Burris Fullfield II vs. Redfield Revolution

[greyling22]

I replaced a 3-9x40 tasco world class with a 4-12x40 viper. I used the same warne rings and bases for both scopes. They're high rings, mounted high to clear the bolt handle. And I get that it could be too high, but feet off at 100 yds? that's got to be due to more than a half inch above the bore.

I mounted just like I always have: insert scope and tighten. everything is tight, no weird gaps, everything looks correctly aligned. I used the same ammo for both scopes.

 

[ArtP]

I don't know what else to offer. Even if your scope is up higher than preferred you would not have the problem you're describing - high mounts don't add up to squat at close range.

If you don't get any immediate satisfaction out of Vortex, I'd bring both scopes and hopefully another rifle (so you have two scopes and two rifles) and swap stuff around until you isolate the problem.

Call me silly or old fashion, but I don't use a bore scope to get close on paper - when sighting in. I start out at 7 yards, if I need to, and work my way back to 100 yards, adjusting and doing the math along the way. I've never had a problem getting "on paper" even at very close range.

I wish I could offer you more. Good luck and keep us posted.

 

[greyling22]

vortex guys said it sounded like classic mount problem. said they'd be happy to take the scope back and check it out, but it really sounded like a mount problem. said maybe I should try the burris adjustable rings. I was pleased with their support.

I used warne rings and bases so I called warne. They guy there asked what rings I used (vertical permanent attached) then asked how I tightened them. I said all of them little by little in a pattern, just like lug nuts. he replied that on his rings you're supposed to tighten the bottoms all the way, then the tops. if that doesn't work I am supposed to call him back. So I'm very pleased with warne's CS as well.

Hopefully that will fix the problem. and who knew you were supposed to put on the vertically split rings that way. (maybe everybody, it probably said so in the directions) but nice polite and helpful people all the way around.

 

[UniversalFrost]

any updates on the vortex scope?

I have several vortex products and am tempted to purchase the viper in 2-7x35 for my 6.8 SPC AR I just built. Nice to buy an product with Customer support that is top notch (both warne and vortex)

 

[greyling22]

not yet. I remounted according to the warne guy's instructions, but I haven't made it to the range and I don't have a bore sighter. I'm hoping to get to the range next weekend.

and yes, customer support is a breath of fresh air. I've had a couple issues with the rifle. a left handed zastava mini-mauser imported by the now defunct charles daly, with no current importer. GAH!!!

 

[<SLV>]

Looking forward to your range report. I'm scoping an AIA M10 A2 carbine, and I'm looking for the best 2-7x value. Right now my list is:

Redfield Revolution
Bushnell Elite 3200
Burris Fulfield II
Vortex Viper

I've owned an Elite 3200 that I absolutely loved. I was thinking about giving the new Redfield a try, but after reading this thread I'm itching to try a Vortex. Why is the line being discontinued? That can't be a good sign. I've never owned a Burris, but I hear good things from those who do.

 

[Mr_Pale_Horse]

I mounted and sighted in a Fullfield II Ballistic Plex 3-9x40 yesterday.

I bought one of the Fullfield Packages from Opticsplanet for $199 after a $20 mail in rebate. That included a 10x39mm Burris Landmark Binoculars.

I can only compare it to the scope I replaced; I left the other guns at home. Prior to opening day (11/13), I will have various Leupold and Bushnell models and to compare it to.

The Nikon 2-7x32 Prostaff it replaced was small and light, but, the light out of the FFII, Image quality, and fast focus (my old eyes seem to have a different diopter every other day) made me glad of the decision to upgrade.

The eye relief was far less critical with the FFII. Moving forward or backward on the cheekpiece did not result in the loss of field of view that the Prostaff had burdened me with (you had to be at the exact eye relief or the FOV shrank and distorted).

Lastly, the internals are finished much better. You could see screws and poorly finished metal surfaces inside the Prostaff if you slid too far forward.

Both seemed to have good stability of POI (I hunted for two seasons with the Prostaff; put 80 rounds downrange yesterday with the FFII).

 

[ArtP]

I went through a similar upgrade about a year ago and my findings were similar. If you ever get the money or the balls the buy a Signature Select, you're in for a real treat. They are even clearer & brighter, and clear edge to edge (I bought a 4-16x44). I notice the FFII is a little blury around the edges but still a fantastic scope for the money, and the edges don't amount to much in practice. If trying to balance cost vs. perfomance I've always favored Burris.

 

[an_drew308]

I know this is an old thread, but ArtP, I've noticed the same thing with my two Fullfield II's 4.5-14x42

I don't remember seeing that blurriness when I first purchased the scopes. I keep my guns in a safe. It does get pretty cold in the room that they're in, though. Would temperature have anything to do with that, or is it just how they are made?

I have a few buddies who have the exact same scope, I'm going to compare this afternoon and see if their scopes are blurred around the edges too.

Also, my parallax adjustment seems to be off now. I have to set it on 200 for it to be clear at 100 yds. 300 for target to be clear at 200 yds.... ???

BTW, the blur doesn't hurt functionality, and it's really not too noticeable unless you look for it...