-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes So I bought a “Just As Good”, Burris XTR3
- Thread starter redneckbmxer24
- Start date
I like a .5 reticle personally. Never had trouble dividing the halves in half to get a quarter.
Seems like some good deals:
www.eurooptic.com
Burris Optics Closeouts
Designed, machined, and assembled in the United States, the Burris Xtreme Tactical riflescope is a prime example of expert riflescope craftsmanship. While supplies last, enjoy huge savings on select Burris Xtreme Tactical II & III riflescopes
The only thing that is in stock is the XTR II with the non-xmas tree reticles. I dont know if I trust placing a backorder for a XTR III or Pro.Seems like some good deals:
Burris Optics Closeouts
Designed, machined, and assembled in the United States, the Burris Xtreme Tactical riflescope is a prime example of expert riflescope craftsmanship. While supplies last, enjoy huge savings on select Burris Xtreme Tactical II & III riflescopes
Maybe something that rhymes with Schmiberty popsicle.
No kidding, he could have come up with something closer like Bibberty Cocktricks.
Are you joking? Have you never heard of EuroOptic before? EuroOptic has been around for a VERY long time. They're an exceptional company. They just built a HUGE showroom in PA where they have pretty much one of everything they sell on display for you to get hands-on with. They're one of the most legit optics dealers you can buy from. They even have guys here on the forum that work for them like @Euro.Connor . They're not just some random jackleg selling shit out of his basement/garage like that Liberty Optics douchebag. They actually have a brick & mortar showroom floor.
I guess we get to see what the fuss is a about
@redneckbmxer24 we gotta test this. I have the USA 3-18 and my Steiner too
@redneckbmxer24 we gotta test this. I have the USA 3-18 and my Steiner too
Attachments
I've had that same scope for over a year now... You're going to like it. At the $1000 sales price, it's almost stupid NOT to buy one. You'll see why once you get it outside and look through it.
I’m sure this might have been mentioned somewhere in the last 4 pages of this thread, but do any of you know how a XTR III or Pro compares to a Cronus BTR? I have a Cronus BTR and I really like it and I’m looking for another scope for a 20” 308 build. A 3-18 would work great and I don’t really need the power of the Cronus, but the recent used prices on the Cronus plus the fact I already have one, could sway me unless these XTR III’s in the 3-18 are really that good. Also, if I remember correctly, the 3-18‘s made in the Philippines are better than the dandruff Dan USA made units?
I like my all of my Cronus scopes, I have three, but the Burris 3-18 is is really good too, especially at that price. I have the 3-18 with the SCR reticle and the 5.5-30 with the SCR2 reticle. I'd say the XTRIII vs the Cronus is close in glass, XTR has a wider view, reticle is good in both, I still like the Cronus reticle a little better but I've used it a lot more as well. Haven't looked through a pro model, though I'm tempted at the eurooptic price.
The XTR's have better FOV and eye box, but the Cronus has better resolution than the Xtr3 and slightly better resolution than the Pro. Cronus controls CA much better than either XTR
I had a 3.3-18 XTR3i for a short time. Sent it to Burris as it was horrible in low light at or above 15x. They sent it back saying it was withing spec. I sold it right after.
I've now had mine to the range a few times, I wouldn't say I hate it, but I'm also not planning to run out and buy more of them.
So most of my range guns either wear a Vortex Razor 4.5-27 Gen 2, or PST 2, 5-25's. I'm not a big comp guy, I don't rely on my guns for anything other than enjoying at the range, so take my thoughts as you will.
Optics wise, it's good and bad. Resolution wise, it's quite nice, it struggles over 25x but it's better at 25x than the PST 2 is at 25x noticeably so, at 20x they are both pretty even. I tend to zero/group test at 25x so I give the nod to the XTR III being nicer at 25x for sure, and of course getting an extra 5x never hurts, but I usually don't dial to max anyway. The reticle is certainly nicer to use at 5x than the PST 2, however here again I spend almost zero time at 5x. As others have mentioned it's not great in low light, our range opens at 7am and on a cloudy day like this morning the PST 2 was noticeably brighter but both were useable. I wouldn't put either on my hunting guns so extreme low light performance is not an issue for me aside to note I was surprised it was obviously darker. I prefer the center dot of the EBR-7C, but the small crosshair worked perfectly well, and that's pretty much personal preference. I do like the locking diopter adjustment of the XTR III, and I found it quite easy to adjust. Eyebox was nice, I'd say more forgiving at 20-25x than the PST 2, but that's probably because it's not at max power. At max power I'd say they are pretty close eyebox wise.
