-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Vortex strike eagle vs XTRII
- Thread starter akmike47
- Start date
The XTRII glass is much better than the Strike Eagle. For that matter, the new Burris RT25 glass is much better than the Strike Eagle. I've had them side by side.
Burris steadily improved the glass on the XTRII over the years. The last 25x I bought for an AR10 a couple years ago is pretty nice glass. As nice as anything out there at $1000. The new RT25 that just came out has the SCR2 grid reticle and sells for about $600.
Burris steadily improved the glass on the XTRII over the years. The last 25x I bought for an AR10 a couple years ago is pretty nice glass. As nice as anything out there at $1000. The new RT25 that just came out has the SCR2 grid reticle and sells for about $600.
I recently went through this myself.
I had the opportunity to demo a SE 5-25. I was generally very pleased. the glass was good, the reticle excellent, the adjustments decent.
I was worried about the long term reliability and robustness of a Chinese made scope. Vortex's other CHICOM scopes have not had a good reputation in that regard.
I ultimately decided on an XTR II 4-20 with the SCR reticle. It was a blemish model on sale at Natchez (I have yet to find the blemish).
the glass is absolutely serviceable. It is hard to describe, it isn't "bright", but it isn't dark. the image doesn't pop, but things are clear and well defined.
The reticle isn't as nice as the Vortex offering, I wish it was a floating dot instead of a floating crosshair, but that is a personal preference.
I'm very okay with the more minimal design, as I dial elevation and hold for wind. Don't get me wrong, it is a very usable design.
In regards to robustness/reliability, it feels like I could take it off the rifle, beat someone with and put it back on the rifle with no issues.
A big plus is the fact that it isn't Chinese.
I am VERY pleased with the purchase.
I went with the 4-20 as they enjoy a reputation as the sweet spot in the line up.
FWIW, I have used an older 3-15, made just after they switched to the 10 mil turrets. That scope had some very noticeable chromatic aberration that is not present in the newer scopes, I rather liked that scope as well.
If I had to make the choice all over again, I would still buy the Burris. It seems to be a better overall scope.
I had the opportunity to demo a SE 5-25. I was generally very pleased. the glass was good, the reticle excellent, the adjustments decent.
I was worried about the long term reliability and robustness of a Chinese made scope. Vortex's other CHICOM scopes have not had a good reputation in that regard.
I ultimately decided on an XTR II 4-20 with the SCR reticle. It was a blemish model on sale at Natchez (I have yet to find the blemish).
the glass is absolutely serviceable. It is hard to describe, it isn't "bright", but it isn't dark. the image doesn't pop, but things are clear and well defined.
The reticle isn't as nice as the Vortex offering, I wish it was a floating dot instead of a floating crosshair, but that is a personal preference.
I'm very okay with the more minimal design, as I dial elevation and hold for wind. Don't get me wrong, it is a very usable design.
In regards to robustness/reliability, it feels like I could take it off the rifle, beat someone with and put it back on the rifle with no issues.
A big plus is the fact that it isn't Chinese.
I am VERY pleased with the purchase.
I went with the 4-20 as they enjoy a reputation as the sweet spot in the line up.
FWIW, I have used an older 3-15, made just after they switched to the 10 mil turrets. That scope had some very noticeable chromatic aberration that is not present in the newer scopes, I rather liked that scope as well.
If I had to make the choice all over again, I would still buy the Burris. It seems to be a better overall scope.
I really want a Cronus or a Razor, but I don't have that sort of budget. My Burris has done fine, but it's not quite where I want it to be glass wise either.
It is a tank though. Maybe I can luck out and find one with a h591 reticle.
It is a tank though. Maybe I can luck out and find one with a h591 reticle.
Last edited:
I have a used 4-20 I'm getting ready to dish off. Its the SCR though, not the H591.
Its very lightly used though. Its rode around on a 6.5 Grendel for 300 or 400 rounds, and thats about it. It will be a good buy if you're interested.
No worries, just hanging it out there. These scopes always sell fast here on the Hide.
Good luck with your rifle sale.
Hell im trying to decide if I even want to sell it. Maybe I'll sell my kayak instead.
Maybe I had a really old XTRII, but I disagree. My XTRII glass wasn't noticeably different than the Strike Eagles I have. Granted, the turrets on the XTR were better, but everything else is better with the Strike Eagle (reticle, illumination, etc). I actually sold my XTRII immediately after it shit the bed during a match. The glass completely washed out due to sun position. There were 4 other shooters on the line with me pointing exactly in the same direction, I was the only scope that failed. I wasn't the only one who couldn't see out of my scope on that stage either. The XTRII was a good scope except for the glass and it was the worst glass I'd ever seen in a scope in that price range. Also for the record, my Strike Eagle cost half as much as the XTRII.
