot in 3 separate snow storms and low light and nv once did I feel I wanted or would have used illum.

ymmv!

I was unfortunately unable to make weight with the Ckye-pod double pull (12 lb limit for production class) so used the single pull. It worked very well.


GL!
DT
Love the UPR, pretty much the hunting/cross over set up im going for.
I love the 10shot CTR magazines.

Are those 1" high rings?

Surprised it weighs more than 12lbs though, the bipod and stock must be heavier than they look.
 
That sums it up very nicely.

The illuminated version with a slightly thicker reticle will make this optic more versatile. More well-rounded for a variety of applications.

I guess you haven't heard yet... The Burris rep said we don't need illumination.
Point to the post where someone said that.

My exact last words on the subject above.
 
Loving my 3.3-18 and 5.5-30. In general I will pass on illumination. I don't need another failure point for something I never need. I think I have used illumination once or twice to make my reticle contrast better on a black target. Aside from turing it on to see if it works. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: On paper it would seem like the SCR would be pretty thin on 3.3 power, but when you put that big eye piece in front of your eye ball. It is kind if like looking at a big screen TV.
 
So are the 3x18s impossible to get for now?

I honestly don't know what availability is. It depends on if retailers have them in stock or not, and I havent shopped for one.

But I got it from Greeley that they have really gained momentum and are selling very well right now.

I think most folks knew that a $1700 Burris would be met with skepticism. But if it was a good scope, it would gain a following over time. And its definitely a good scope. So they are really starting to move now.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
Question regarding the FOV. The 40ft FOV that everyone is raving about is with the 3-18x50 model....not the 5.5-30x56 correct?

my new varmint rifle is due any day, a Seekins SP10 in 6.5CM. Wide FOV is important to me. And I’m stuck between the XTR3 and Razor lines. Primarily with what magnification range to get.

so correct me if I’m wrong...if I want that wide FOV I need to be looking at the lower magnification options of these two scopes?
 
Question regarding the FOV. The 40ft FOV that everyone is raving about is with the 3-18x50 model....not the 5.5-30x56 correct?

my new varmint rifle is due any day, a Seekins SP10 in 6.5CM. Wide FOV is important to me. And I’m stuck between the XTR3 and Razor lines. Primarily with what magnification range to get.

so correct me if I’m wrong...if I want that wide FOV I need to be looking at the lower magnification options of these two scopes?
Yes, that's the FOV on the 3.3-18.

I do like the Razor line up, I've compared side by side against the XTR3 many times.. The blue sky is a little more blue in the Razor. But the XTR3 is brighter than the Razor glass. You'll like it better in low light.

I've had it alongside a 25x ATACR at dusk all the way to dark as well. It actually handled low light much better than the NF.

Its a very good low light optic.
 
So if I’m looking at the larger mag Razor and XTR3 then FOV is almost identical. Hard to decide which one to go with. At that point it’s basicallly based on reticle it appears.
 
I think I like the XTR3 glass a little more than the Razor. With the Razor I notice issues with flare if looking towards the sun during morning or late afternoon. I have not noticed that with the XTR3.

If the XTR3 came with a thicker Christmas tree reticle with .5 mil holds (don’t need .2) it would be hands down the best optic for a speed oriented gas gun.

Im setting a rifle up for a few of those matches this year and trying to decide on optics. My LRHS has a better reticle for that purpose. The XTR3 is better in everything else.
 
So if I’m looking at the larger mag Razor and XTR3 then FOV is almost identical. Hard to decide which one to go with. At that point it’s basicallly based on reticle it appears.
Remember the FOV specs are for a set magnification, you'll need to extrapolate the data to compare against scopes or other magnification ranges.

The wide FOV on the XTR3 is the case at all magnification ranges, the 40ft at 3.3x is nice but you get the same benefits of a wide FOV for the magnification on the 5.5-30 model too.

I would have assumed a varmint rifle would warrant a higher magnification scope but if you are hunting predators too then the 3-18 would likely be preferable. Bearing in mind folk like @Glassaholic found the SCR2 too fine at 3.3 magnification but others have said it's not an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D_TROS
I probably focus too much on things that are really personal preference. When I was younger the thinner reticles didn’t bother me so much, but now my eyes have greater difficulty picking up center with busy backgrounds. Again, personal preference
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moose
So if I’m looking at the larger mag Razor and XTR3 then FOV is almost identical.

At 100 yards, the FOV on the Razor is 4.4ft at 27x

At the same distance, the FOV on the XTR3 4.2ft. But thats on 30x. So there's more difference than you think.

Off the top of my head it seems like with both of them at 20x, the XTR3 showed another 1 or 1.2 mils of reticle per side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D_TROS and Jigstick
In all fairness, you were the one 2 years ago saying it was coming soon so...



I bought a non illuminated option and I like it as a target scope. A 3.3-18 illuminated would make a good crossover. Basically a cheaper mk5 with a better reticle.

Speaking of which, through some industry deals I am able to get good prices on either a mk5 3.6-18 with a PR1 reticle or a xtr iii 3.3-18 with the scr2 reticle. It’s a difference of $400 dollars between the two with the Leupold being more expensive. Is the price hike worth it in your guys opinion? For context, This optic will live on both my 6.5 CM AR10 rifle and my 6.5 CM hunting rifle. They’re both light weight and quality built.
 