Where the XTR III at least mine, is very disappointing is the knobs. The elevation knob has 0.05mil lash/slop, but nice solid/loud clicks, but the windage knob clicks are so light and mushy I can't dial it by feel at the range, something I'd expect to run into in a $300 scope, not a $1100 one. Removing the turret o-ring would probably help the clicks feel more solid, esp. since the turret knob really fits tight on the o-rings, but that could be compromising the sealing of the optic, it also does nothing for the elevation knob slop. I did try to "cheat" the knob and see if slop/lash impacted elevation, IE is the lash just there or is it impacting elevation, both visually and in groups I could not see a difference, but it feels "cheap". That said I could get past it, and probably never notice it shooting. I have several PST 2's and none of them have that issue, the PST clicks are not as hard and audible as the XTR III elevation knob, but much better than the XTR III windage knob, they are consistent where the XTR III windage I can barely feel behind the gun. If you always hold windage I guess it doesn't matter. I don't use the zero stop as I have it setup on a .22 and elevation/zero changes pretty significantly when testing ammo. Bottom line for me is I've never had a problem dialing a PST 2 by click feel, and on the XTR III I can't do that for windage, and even visually it's very hard to see/feel when the knob has settled in a click.
The PST 2 5-25x might be old, and folks love to pick on it, but considering they often end up on sale recently in the $700 range these days, I'd still consider it a really good deal for just a range optic. Burris would have to address the knobs before I'd consider buying another one, esp. with the reports here of people sending them back only to get the same thing back saying it's fine. If they fixed the knobs, I could see slowly swapping out some PST 2's for them. The XTR III's used to be cheaper but now seem to be settled in that $1100 range at the cheapest I could find. That's a 55% increase from a PST 2 at $700, also the cheapest price I could find currently, so it's a significant jump % wise in "best deal" pricing.
So most of my range guns either wear a Vortex Razor 4.5-27 Gen 2, or PST 2, 5-25's. I'm not a big comp guy, I don't rely on my guns for anything other than enjoying at the range, so take my thoughts as you will.
Optics wise, it's good and bad. Resolution wise, it's quite nice, it struggles over 25x but it's better at 25x than the PST 2 is at 25x noticeably so, at 20x they are both pretty even. I tend to zero/group test at 25x so I give the nod to the XTR III being nicer at 25x for sure, and of course getting an extra 5x never hurts, but I usually don't dial to max anyway. The reticle is certainly nicer to use at 5x than the PST 2, however here again I spend almost zero time at 5x. As others have mentioned it's not great in low light, our range opens at 7am and on a cloudy day like this morning the PST 2 was noticeably brighter but both were useable. I wouldn't put either on my hunting guns so extreme low light performance is not an issue for me aside to note I was surprised it was obviously darker. I prefer the center dot of the EBR-7C, but the small crosshair worked perfectly well, and that's pretty much personal preference. I do like the locking diopter adjustment of the XTR III, and I found it quite easy to adjust. Eyebox was nice, I'd say more forgiving at 20-25x than the PST 2, but that's probably because it's not at max power. At max power I'd say they are pretty close eyebox wise.
Where the XTR III at least mine, is very disappointing is the knobs. The elevation knob has 0.05mil lash/slop, but nice solid/loud clicks, but the windage knob clicks are so light and mushy I can't dial it by feel at the range, something I'd expect to run into in a $300 scope, not a $1100 one. Removing the turret o-ring would probably help the clicks feel more solid, esp. since the turret knob really fits tight on the o-rings, but that could be compromising the sealing of the optic, it also does nothing for the elevation knob slop. I did try to "cheat" the knob and see if slop/lash impacted elevation, IE is the lash just there or is it impacting elevation, both visually and in groups I could not see a difference, but it feels "cheap". That said I could get past it, and probably never notice it shooting. I have several PST 2's and none of them have that issue, the PST clicks are not as hard and audible as the XTR III elevation knob, but much better than the XTR III windage knob, they are consistent where the XTR III windage I can barely feel behind the gun. If you always hold windage I guess it doesn't matter. I don't use the zero stop as I have it setup on a .22 and elevation/zero changes pretty significantly when testing ammo. Bottom line for me is I've never had a problem dialing a PST 2 by click feel, and on the XTR III I can't do that for windage, and even visually it's very hard to see/feel when the knob has settled in a click.