The XTRII has been on the market for 6 years now. The first couple years they were hit and miss on glass. The bar was too low for for what was acceptable glass and what wasn't. Starting about 3 years ago they really started cleaning them up. The 2 or 3 ive picked up in the last couple years, a pair of 20x and one 25x, are pretty nice glass. Much brighter and cleaner looking. If you got an older scope I'm not surprised you had some issues. But the SE doesn't look anywhere near as nice as the newer XTRIIs that I own or have looked through.
I think Vortex did a good job at making a decent featured scope. 34mm tube, good elevation, illuminated.. but the glass isn't the strong point. Kinda like an older XTRII...
I had a XTRII last year and recently bought a Strike Eagle 5-25x56;
1. glass win goes to Burris easily
2. turrets on SE are the worst I've ever had. Redefine the use of the word "mushy". They are simply shite. Turrets in XTRII are excellent
3. you mention going to 25x The eye box in SE at 23-25x is tiny
4. subjective one but the Burris felt way more solid and robust when just holding the two in your hand out of the box
I would never consider the SE 5-25x56 a comp scope.
Ok for 22LR and other trainer rigs where you want to train with no dial using holds with a FFP reticle.
Attractive FFP for the price, but, a mid level scope it isn't.
Hope that helps
The eye box on the SE is not at all tiny. You are actually the first person i have heard say that. Most say it's better than the PST actually. It's pretty good sized and easy to get behind.
As for the knobs they are mushier than more expensive options but they track and hold true. I did a tracking test to 20 mils and it was right on and I have been using it in matches all year and it returns to zero.
I bought the SE for the feature set vs price, not the glass. It’s functional but not great. My older XTRII wasn’t even functional. The turrets on my SE are no worse than my Tango 4’s, vortex vipers, or pst’s.
So if you have an older scope with the not so sharp glass, will Burris do anything for you if you send it in? My eyes say that the SE has brighter glass and equal clarity.
I dont know the answer to that. If its a flaw and way below the acceptable standard, then I suspect so. But I dont know what you have.
I've yet to look through a Strike Eagle that looks as good as my two 20x H591's or my most recent 25x XTRII. Not even close.
I also now own an RT25, which has much nicer glass than both SEs I've compared to. The SE from what I've seen has decent elevation and they did add illumination, which the RT doesn't have. But I think they could have done nicer glass in that price point. The RT focused their dollars on reliable turrets and glass.
I would like to know the answer to this question too. My xtr2 is about 5 years old and glass kinda sucks, but the turrets and tracking are fantastic. Just purchased an xtr3 and the glass is way better, but I think the turrets suck. I haven't had a chance to check tracking, but I kinda wonder how its going to do. I think if they put the xtr3 glass in the xtr2 it would be the best.
Strike Eagle turrets are reliable as well. Been cranking them up and down all year and they track and return to zero.
Glass is subjective. Have looked though it at 1200 yards and had no issues seeing the target. And considering the XTRII are twice the price I would hope their glass is better.
With only 65 MOA of elevation in the RT25 the choice is easy for a rimfire.
I agree glass is subjective, but I think most people will agree you can tell one scope from another. The Gen II Razor > the GEN II PST.. > Diamondback.
XTRIIs can be had for $700 to $900 depending on type and how much you shop. But your point is taken. The OP is making the comparison. A more fair comparison would have been the shared price point of the XTRII/GenII PST.
Agreed, the SE has better elevation. But the RT
is still workable for a rimfire. Its plenty for NRL22. I have 14mils elevation in mine which takes me to 340 yards before holdovers. I was plinking a 10" plate at 400 yards with a 4 mil holdover this past Friday. I shot a rimfire match with a buddy's before I bought mine, no issues. I do think tne elevation is the weak link for the RT, but I think the glass and turret quality make up for it. I bought mine to play with on my trainer, because as Vortex has done with the EBR7C, the low cost RT has the same SCR2 reticle as the flagship XTR3.
First, I have never received any incentives to write any product review. I’ve spent my hard earned money for everything I own. Incidentally, I don’t waste money on products in order to keep up with the Bones’.
I own several riflescopes to include Bushnell’s XRS II, DMR II Pro, HDMR II and Match Pro. See the pattern. I recently needed a scope for my 6.5 CM. I wanted a bit more magnification than the offering in the 21 top end of the DMR. I wanted a lower minimum parallax adjustment than the offering in the XRS. I wanted a bigger tube than the offering in the Match Pro. I needed a really good reticle similar to those I already have. My goal was to stay below $1,200.