I know of 5 failed xtr3 between myself and 2 other shooters. I've owned 4 mk5hd and know quite a few others who, like myself, no issues. I'd go mk5hd with the new pr2-mil reticle. I like mine a lot, just wish it had the bigger eyebox of the xtr3. Like supercorndogs said, they have their pros and cons, but to me, reliability is #1.

If you don’t mind me asking, what were the failures you saw?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yoteski
I know of 5 failed xtr3 between myself and 2 other shooters. I've owned 4 mk5hd and know quite a few others who, like myself, no issues. I'd go mk5hd with the new pr2-mil reticle. I like mine a lot, just wish it had the bigger eyebox of the xtr3. Like supercorndogs said, they have their pros and cons, but to me, reliability is #1.
That is a large failure rate, what where the failures and how did Burris respond?
 
Mine is fine but I'm a fair weather shooter essentially playing long range 3D billiards. To me, glass is a bit better than MK5 also (had both at same time). I've shot a few hundred rounds of 308 and ~250 rounds of 300 RUM with mine.
 
In all fairness, you were the one 2 years ago saying it was coming soon so...
Haha, true.

The decision makers at Burris had a change of heart on the illuminated version and ended up not sticking to the original plan. Then the whole thing turned into a feet dragging issue because there was no plan at all.

In a nutshell, the XTR3 is a victim of its own success.. I think at this point they are hoping the large backlog of orders that has made them reluctant to stop production on the Competition model and change over to the illuminated model, will change. I think they are hoping vendors will change their orders to the illuminated version once production begins.

Unlike past cases, a production start date is now on the calendar.
That is a large failure rate, what where the failures and how did Burris respond?

I'm also aware of about a handful of broken XTR3s. The first production run on the 30x and 18x scopes had a couple bugs. Khuber up there had issues as he mentioned, and there was a tracking issue. Sounds like his buddy got one as well, though I'm not aware of anyone on the Burris team in the last handful of years named Matt. @Glassaholic got an 18x with an issue. I'm aware of a couple others as well who got one out of that first run that needed to be returned, including a friend of mine in Utah. I'm only aware of one XTR3 after that initial run that needed to be returned. So only one person that I know of personally has returned this scope. Every other return I have learned about on forums such as this.

My circle of influence on these optics is as big as anyone I'm aware of not employed by Burris. I'm a PRS Match Director for the NW/RM Regional Series, and will be the Regional Director of that series for the 2022 season. I host a two day PRS Pro Series Qualifier every year, and I shoot about 20 single day and two day matches a year between the PRS and NRL. I talk to every shooter I see running a Burris, I've done that for years. I seriously doubt there is anyone outside of Greeley that has gotten as much face to face feedback on the XTR line in the last 5 years as I have.. I also have a Facebook page called Precision Rifle Series for Beginners with 40,000 members. We discuss optics, and Burris optics specifically all the time. I've been on this forum since 2014, and constantly get PMs to discuss Burris scopes.. And if all that isn't enough to establish bona fides, I talk to the Burris brand manager regularly.. the XTR3 is a well-covered subject. I'm personally aware of about 50 to 60 of these being in the wild. As in first or second person contact. I know of about 5 that were specifically bought to replace MK5s, all the buyers are happy, no issues. Some of those are from a gunsmith who offers the 18x XTR3 on a rifle package (about 20 last time I spoke to him). He chose it over the MK5 for performance and cost.

I havent seen or heard of anyone in over a year having an issue with an XTR3. Based on the number of these optics that go back to Greeley, I can tell you that just like the XTR2, this is one of the most durable optics on the market. For one guy to have first hand experience with a handful of breakages is a phenomenal level of bad luck. All evidence of this being a fragile optic from the shooting community I am deeply embedded in is to the contrary.

Glassaholic did an extensive write up here on the Hide on the 18x he received. He called it one of the best optics of its type under 2k. Edging out the MK5 and NX8. I believe he now owns a 30x.

Burris engineers designed this scope from the ground up and began producing it in a brand new facility in Colorado. So the fact that the early versions had some bugs comes as no surprise. They did an amazing job of immediately correcting those issues, and they haven't recurred. No scope is perfect, they all break. But the durability of the XTR3 and the low rate of return is as good as any scope in the industry at any price.

And just to add my personal experience to this novella, I've been running XTRs of one flavor or another in 3 Gun, Hunting, and PRS for 8 years. I've beat the living hell out of a few of them and had to dish them off cheap. Out of the 15 or more some odd XTR2s and XTR3s I've owned over this period of time, there is not one single ocassion they have failed to perform. Ever.

Unconditional Forever Warranty. Never needed it.
 
Last edited:
10# all up 300 norma improved, 11# all up 338 rum. However after the initial replacements, I devoted these xtr3 to lighter recoiling rigs, but my light weight 6.5 saum also has caused the replacement 3.3-18x50 to have the same problem as the original 2. I do have another 3.3-18x50 and a 5.5-30 that aren't exhibiting these problems......yet.