The PST 2 5-25x might be old, and folks love to pick on it, but considering they often end up on sale recently in the $700 range these days, I'd still consider it a really good deal for just a range optic. Burris would have to address the knobs before I'd consider buying another one, esp. with the reports here of people sending them back only to get the same thing back saying it's fine. If they fixed the knobs, I could see slowly swapping out some PST 2's for them. The XTR III's used to be cheaper but now seem to be settled in that $1100 range at the cheapest I could find. That's a 55% increase from a PST 2 at $700, also the cheapest price I could find currently, so it's a significant jump % wise in "best deal" pricing.
For giggles I sent the video above to Burris custom support and they requested it be returned, shipped it out this week. Be interesting to see if they replace it or if they just return it with the "meets specifications" result and/or if the replacement is significantly better or not. I think their email said return estimates are 5-6 weeks after the product has been received and put into the RMA system, so I'm guessing it could easily be 8 weeks, but I'm in no hurry.
I got that same estimated time on my Pro when I returned it. Got it back (repaired) in 3 weeks.
Yeah to be honest I'd actually rather be told a realistic or even longer than expected estimate than the usual practice of telling someone it will be way faster than it will be.
Tell a customer it's going to be back in 6 weeks and if it's back in 4 weeks they are super happy. Tell them it's going to be back in 2 weeks and it's back in 4 weeks and they are upset cause it took twice as long as you told them.
Tell a customer it's going to be back in 6 weeks and if it's back in 4 weeks they are super happy. Tell them it's going to be back in 2 weeks and it's back in 4 weeks and they are upset cause it took twice as long as you told them.
Great rule for life in general - underpromise, overdeliver.
Wonder if the Steiners have dust in them like the Burris line. They are both made at the same facility, Greeley CO?
Unless I am mistaken, only the Pros are made in Greeley these days. I have seen the one thread on here where one of our resident reviewers got several Pros in a row with crap on the inside lenses.
*****
On a different note; while I'm busy being poor for the rest of this year, I put my old trusty XTR III on my 'new to me' old Surgeon build in 300WM. I guess I got lucky, because this one is right. It certainly isn't in the same league as my Razor G3 or the S&B PMII that I had my hands on for a while...but it works, tracks, and is plenty "guuud enufff" for load development and informal shooting at distance.
Should be interesting to see what comes back next week. Burris received it, repaired it, and shipped it back out it less than 2 days. That's either by far the fastest optic repair I've ever had done, or all they did was look at it and put it back in the box and ship it out. 
Don't think they just replaced it, the support ticket clearly shows it was repaired and the same SN coming in and going out. No details on the repair/issue at all. All the email said was: "Your scope has been repaired and after evaluation through a multi-point inspection process. We have determined that the scope now functions properly and is within all advertised factory specifications."
Don't think they just replaced it, the support ticket clearly shows it was repaired and the same SN coming in and going out. No details on the repair/issue at all. All the email said was: "Your scope has been repaired and after evaluation through a multi-point inspection process. We have determined that the scope now functions properly and is within all advertised factory specifications."Well the update is mostly disappointing, and I'll be contacting them to send it back in again.
The repair order lists that they repaired the windage turret, and optically centered the reticle and tested the scope. However it mentions nothing about the slop/lash in the elevation turret at all. I will say that the windage turret is definitely improved, so clearly they did something to that.
I guess 50% fixed is better than 0%
The repair order lists that they repaired the windage turret, and optically centered the reticle and tested the scope. However it mentions nothing about the slop/lash in the elevation turret at all. I will say that the windage turret is definitely improved, so clearly they did something to that.