So, in looking around, I narrowed my choices to to a Strike Eagle or XTR II. I went with the XTR II. Now, I’ve owned and inspected piles of riflescopes over the years. These scopes range from economy to premium optics. Today, I can say unequivocally the XTR II is the most substandard riflescope I have ever put my hands on or looked through. Receiving it was a huge letdown based on the information I reviewed prior to the purchase. In this connection, I could not justify using it on any rifle, even if it were given to me as a gift.
Two final thoughts-
1. Everything is relative to some standard.
2. Always consider the source of information; beware of the reviews you read or view.
I own several riflescopes to include Bushnell’s XRS II, DMR II Pro, HDMR II and Match Pro. See the pattern. I recently needed a scope for my 6.5 CM. I wanted a bit more magnification than the offering in the 21 top end of the DMR. I wanted a lower minimum parallax adjustment than the offering in the XRS. I wanted a bigger tube than the offering in the Match Pro. I needed a really good reticle similar to those I already have. My goal was to stay below $1,200.
So, in looking around, I narrowed my choices to to a Strike Eagle or XTR II. I went with the XTR II. Now, I’ve owned and inspected piles of riflescopes over the years. These scopes range from economy to premium optics. Today, I can say unequivocally the XTR II is the most substandard riflescope I have ever put my hands on or looked through. Receiving it was a huge letdown based on the information I reviewed prior to the purchase. In this connection, I could not justify using it on any rifle, even if it were given to me as a gift.
Two final thoughts-
1. Everything is relative to some standard.
2. Always consider the source of information; beware of the reviews you read or view.
Attachments
I am not discounting your experience.
I chose the 4-20 XTR II, due to the fact they had a better reputation glass wise. It has been said on several forums that the glass is just not up to the 5-25.
Is it the equal of my higher end scopes?
No.
I do wish they would do something with the glass, as otherwise, they are usually solid performers. The picture is clear, but unimpressive, there is no "pop", it's almost as if you are looking through a windshield that is clean, but has that foggy residue on the inside from the plastic inside the car outgassing.
I don't have issue with the turrets, I have ones that are more tactile and with better feel, I have others that are not as nice.
FWIW, I bought it for just over 600 as a "blemished" model.
I felt 600 was a fair price, I would have been disappointed if I had paid full price.
They wouldn't do anything for me, but I had the older version when they first came out. The glass was shit to say it nicely, but the scope tracked fine and there were no other issues. I sent them the scope and they sent it back and said it was fine.
My experience was such that if Burris sent me a scope at no charge I could not in good consciousness use it on any rifle I have.
Not only was this scope not clear, when I attempted to focus, the image would literally change colors because of slight play in the parallax adjustment knob.
I'm currently 55 yoa. From about 14 yoa, I used a totally manual 35mm slr camera and developed my own film. I’m a former Infantry Officer. I’ve owned, maintained and flown general aviation aircraft most of my adult life as an instrument pilot.
I’m pretty conservative. Nonetheless, this is one of the worst representations of a piece of equipment I have experienced for what it’s purported to do.
I have a 4-20 XTR II that I bought new for $590 shipped (DVOR sale + Optics Planet price match + coupon code). I’ve used it to get consistent hits past 1 mile. It’s a solid optic at $600 and I’m happy with what it is at the pricing I got it at. My particular example has pretty strong CA and nothing about the image quality is good, overall it’s bleh. It’s just a mediocre scope that tracks 100%.
While I didn’t feel as strongly as you, I had a similar experience with the XTR. That’s why I don’t have any of those, but I have two strike eagles. Your mileage may vary.
I ended up selling the scope. I wanted to like it! The turrets felt good to me and the scope felt like a nice unit, but the glass just wasn't what I was looking for in that price range. I ended up selling it to fund another Strike Eagle.
Sorry, I‘m not sure what, “Your mileage may vary” means.
I’ve look through a Strike Eagle and was pleasantly surprised. However, I’m at a place where I’m going to stick with what I have experience with; what I know works.
I just mean, some people have had much better glass in their xtr’s than what I experienced. It doesn’t seem as if they have been super consistent over the years so that’s why I said, your mileage may vary.
Okay. Perfect. I really like my 3 Elite Tacticals. I just wish there was something in the 3/5-25 magnification range (34 mm tube) that focuses at a lower minimum parallax. That’s why I tried the XTR II.
