Burris Fullfield II vs. Redfield Revolution

[ArtP]

After cutting through all the marketing hype, the only difference I can find is the FFII has fully multi-coated lenses while the Redfield has multi-coated lenses.

Any opinion of the optical quality difference between these two is welcome.

 

[kestak]

Greetings,

I can say I have a Fullfield II and a Nikon Buckmaster and used them a lot. They are toe to toe.
I saw a few Redfields and they are very nice. I do not have field experience with it, but ALL the reviews I read in the gun magazines about the new Redfields are good. And they are cheaper than the 2 previously mentionned.

I think with the 3 mentionned in my message you cannot go wrong. One advantage of the Nikon is the empty circle reticle. It is very nice for hunting.

Thank you

 

[greyling22]

http://www.opticsthoughts.com/index...mparison&catid=4:rifle-scope-reviews&Itemid=4

to sum up, the burris is better, but it costs more. it's a very good read though.

 

[Wagon]

I have both. Burris FFII 2-7x, clear bright glass, solidly built (heavier too). The only think I don't like is that to zoom, you turn the whole ocular piece, I can't use flip up.. and I like flip up... but good glass, forever warranty, sold product.

The Redfield is Revolution 3-9x, good optic for the price, simple, no fancy feature.. it is lighter too. I like the "assembled in USA" and Leupold warranty.

If price is not an issue, if you don't care about flip up, if assembled in USA (or not) makes no different, IMHO, Burris would be a better scope (between the two).

 

[ArtP]

That's a fantastic link, thanks! I only skimmed it, but will read it thoroughly.

I too own a FFII in 3-9x40 and am pretty darn happy with it. It's only shortcomings are it being blurry around the edges, but only if you're looking for such things. I don't care for turning the whole eye piece either, but I can easily live with that. I have a Signature Select too which I find to be a flawless, fantastic scope but I don't want to plop down $500 for this rifle. $50 makes little difference.

For far less than $200, I'm curious to know the shortcomings of the Redfield. At that price it's got to have weaknesses.

Wagon, if I understand you own the Burris and the Redfield and think the Burris is better? No comment necessary unless I read that wrong.

 

[hometheaterman]

I was going to post that same link, only to the same thread at Optics Talk. It's a great read. IMO there is no comparison between the Burris FFII and the Redfield. The Burris is more comparable with the VX-II when it comes to glass quality, where as the Redfield is basically optically similar to the Leupold Rifleman line. For the small price difference I'd pick the Burris out of those two.

However, with several of the Vortex Vipers on closeout right now, I might would have to go with one of those. They are better scopes by far than all of the ones mentioned above and you can get the 2-7 for like $180 or something similar. There are some great deals on a few models. They are more comparable with the Leupold VX-III, and have a great warranty that's as good or better than Leupolds.

As for the weakness of the Redfield, the biggest weakness I've read about is the poi shifting with magnification change. I've not read of this in any magazine report, however, I have read about it several times when reading personal experiences posted online from guys on various forums. It doesn't seem to be a huge change, but I've read several reports of people saying it does change. The other weakness is the glass quality. The VX-I glass quality is pretty crappy to be honest, I'd hate to even see what the Rifleman lineup looked like. I've not seen one outside of the store, but since they are a lower end model than the VX-I, I can't imagine they'd be good since the VX-I certainly is not.

 

[greyling22]

I was going to go with a redfield, then I read that article and decided on the diamondback. then I saw the vipers on clearance...... the only problem is that they don't have what I want on clearance. I'm trying to scope a small 223, I'd like at least a 9x, and the vipers are just so big.

 

[ArtP]

I'm not sure what your budget is, but SWFA has Vortex Diamondbacks for pretty good price. I'm considering one myself. The size appears to be normal for the sort of magnification it offers.

http://swfa.com/Vortex-Diamondback-Rifle-Scopes-C1409.aspx

After looking (on paper) at the Diamondback and Viper line, the DB's look like a lot more scope for not too much more money, IMHO.

I tend to put more research and importance on the scope that I do the rifle. I'm also up for getting a lot of scope for a little money if I can get away with it (who's not?). Because I don't have a place I can go look in person, it makes choosing all that much harder.

The last scope purchase I made was for a Signature Select and I made sure I bought from a retailer that accepted returns.

 

[ArtP]

However, with several of the Vortex Vipers on closeout right now, I might would have to go with one of those. They are better scopes by far than all of the ones mentioned above and you can get the 2-7 for like $180 or something similar. There are some great deals on a few models. They are more comparable with the Leupold VX-III, and have a great warranty that's as good or better than Leupolds.

While remaining respectful and recognizing we're all just stating opinions, that's a pretty hefty claim, to compare the Diamondbacks to a VX3. I'm very tempted to buy one to see what they're all about.