I guess 50% fixed is better than 0%
Sent it back in, heard back from them today that they evaluated it and consider that amount of elevation slop/lash to be functioning properly and within factory specs.
I guess I haven't been around enough scopes, never had one from $200 to $3000 that had that much free slop in the elevation turret.
I guess I haven't been around enough scopes, never had one from $200 to $3000 that had that much free slop in the elevation turret.
Well you can wiggle it a little , does it affect anything? For shits and giggles just checked 5 XTR III 's yours does seem excessive. For comparison i just checked my MK 5's and way less on all of them. My Sightron SIII ' s were a mixed bag some excellent some for shit but I've never had a problem with them and they all track just fine.
I guess if it bothers you maybe you need to stick to the top tier scopes and spend a bit more?
I guess if it bothers you maybe you need to stick to the top tier scopes and spend a bit more?
Yeah that was one of the first tests I did, so if you clamp it in say something like a Final Scope level from Short Action Precision and watch the reticle on a tall target, the slop isn't "just" slop, it's moving the reticle. If it wasn't, I'd be less concerned. However as it is now esp. with half a click of slop, not only do you have error when you are in between marks, you now have to wonder which 0.1 step you are at if the indicator sits half way between marks. If you look at the dial and it indicates 0.55 mil, did you dial to 0.5 mil click and it's slop up to 0.55, or did you dial to 0.6mil and it's slop down to 0.55. That's the biggest annoyance I've found using it, it seems to settle between indicators naturally, and when it does, you don't know if you are really at the higher or lower one, unless you dial back to zero and count.
Not sure $ has anything to do with it, I've used hundreds of optics from $300 to $3000 over the decades and never had one have this much free slop in it. Vast majority of my optics cost less than this, never been a problem. Seems to be a weakness of the XTR III design since quite a few others have reported similar issues. Still totally unacceptable for what is a $1000+ optic street price. I don't even mind that they let a lemon out of the shop, happens to every manufacturer, tolerance stacking and all that, but to consider it acceptable and not bother to fix it is a pretty poor statement about Burris as a company. Not only that but they were given the same video before I sent it in the first time and they wanted it back for eval/fixing, so they clearly knew what the issue was. If that much slop/lash was acceptable why bother having me send it in twice for repair only to not fix the issue they had me return it for. Then again it's hardly the first iffy report we've seen from Burris's repair shop recently.
Not sure $ has anything to do with it, I've used hundreds of optics from $300 to $3000 over the decades and never had one have this much free slop in it. Vast majority of my optics cost less than this, never been a problem. Seems to be a weakness of the XTR III design since quite a few others have reported similar issues. Still totally unacceptable for what is a $1000+ optic street price. I don't even mind that they let a lemon out of the shop, happens to every manufacturer, tolerance stacking and all that, but to consider it acceptable and not bother to fix it is a pretty poor statement about Burris as a company. Not only that but they were given the same video before I sent it in the first time and they wanted it back for eval/fixing, so they clearly knew what the issue was. If that much slop/lash was acceptable why bother having me send it in twice for repair only to not fix the issue they had me return it for. Then again it's hardly the first iffy report we've seen from Burris's repair shop recently.
Last edited:
I’ve had 4 samples and all of them has had the identical amount of slop as yours. By design the reticle will move any time the turrets do because they’re just turning a fine precision screw. I didn’t find .05mil to be an issue but it’s certainly there.
I’ve sold 3 of them and may get rid of the 4th too. For $800 they’re not bad, but they still leave a lot of be desired if you appreciate nice things. If I paid $1000+ for these things like a lot of people did I’d be pissed at the quality and probably would have returned them for a refund without even trying them. Those legitimately comparing them to $2000+ scopes and thinking they are even remotely close in quality continues to blow my mind and just goes to show how stupid the internet is.
The only thing I genuinely like about the scope is the reticle. The SCR2 is one of the best out there IMO. It does have a good eyebox and FOV but it’s not that much better than other optics and the shortcomings of this scope are far more noticeable than those slight advantages. The glass quality is also mediocre at best, it blows in low light and the CA is very noticeable at times.
