Weaver or Burris?

[kennygarza]

Weaver or Burris? UPDATE!

Hey there folks. I want a new scope for my .243. I'm torn between a Weaver Grand Slam and a Burris Fullfield II. Looking at the 3-9x40 class. One concern of mine is if the bolt of my rifle will clear the focus adjuster on the Weaver. These 2 scopes are within $50 of eachother. I would like something with good eye relief. I'm interested in hearing your opinions/experiences/preferences. Any info you guys could provide would be greatly appreciated.

KG

 

[mattw]

aren't both of those scopes kind of expensive? if they are compairable in price to a leupold 3x9x40 you might want to look into it.

 

[scubie02]

I've owned both. The weaver has the best optics of any scope I have owned, IMO the best in its class (I own or have owned pretty much everything in this range--Leupold, Burris, B&L, Weaver, Sightron, Nikon, etc)
Its weakness is that the semi long tapered front bell, relatively short length and eye relief meant for me that I could ever get it to mount back far enough on any rifle w/out special mounts. I have had guns where the bolt wouldn't clear the rear bell with the rubber too. As mentioned, however--great optics and arguably the best adjustment system.

The Burris is a solid scope with average optics. It should be cheaper than the GS--anywhere from $169-$199 with $199 being the norm, but I've seen them cheaper. Often there's some sort of throw-in too--binoculars or spotting scope etc. One thing I used to like about Burri's--the crosshairs seem to stay black better than others in varying light, rather than turning that metallicy copper in certain conditions. Never had a problem with a Burris or a Weaver scope. I've always been able to mount them fine too. If the GS were a bit longer it'd be the prince of its class, but it IS a PIA to mount. Ended up selling mine finally, but still the best optics I have seen (better than a Leupold vx-ii, burris signature, etc by a hair)

 

[kennygarza]

Yeah, I've had Leupolds. I just sold a VX-1 in 4-12x40 on here for $100. I also have a VariX 2 in 3-9x40 on my other rifle. About the cheapest Leupold is around $200 for their Rifleman line. You have to be real careful and know the lines within the brands. The Burris is around $200 and the Weaver is $250. A comparable Leupold would be significantly more. I am real critical on eye relief and bolt handle clearance, so at this point I'm leaning more toward the Burris.
KG

 

[scubie02]

yeah, it would be the vx-ii for $299 that would be the comparable leupold to the weaver theoretically. With Burris its more of a gray area. The fullfield used to be comparable to the Nikon Buckmaster or Weaver V series probably, with the Signature the equivalent model to the GS, but the discontinued the Signature's and the Signature Selects are significantly more expensive (and uglier...), and they seemed to have upped the glass slightly on the ff ii's.

One thing you might consider--I have read before that the glass is the same in the Weaver GS's as in the v series, the differences being mostly cosmetic, and the microtrac adjustment system. While microtrac is arguably superior, keep in mind that the adjustment system in the V series is the same as everyone else uses. The V series are also slightly longer/don't have as long of a taper on the front bell, and don't have the rubber coating on the rear bell, so you don't get the mounting worries typically. You should also be able to get them for well under $200--typically natchezss.com has good weaver prices. You might want to consider a V series 3-9x40 (don't get the 2-10x40 v series--you get a bit of a tunnel effect with that one you don't get with the 3-9).

 

[scubie02]

just looked it up--natchez makes it a pia to look up the weaver scopes, but if you go to their online catalog the 3-9x38 sells for $139! How's that for a deal? These have very nice optics.

 

[ocabj]

I vote for the Weaver. I had a Grand Slam 3-10x40 that was awesome.

 

[kennygarza]

I talked to a rep. at Weaver about the rubber focus ring. He said you have to use high mounts to clear the bolt on most rifles. I'm not a fan of high mounts. The Weaver V series is looking good. I'd like to thank everyone for your input.
KG

 

[TheOpticZone]

I also would opt for the Weaver Grand Slam. It is a much better scope than the Burris Fullfield II's. I would actually compare them very close to the VX-III's.

 

[45crittergitter]

The Weaver GS is brighter than the V series. According to Barsness, the Fullfield II is brighter than the GS, although the advertised numbers are practically the same (V=93%, GS=96-97%, FF2=95%). I too, love my V16, but it's noticeably dimmer than my Bushnell Elite 4200 and my Leupold
Vari-XIII.

 

[kennygarza]

Update!

I stopped off today at a local sporting goods store that had tons of scopes to compare. I was able to make a thorough and fair comparison between the Weaver GS, Burris FFII, and the Sightron SII. I immediately discarded the Sightron. I used to have an SI that I sold because I could always see 3 screw heads inside the scope. This always bugged me but I thought the SIIs would be better. Nope. I don't care how good the glass is, if I am distracted by huge screw heads in the scope it's useless to me. It was actually a draw between the GS and the FFII only because of the price difference. I initially wanted the GS, but wasn't sure if my bolt handle would clear the rubber focus ring. It not only clears it, but with ease. And this is with low mounts. Eye relief was not a problem. So I went with the Grand Slam in 3-10x40. The Burris was a close runner up, significantly less expensive. But I could afford the Weaver. I have to say that I like the way the reticle changes color going from dark to light backgrounds. The Burris stays black, and I felt like it could be a problem on a dark object or background. I feel that with careful research and all your input I was a well informed consumer. I am now a Weaver fan and appreciate all the input.
KG