As far as anyone having a better warranty that Leupold; I don't think it's possible to go beyond, "no questions asked, lifetime repair/replace, fully transferable, no receipt required." Perhaps, if a company rep came out to my house in person and handed me a new scope, apologized for any inconvenience, then bought me lunch, that might be better.

If anyone here has first-hand experience with a Vortex Diamond Back I'd love to hear about it.

 

[greyling22]

from what I've read the viper line seems to edge out the vx3's, with the diamondback falling in between the vx2 and vx2.

I was looking at the 4-12x40 DB. it's actually cheaper than the comparable redfield. the question them becomes, is the 3-10x50 viper a better scope and worth the extra $60 bucks, and would the 50mm lens dwarf my little 223? and the 2-7x32 viper worth giving up 5 power? I sure wish I had a little more power when I'm aiming at a quarter sized dot at 100yds. or a thinner reticle. (oh course I'm currently rocking a tasco world class so anything would probably be an improvement)

 

[ArtP]

I thought the Diamondback line was better than the Viper line?? No?

I'd avoid the 50mm lense too. From what I know and have experienced, it's got to be almost full on dark for the bigger objective to actually gather more visible light. There is another benefit to a larger exit pupil/larger objective lens - that is a larger "sweet spot". Sweet spot is the term I use to describe how forgiving the eye piece is to the eye moving slightly before the scope winks out. Bigger objective lens = bigger sweet spot. I draw the line at no more than 44.

 

[greyling22]

no. crossfire<diamondback<viper<razor.

and I guess you just helped me eliminate the 3-10x50 viper. so it's either the 2-7 viper or the 4-12 diamondback. I guess. I could really go for the smaller diameter eyepiece size and the design of the vipers, but I sure do like the option on the extra 5x magnification. I probably couldn't tell a difference in the quality of the optics if they were side by side though.

 

[ArtP]

I see. Thanks.

I wanted to add more about the objective lens. As magnification increases, light and sweet spot get smaller (exit pupil), so I always pick an objective in relation to the max magnification. If I were in the market for a 32x target scope, I wouldn't mind a 56 objective.

The scope I own with the most magnification is a 16x with 44 objective. I find the sweet spot to be tiny at 16x. So much so that I would only use that magnification from a bench or other ergonomic setup. I'd call it almost worthless in the field.

If this is review, sorry.

 

[hometheaterman]

While remaining respectful and recognizing we're all just stating opinions, that's a pretty hefty claim, to compare the Diamondbacks to a VX3. I'm very tempted to buy one to see what they're all about.

It's not the Diamondback that compares to the VX-3, but the Vipers. The Vipers are what are on clearance right now for some models. Sorry I didn't make myself clearer.

The Diamondbacks are supposed to be more comparable to the VX-2.

As for the warranty, Vortex has the same policy.

 

[MrBob]

I was going to go with a redfield, then I read that article and decided on the diamondback

not a bad choice. I prefer the burris but the diamond is nice too

 

[greyling22]

I got my viper in the mail today from cameraland. nice optic, and they threw in free vortex medium mounts, a sticker, a hat and some coffee. (coffee?!) anyway, looks good, can't wait to mount it. the Viper's stamped made in phillipines.

 

[ArtP]

congratulations! I'm interested in a range report once you take it out.

 

[greyling22]

well......I'm hoping to get it out next weekend at a friend's range, but I might not be able to. my range was closed down for deer season, and I"m not a super duper scope guy, but I"ll let you know as best I can when I can.

 

[magnumman44]

I have two Burris FFII scopes...one is a 3-9x40 on my DPMS Sweet 16, and it is fantastic. I also have a 4.5-14x42 on a Remington 700 sps Tactical 223, and it shoots super groups. You can also get good prices on auction sites and gunbroker.

 

[greyling22]

academy has the bushnell elite 3200 for $150 right now.

 

[cibach]

that is a good deal

 

[slowr1der]

Yep, Academy seems to have good deals, I wish we had one close by, but we don't.

 

[greyling22]

ok, vortex viper range report: pulled off my tasco scope, put on viper, and it shot 2 feet low at 50 yards. I maxed out my elevation and was still 4 inches low. I'm assuming that since my last scope worked out ok, maybe it's the scope. I'll be calling vortex in the morning. I'm open to suggestions.

 

[ArtP]

I can't imagine your action and barrel or the scope is that much out of alignment at only 50 yards. I would immediately replace the base and rings with something quality but simple. A $25 Weaver base and rings should do fine. Check everything again, the Tasco worked. Sure, you could shim a base, but doing that at close range is trying to bandaid a much bigger problem. Did you mount the Tasco with normal mounting gear? Did someone else??

Because you moved your point of aim almost two feet (20 inches) at only 50 yards tells me the scope is offering a normal amount of travel. If I did the math in my head right, that would be 160 MOA of travel, in only one direction.

 

[PT1911]

What size objective did you get, what height rings and base are you using? My guess is you problem lies with one of those variables... a whole lot of people end up mounting their scopes way too far above the bore.