I don’t regret giving them a try and one may stick around, but they weren’t what I was hoping for and certainly don’t live up to the hype. If I hadn’t gotten such a good deal on them where I could try them and not lose anything instead of the typical 20-30% loss I’d probably have a sour feeling towards them.
I’ve sold 3 of them and may get rid of the 4th too. For $800 they’re not bad, but they still leave a lot of be desired if you appreciate nice things. If I paid $1000+ for these things like a lot of people did I’d be pissed at the quality and probably would have returned them for a refund without even trying them. Those legitimately comparing them to $2000+ scopes and thinking they are even remotely close in quality continues to blow my mind and just goes to show how stupid the internet is.
The only thing I genuinely like about the scope is the reticle. The SCR2 is one of the best out there IMO. It does have a good eyebox and FOV but it’s not that much better than other optics and the shortcomings of this scope are far more noticeable than those slight advantages. The glass quality is also mediocre at best, it blows in low light and the CA is very noticeable at times.
I don’t regret giving them a try and one may stick around, but they weren’t what I was hoping for and certainly don’t live up to the hype. If I hadn’t gotten such a good deal on them where I could try them and not lose anything instead of the typical 20-30% loss I’d probably have a sour feeling towards them.
It looks like one if their soon to be released infinitely adjustable scopes got out into the wild and you are the lucky bastard that got it. Clicks are so passe. You want to come up .02 mils no problem. Checkmate moa fags.
My biggest annoyance in scopes is just what you described. For the money I like the G2 Cronus because it's the opposite as far as turrets go. I like the "feel of distinctness, lack of lash, and dead nuts lining up with the indicator on the housing", more than my March's, my S&B, Vortex, USO, and the NF I've had. This G2 is probably falling behind in other attributes compared to more modern scopes but mine have been so solid I don't feel the need to part with them "yet".
Folks every scope in the 1000 price range is gonna have flaws and deficiencies, if they didn't they would cost 5 times more.
What you as the end user have to do is decide what you can and cannot live with.
Earlier this year i shot a round robin at 100 300 and 600 yards dialing every shot and didn't see anything on paper that gave me concerns.
I do prefer my MK5 3-18 over my XTRIII 3-18. But f it at the end of the day they both make me happy.
What you as the end user have to do is decide what you can and cannot live with.
Earlier this year i shot a round robin at 100 300 and 600 yards dialing every shot and didn't see anything on paper that gave me concerns.
I do prefer my MK5 3-18 over my XTRIII 3-18. But f it at the end of the day they both make me happy.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,716
- 20,446
Well they may have issues, but not so much with deficiencies.
End of day if you want a perfect scope you gotta pay for it .
Just that it's getting old with some of the expectations some have when buying scopes.
At the end of the day yes 1500 is alot of cash but what we get is for the most part a damn fine optic with a lifetime warranty.
And if you find that there are to many deficiencies in the 1500 price range you gotta step it up.
Guess I'm lucky that spending more aint gonna make me a better shot.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,716
- 20,446
I’ve noticed on my XTR III that if your eye is not perfectly centered the image will look hazy, even before you get scope shadow.
I wonder if that is the CA and glass quality that people are complaining about, because the glass on mine is great.
I do agree that the windage turret adjustments are dog shit, I hold wind so not a deal breaker, but makes you question the quality of the elevation mechanism.
I wonder if that is the CA and glass quality that people are complaining about, because the glass on mine is great.
I do agree that the windage turret adjustments are dog shit, I hold wind so not a deal breaker, but makes you question the quality of the elevation mechanism.
This is certainly true and we see it in manufacturers. Unless you are at alpha prices sacrifices have to be made somewhere, you can't give the best glass, best mechanics, best housing, reasonable weight etc. at $1500 prices, there's no free lunch. So some manufacturers might focus on as much optical quality as possible (I suspect is probably the best are to sell high volume because it's pretty easy to compare optics, but most will never know if their scope dials at 99% or 101%, and most will never use them enough to break. Others might focus on raw durability, others on electronic gadgets.
