Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Burris Fullfield II 3-9 x 40

My go to hunting scope for years has been the Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10 x 40. I own several of them, I believe only two bought new. I find it difficult to pass up a used one at a good price.

I don't know how many name changes and design changes the 3.5-10 x 40 has gone through. I suspect there have been more design changes than name changes. I suppose every iteration is supposed to be a breakthrough improvement, but I admit skepticism. When I find a used one, I pay little attention to age, mostly just condition. Their customer service to quote Dave Petzal, "... is so good that it not only repairs your scope, but restores your faith in humanity as well." That has been my experience when I have needed their service, which has not been often.

One issue I do have with that model is that I have to back the focus out virtually all the way to get focus, and the only glasses I need are drugstore 1.5 readers. That doesn't make sense to me. I wonder what those who need much more powerful reading glasses do?

I used to simply figure out which Leupold suited my needs, but I discovered SWFA SS scopes for a long range .22 RF project, and based mostly on Mule Deer's (JB) praise, I am considering a Burris Fullfield II 3-9 x 40. They are certainly attractively priced, less than what I usually expect to spend for a good used Leupold 3.5-10 x 40.

Besides the slight difference in magnification range, the main difference seem to be about 3.3 eye relief for the Burris vs. about 4.0 for the Leupold.

For those that have used both:
Do you find the Burris difficult to "get behind" compared to the Leupold?
Would I be disappointed in the Burris compared to my old standby?
Should I give the Burris a try, or just keep looking for used versions of my old favorite?

I know your answers are only your opinions, but I would like to hear them.

Best,
Gun Doc

I have used more than a few of the Fullfield II with the ballistic plex reticle.
They are really great on lightweight 270’s.
Incidentally that is my favorite reticle BY FAR.

I have used both, and currently have a couple of the FFII including a 3-9 with the Ballistic Plex reticle, which has been on a Brno .22 Hornet for some years. I've been very happy with it - good optics, no reliability issues, and I think the ballistic plex reticle works well once you work out at what distance each line is on the money. It is a simple reticle too, not at all "busy". I have no problem "getting behind it", and have had no issues with quick shots and dropping running critters. FWIW I actually measured the eye-relief at 4" at 3x, and just over 3" at 9x.

I have used the FFII as well as VX2 and VX3. I’ve found the Burris to be a very dependable scope. During the course of playing scope roulette I’ve found the FFII to just work while other scopes are failing.

I have had nothing but excellent luck with the Burris FFII...had them on more than half a dozen rifles and still have three in operation....

The 2-7 FF II that is on my truck gun has been in a pickup everyday for the last 2 years(?).

From whenever I got that setup anyway it has been outside bouncin' around and I know it's still sighted in because 4-5 times a year I actually shoot something with it.....grin

Seriously, last time was back in June and it was on enough to easily hit spring wheat field gophs at 100-150 yards. I didn't shoot any farther.


BC's on the scope and I don't like the entire ocular rotating......

Have had FF II's (whether made in the USA or the Phillipines) on a number of rifles up to and including a .300 Weatherby Magnum, with no problems. By the way, when Burris started having the FFII's made in the Phillipines, they set up the tooling (the same as used in the U.S.) and instructed the Phillipine factory on how to use it. I tested of the 3-9x40's shortly after the changes and, if anything, they were a little better machined. Own very recent models that work perfectly as well.

No problems with eye relief so far...mine are on a 7mm-08 and a 6.5 x 55. Reliable over 10 years each. Just put a Fullfield E1 4.5x 14 on a RAR in 308 and it has been great as well.

Thank you Mule Deer, and also everyone else who offered comments. I had read most of what Mule Deer just related on an old thread. In fact, it was that very thread that got me to thinking I should try a Fullfield II. These endorsements and the prices I am finding on the 'net sure get one's attention!

As a set-and-forget scope, they're awesome.

I have a couple of the old Pentax Pioneers, which I think were the same scope,. They are on my 22 RF gopher guns and have been reliable

Pretty decent optics for $90 if I remember

I have two of the Burris scopes, and have had no issues out of either one. I like them.

I’ve had a Burris FFII on my Tikka for 12 years without having any issues. It gets bounced around a bit in the gun boot and hunting thick brush .

Resurrected this thread to get the latest info. I’ve picked up a couple of these scopes and really like them. The reticle works wonderfully for my use. Has anybody had problems with one? I’m really only interested in their durability and holding zero. Precise tracking is unimportant to me. Will be used on 30-06 to 300 Mag rifles. Thanks.

Use with confidence.

I’ve had one on my 7 Mag for 12 years without a problem I just put one my 7x57 and really like it.

I just gotta say this is the most refreshing thread I have read on the internet all week, a scope for less than $800 getting some love

I have several. No problems. I keep buying more.

Have only been using Burris for a couple of years, but have had zero issues so far. IMO you have to spend a bunch more to get something significantly better for S&F use, and or noticeably better glass. Adjustments are not super-crisp, but I don’t have to chase them around either.

I don’t think there has ever been a scope with more bang for the buck than the FF II. I’m not sure how they do it. They are cheaper than they were when they first came out and they just work and work well.