Thats crazy. How on earth are you breaking so many scopes.

I have about 5 XTR3s total. Four 30x, one 18x.

I have one of them on a 300 Norma mag elk rifle that weighs in at 11.5 lbs. I've fired about 250 rounds through that rifle and scope. Even dropped it out of an ATV rack. No issues. I have another one on a 338 Lapua mag Savage 110 BA running 300gr Sierras with about 150 rounds on it. And I swapped that same scope onto a Steyr bolt action 50 caliber for about 70 rounds last summer for some long bomb fun. One on a 6GT and a 22BR for some unkind usage in PRS. And one on my 22 rimfire for PRS22 that gets some serious turret twisting. No issues.

Its a complete head scratcher to me that you are taking these things out when hardly anyone else is. I know bunches of guys using these in ELR and PRS that are having zero issues. Jason Chipley took 3rd overall at Scott Satterlee's Wyoming ELR match with an XTR3 and 300 Norma. Not to mention all his PRS time. @D_TROS runs the hell out of his in PRS and extreme team matches. There's tons of these out there that don't break like this. They've been cranking them out for two years now.

You've got bad juju.. If we ever meet in person, you're not allowed to touch my rifle. 🤣
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: S3th
Talk to Matt Nietzke, a formerly sponsored Burris guy, there's a reason he dropped the free scopes. He had major problems went back to Kahles. Matt's a great shooter too, belive we was #11 at the Horandy PRS in Utah. He's running a 20# 6.5x47 so no recoil problems there. The quality control in these is just very hit and miss I feel.

Well we've tumbled down this rabbit hole far enough, so I figured it was time to get to the bottom of it. Here's the "other side of the story".

I dont know Matt. We have a ton of mutual friends and shoot a lot of the same matches.. I'm sure he's a very nice guy who's been dragged into this conversation. No one at Burris has heard of Matt. At least the two guys in charge of the team and "free scopes" havent heard of him. Its possible he may have been affiliated at the club level somewhere, friend of a friend, wearing the Burris logo, getting an insider discount or a discount certificate. In chatting with Dorgan, its possible he helped him get a deal. But Burris management didn't put him on the team or give him free products. So thank goodness for him he didn't have to "drop the free scopes".

In January of 2021 Matt sent in a 30x optic with "mushy turrets and parallax issues". For some reason, according to the technician notes, the turret was maxed out when received by Burris.. the customer had the turret dialed all the way up. The scope was tracking and parallax tested and passed 100%. The completely functional scope was returned to Matt within a two week time period.

(Edit: I've since found out that Matt won the Guardian match with his scope in November 2020. He contacted Dorgan about the turret feeling a little loose while dialed up. That explains why Burris received it in that manner.)

In March of 2021, Matt returned two 30x scopes to Burris. There is zero documentation showing any complaint or malfunction with either optic. Burris exchanged them for two 18x optics. It looks an awful lot like the customer simply returned two perfectly good scopes, and Burris was nice enough to exchange them, not for another pair of 30x, but for 18x. Definitely nice of them.

As for your scope returns Khuber, you and I spoke back in 2019 about the issue you believed you were having with your 30x that came out of the first run. I interceded on your behalf with Burris management. An RMA was sent to you, and you received a replacement scope in two weeks time.

They immediately replaced the scope you returned because they wanted to see what was wrong with it. I remember forwarding to you the theory they had about the possible cause. But as it turns out, complete inspection of the scope revealed nothing. Burris techs and engineers could find nothing wrong with your scope. And that's it. There's no further record of you returning an 18x or any other scope. According to Burris records you returned one scope two years ago that was handled promptly.

According to Burris records, none of these scopes were returned for tracking issues as you mentioned above. And only one scope, not three, was returned for FOV/mag ring issues. That one was yours, which we've already covered.

So according to Burris return and technician inspection notes, between the two of you, there were 4 returned scopes, or whats far more likely is three scopes, with the one Matt sent in January that was returned to him, being sent in again for exchange in March. Burris promptly repaired or replaced every one of them. And none of them were broken. Those are the facts according to Burris records.

Here's my opinion.

I would say you were treated great by Burris customer service. They easily could have inspected and returned your scope. It was fine. You got a new scope on a two week turnaround and according to their records, havent sent in another one since.

Matt was treated better than great, being allowed to exchange two 30x for two 18x. Sounds to me like someone decided they wanted the 18x instead and Burris was nice enough to swap them.

Yet here you are....talking about all these busted Burris scopes you've returned and how all these other Burris scopes you own are almost busted too. When no one else has the issues you are having in spades, it seems odd. When the folks that make the scope don't see the issue you claim you are seeing in multiple scopes it seems even odder. You seem to be the only guy on the planet having these problems with the XTR3, and you have seen it multiple times. It occurs to me that whatever it is you are seeing has no effect on the performance of the optic, so no one else pays any attention to it? But that's speculation, I have no idea what it looks like to you.

So I'm just going to leave this here. You've told your side, and now the folks in Greeley have allowed me to tell theirs.

That is a large failure rate, what where the failures and how did Burris respond?
See above...
 
Last edited: