Leupold or Burris

[Nightcrawler]

Which of these scopes would you prefer, and why? The use will be hunting/target shooting/whatever from 0-400 yards or so, on a 16" .308 carbine.

I'm considering the Burris 2-7x Compact:

The Burris 1.75-5x Signature Safari:

The Leupold VX-III 1.75-6x32:

The Leupold VX-III 1.5-5x20:

They're all similar. The compact Burris is the smallest and lightest, so it gets points. I also like that Ballistic Plex reticule. The other two are sub-two power (but not by much; Leupold says the actual magnification of their "1.75x" is actually 1.9x) and would be a touch more useful for very close in shooting. The Burris is less expensive.

My question is this. Is the Leupold worth the extra hundred and fifty to seventy five dollars? I like the Alumina accessories option the Leupold has; that yellow-tinted filter might be very handy in the failing light.

The Leupold would be easier to resell later if I decided I didn't like the low-power variable scope. But I'm on a budget and the Burris would be easier, especially the 2-7x compact.

Help?

 

[esheato]

Leupold...always Leupold.

Glass clarity and light transmission are always paramount.

You can't shoot it if you can't see it.

Ed

 

[ArmedBear]

Glass clarity and light transmission are always paramount.

Yes, but have you looked through the Burris?

I have a Fullfield II Ballistic Plex 3-9x40mm. Cost me $220 with a pair of nice rubber armored binocs included. Optical quality and light transmission are truly superb. Functionally, it does everything the equivalent Leupold VX-II does, for less dough, and it has a neat focus knob, too, along with the BPlex.

If you plan to sell the thing, a Leupold might be better for that. If you want to buy USA-made, Leupold is the way to go. Nobody ever actually regretted buying a Leupold VX-II or higher (not having click adjustments would keep me from getting their less-expensive models; I do think the Burris Fullfield II is a better use of $200 than the cheapest Leupolds).

The BPlex is a really nice feature with a round like the .308. Gives you a fair amount of extra no-guesswork dead-on range (assuming you know how far away the target it, which is another issue altogether). And lightest, smallest and cheapest are all points in its favor, given that Burris are perfectly fine scopes.

There are more expensive scopes than Leupolds, oh yes, there sure are. You can always spend more. The real question is, "Is it a good fit, when considering price, features, size (balance), etc."

Note that Leupold tends to overstate their magnification ranges, e.g. 3-9 might really be 3.5-8.5 or something. I don't know about Burris.

 

[esheato]

Yes, but have you looked through the Burris?

I have. In fact, I've shot quite a bit of 223 Rem using Burris optics. They make good glass, but when the difference is only $150 I opt for Leupold.

I have a VX-II on a rimfire and several VX-III on centerfire hunting guns. Dusk and dawn are clear and the specialty reticles (varmint and B&C) are simple to use.

Honestly, it's probably personal preference, but that preference has never left me high and dry.

Ed

 

[arcticap]

I usually like Burris, but I would also prefer at least a 3-9X32 to take full advantage of the mildot reticle.
I forest hunt shotgun slug and muzzle loader with a 4X32 which is not a problem for me at close range since the objective's wider field makes that possible.
With a rifle it's better to have a little more magnification than one needs as a cushion for any eventual situation. It's no accident that 3-9X is the most popular scope, so I recommend looking further.

This one is nice & reasonable but is a little larger than your choices:

http://www.kalinkaoptics.com/detail.aspx?ID=499

 

[hoghunting]

I would pick the Burris because I have used them for years and have never had a problem. The only scope I had a problem with was a Leupold. Both companies make very good products and between your two choices, you won't go wrong with either scope.

 

[ID_shooting]

I have Leuplod 2.5 - 8 VXIII on my m70 30-06. It is teh last scope I ever plan to purchase for my big-game hunting needs.

 

[rbernie]

I have had/have currently several Burris FF, FFII, and Leupold Vari-X III/VXIIs. Between the mid-range Leupolds and the mid-range Burris, I'll always take the Leupold if I can afford it. Not because the glass is better, and not because of some cache associated with the name, but because the Leupolds have always absorbed knocks and impacts better than my Burris scopes have.