Rifle Scopes Burris XTR3!!!

[xpshooter]

We'll see it.. someday...

I'll probably get one, just so other people can look at it. I really have no use for it.

I think the plain SCR would be the perfect hunting scope reticle. But I can see where the illuminated SCR2 wpuld double for both hunting and competition.

I tried using one for hunting but in the last few minutes of hunting when you need to turn down the power to help with last light my old eyes just can't see the crosshair. If they ever come out with a illuminated model I'll buy several as it is an excellent scope

 

[beetroot]

We'll see it.. someday...

I'll probably get one, just so other people can look at it. I really have no use for it.

I think the plain SCR would be the perfect hunting scope reticle. But I can see where the illuminated SCR2 wpuld double for both hunting and competition.

The 3.3-18 Illuminated SCR2 would be cross-over optic bliss.
In theory at least.....

 

[supercorndogs]

It is easy to pick up the reticle at the bottom end with the SCR in the 3.3-18. I was going to mess with one this weekend, but after focusing the reticle I realized it was fogged on the inside or something. Maybe grease on the lens or it wasn't polished. It was one of the lenses behind the objective lens anyway. I snapped a picture since it was something I had never seen before. I assume the glass will be as good as my 5.5-30, the SCR is plenty thick for a cross over scope in the 3.3-18. Out here on the plains I don't think it will be any problem for hunting. Thick woods guys milage may vary. I take a different rifle and scope into thick stuff. These are going to be a big hit once some more people get them in their hands.

 

[Jigstick]

Wtf is the illuminated version already

 

[Jack's Dad]

I heard there is no plan to release an illuminated model ever. Overly complicated technology that Burris can't figure out. Best left for the optical masters of powerhouses such as Barska and Quigley Ford.

 

[TacticalPlinker]

Question from left field to all you optics Gurus....

When does Trijicon lose its proprietary patent on fiber optic "light collectors" used in the ACOG and Accupoint line?

That's the technology I would love to see other brands work that into the mix. For everything during the day and diminishing light it is pure magic how that stuff works. It is expensive to make from what I understand but totally worth it.

For that reason alone I cannot part with my Accupoint 1-4. It's still the cat's ass even though it's a dated design.

A Burris with a light collector would be the shizzle

 

[D_TROS]

CONTINUALLY impressed with this USA made optic.


cant say I will sell mine and get illum when it comes avail...but for you that want it I cant wait for it to be available.

GL
DT

 

[Chasing3]

Maybe premature to ask but @Birddog6424 and @D_TROS, any ideas on how much weight Burris thinks the illumination feature will add to the scope?

 

[Chasing3]

Thanks sir @Birddog6424

 

[Schw15]

I havent heard a weight figure. Based on the materials involved, I would be surprised to see much change. The XTRII illuminated versus non illuminated showed no weight change. So it wasn't worth listing.

Release date for this is this summer to early fall before hunting season. As this optic is made here in the US, it has to be worked into the existing production schedule.

Any news if burris will come out with a floating dot reticle? Seems like these things get high praise

 

[beetroot]

Any news if burris will come out with a floating dot reticle? Seems like these things get high praise

I don't see why they would.
A dot and cross are close enough to the same thing, the advantage to a cross is it gives a very fine aiming point at high mag but is overal wider thus easier to see at lower magnification.

My Delta Stryker has crosses rather than dots in the tree and exhibit these advantages.
I certainly wouldn't let this be the only reason I didn't buy a scope.

 

[Chasing3]

Still waiting.

 

[McMillan]

Any news if burris will come out with a floating dot reticle? Seems like these things get high praise

If they did I'd be jumping ship to a manufacturer that didn't unless the cross was still an option

 

[beetroot]

Still waiting.

Looks like by the time the Illuminated version is out there will be new offerings from Vortex and Bushnell.

This winter (or summer for you lesser Northern hemisphere people) is shaping up to be an exciting one for optic releases.

 

[akmike47]

I've never once used the illumination on my scope, yet I still find myself buying scopes with this feature, "well maybe one day..."

 

[Ericsl2]

I think the big interest in the illuminated version is to get an scr2 reticle that is just a touch thicker...hopefully

 

[Glassaholic]

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

 

[ldunnmobile]

I’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.

 

[Moose]

I use it in bad light and shadow conditions. and like it.

 

[Texaslongshot]

Anyone know what kind of bipod this is and what rail segment he is using to attach to it. Thanks

 

[Trigger Monkey]

Anyone know what kind of bipod this is and what rail segment he is using to attach to it. ThanksView attachment 7617354

My best guess is that's a Cyke-Pod Double Pull bipod on a JP Arca Rail.

Shop MDT Rifle Bipods for Hunting and Long Range Shooting.

The best rifle bipods in the industry are the CKYE-Pod linup of bipods. They're the most adjustable bipod availble for precision rifle shooters.

mdttac.com

JP Rifles

 

[beetroot]

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

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.

 

[xpshooter]

’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.

 

[Jigstick]

Getting tired of waiting for illumination. A Gen 2 Razor is looking more likely. Bummer. Really wanted to rock this scope this season.

 

[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.

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

 

[Black max]

Getting tired of waiting for illumination. A Gen 2 Razor is looking more likely. Bummer. Really wanted to rock this scope this season.

I guess you haven't heard yet... The Burris rep said we don't need illumination.

 

[beetroot]

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.

 

[akmike47]

Where exactly did anyone say that...

If any of them have one they want to get rid of cheap do to no illumination y'all can just let me know.

 

[jLorenzo]

So are the 3x18s impossible to get for now?

 

[supercorndogs]

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. 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.

 

[nmmi9100]

I'm waiting for an illuminated version for the thicker reticle. I rarely use illumination, but this will be a dual use scope for me so I need a thicker reticle at lower magnification for hunting. If I ever draw a damned tag in this state.

/David

 

[Jigstick]

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?

 

[Jigstick]

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.

 

[lennyo3034]

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.

 

[beetroot]

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.

 

[Glassaholic]

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

 

[Moose]

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

Old eyes suck my 67 year old eyes also have trouble with thin reticles.

 

[lennyo3034]

Hell I’m 36 with 8 year old eyes (lasik 20/12 vision) and I still have trouble with the reticle.

 

[nmmi9100]

Tag.

 

[Jigstick]

Dam. Now rumor has it Burris has no idea when an illuminated version may be produced.

 

[Chickentoast]

Where did you hear that?

That's what customer service replied to me as well, not that it means anything. Hopefully gets released before I get sick of looking at my naked rifle. I moved my Trijicon 5-50 to a fancy BB gun so I'm short one scope.

 

[Chasing3]

I want to support a scope made in USA. When is the illuminated model going to be available?

 

[srt-4_uk]

I want to support a scope made in USA. When is the illuminated model going to be available?

I think 2 years of "it's coming soon" is enough to say no one knows.

 

[Jack's Dad]

I stopped waiting and bought something else.

 

[srt-4_uk]

I know.

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.

 

[BoulderE89]

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.

 

[supercorndogs]

I sold my MK5 and kept the Burris. Both are nice, and both have things i like about them, but for less money I think the Burris is the easy choice.

 

[BoulderE89]

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?

 

[346ci]

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?

 

[346ci]

That sucks, what round or load are you shooting for such recoil?