Re: Burris Signature scope feedback
- From: penultimate <drwilly@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:07:18 +0000 (UTC)
On Nov 11, 7:36 pm, "clarkmagnu...@xxxxxxxxx"
<clarkmagnu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...I second Clark Magnuson's comments regarding scope power and weight
for hunting and particularly his implication that the only place where
a high variable power setting on a variable scope on a medium to big
game rifle gets used is at the range. These days I'd probably be
perfectly happy with a 3X fixed as the simplest and best all around
choice and certainly that is where I leave my variables set and have
never in any way felt disadvantaged by rifles with fixed power 4X
scopes. Certainly a 3X setting is the case on my favorite 270,
whether shooting near or far. If I had a 1.5X - ? variable, and
consequently enough experience to know how I liked such a setting, I
might do the same as he.
In addition to what I think is some advantage in shooting quickly when
required, I give the edge to lower power (variable or otherwise)
scopes because they are generally lighter and more compact. And,
certainly, lighter and fixed power contribute to durability in the
presence of recoil. Obviously, in the final analysis, preferred power
when hunting is a question of personal preference. Perhaps biasing my
preference increasingly toward lower power settings over the years is
that I have come to almost exclusively "hunt" with aid of 8X
binoculars, which I actively use. For whatever it is worth, I can not
recall knowing a single hunter of proven ability that carts around
more than a 9X top value variable and number the several I know with
"big, bad-ass" scopes as beginners likely to get smarter with age. I
think it takes some years before you no longer assume that "bigger" is
in some way automatically "better."
I also second Clark's comments regarding the quality of Burris'
Signature series. At this price point, you really should expect (and
demand) satisfaction in the "quality" domain from all the serious
players (Burris, Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss and possibly still the "Elite"
line from Bushnell). Optics is usually one of the places where you
pretty much get what you pay for, at least if you avoid the extreme
expense of European manufacture. You may or may not "prefer" some
aspect of design beyond "quality." For example, I have a bias toward
Leupold for hunting purposes because of design properties in the area
of eye relief.
I do not know if the Burris "Signature" line, post Beretta, is still
made in America, or if the recent Phillipine made FFII's have proven
durable or been consistent in quality. But Burris did set up a brand
new assembly plant with state of the art equipment and made a big deal
of having American management on site and in charge of production. I
was awfully impressed with a Phillipine made 3-9X BPlex FFII I bought
for a "gift rifle" and think that (save for the issue of proven
durability) was in every way at least competitive with a low end (and
about $60 more expensive) Leupold. This scope has thusfar stood up to
a couple of years in the field and from the git-go was way above the
various "toy models" generally selling in the $100 and below range.
..
--------------------------------------------------------------
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.net
Win a Fulton Armory AR-15 'game gun' and defend liberty at the
same time - Donate to MPFO today! Details at http://myguns.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
- References:
- Burris Signature scope feedback
- From: T.Alan Kraus
- Re: Burris Signature scope feedback
- From: clarkmagnuson@xxxxxxxxx
- Burris Signature scope feedback
- Prev by Date: Re: S&W 638 vs. S&W 642?
- Next by Date: Re: Question about .357Mag SmithWesson M&P revolver
- Previous by thread: Re: Burris Signature scope feedback
- Next by thread: Bore Runner
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