It's also true that everyone has different priorities for their optics. If you always hold windage, you probably care little for the windage dial. If you always dial everything you may care less about how good the reticle is for hold offs. If you want a 24lb 6mm PRS rig you don't care how much it weighs. If all you do is shoot at a square range in nice conditions you probably don't care much about light gathering, CA, etc. I'd call those user subjective things, every user is going to be more or less picky about them based on their use case.
I would not put a half mil of lash/slop in an elevation erector into the subjective category. Nor would I put it into something that should be expected/accepted in a $1700 MSRP optic, I've never even seen it in a $300 optic this bad. To me it's closer if you had a 5 deg reticle cant, or the optic dialed at 95% or 105%. It falls more into the range of design defects or unacceptably poor tolerances. If a $300 vortex, nikon, and bushnell can figure out how to make an erector that doesn't have that much lash in it, a $1700 Burris should. The industry clearly can figure out how to reduce it much more than this at products that cost 5x less I wouldn't really consider it a "feature" that has to be sacrificed to hit their price point.
Half a tenth. It doesnt look particularly abnormal to me. Granted lash is something that can be felt and measured better than seen. It doesnt look like it woukd hard to figure which tenth it is on. I can't remember a scope that I have used that didn't have some lash in the turrets.
Agree. OVERALL the XTR III is an excellent scope for what they’re selling for today. There may be sub $1000 scopes that occasionally will have better turrets or whatever, but as far as the whole package, most are lacking in more than one aspect.
Funny thing I noticed today, I pulled the knob off to set the zero and completely forgot that originally I removed the o-ring to see if it would improve the stiff/mushy feel in the elevation knob and it was still not there. So it went back for them twice for repairs for an elevation erector issue, and either they didn't notice the missing o-ring and turret feel, which is hard to believe, or they noticed it and didn't even bother to replace it.
I’ve been eyeballing the xtr3 but I’m going back and forth between a Cronus or maybe even bumping up to a mark5. I looked through a mark5 at the store and I was very impressed. It was really nice.
I love my XTR-3, and the glass is very good for the price. And I really like the thickness of the SCR2 reticle.
How does it compare to say the Steiner P4xi? I have a lot more time behind the Steiner so it would be an easier comparison for me. Thanks.
No clue...Never looked through one of the P4xi scopes, so can't give any thoughts on that. I wouldn't buy anything made by Leupold, I can tell you that much. But that's my personal opinion.
I had a P4xi a few years ago (I think it was 4-16x). If I remember correctly, the reticle was really hard to read because of how small it looked and there was a ton of chromatic aberration around the edges. The XTR3i was better in every way except for the stiff parallax knob.
I asked this same question on here ages ago (before buying both), and had some guy with Burris branded on both his asscheeks nearly have an aneurysm in the responses after. It was somehow sacrilegious to even consider comparing both.
He went on and on about how the cronus was "cheap chinese crap" and that Burris's commitment to US manufacturing meant that you were a commie-tranny-lizard if you bought anything else otherwise.
At the time, the cronus gen 2 was reasonably ($300-$500) cheaper on average, excluding a few occasional discounts on expertvoice that made the Burris lower priced for some. It was also new in the gen 2 offering, so not many were out there in the field for review.
Since then, the Cronus gen 2 has become a lot more popular (and the price has went up by a few hunded), the xtr got outsourced (not pro, since someone will undoubtably try to point this technicality out), and the price has lowered substantially on it as well. Its not uncommon now to see the Cronus compared to nightforce scopes and a coin toss to which some prefer.
My biggest complaint about the cronus was that the sunshade didnt match the finish of the scope. I thought the turrets were some of the best in terms of positive detent and sound (a big improvement from the gen 1), and arguably better turrets than my razor.
The burris has "dragonscale" on the turrets and magnification, which was a gimmick as clever as griffin's SPRM mount, and really was overpriced at the time for what you got. I think it was the only scope I compared at the time that did not have illumination. As the older US made models (non-illuminated) went to closeout and similar low price...they became a much better value, if you got a good example. Based on the items mentioned in this thread, you can see that not everyone did.
Also, for some "genius" reason, burris decided to etch the reticle name into the lens of the scope...so you can be reminded of it every time you looked through the glass I guess?
For your money, get whatever is cheaper, they're close enough now in price to admit that they're equally comparable scopes.
Last edited:
