Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Set and Forget

Anyone have any experience with the Burris Fullfield linked here?

Does it hold zero?

https://cameralandny.com/shop/burri...0135-de2f-00163e90e196?variation=1693884

I have a few Burris scopes and have had a few others. I have never had any issues. The eye relief is somewhat short. Optical quality is good. Easy to dial in.

Not the E1, but I just received my regular FF2 yesterday. My only actual experience with that one is five shots fired through a Kimber wearing one a couple years ago. The one in hand looks solid, with solid clicks and clear glass. A quick check with a flashlight indicates eye-relief won't be a problem. Positive reports from many here make me think this one's gonna stick, and get company as needed, a new "standard" model for me as a S&F hunting scope, replacing the ones I used to buy from You-Know-Who.

We had to send one of the exact ones back in cause it went wonky on us. Now the plain old FFII’s have been real good for us. My favorite scope to use if I am zeroing and just leaving it.

Yes. The E1 reticle is funky in my opinion. I like the ballistic plex or plex better.

They work, but I do find the Burris very short on eye-relief and very short on low light performance, if any of that matters to you.

I have the 3-9x40 with #4 illuminated reticle and it has held zero so far on a Howa Mini 6.5 Grendel. Love the scope. No problems with eye relief but not great Low light as others mentioned. Still a great scope for money in my opinion.

Have two trips to the range with a FFII 3-9 with ballistic reticle. Looked through the E1 reticle and chose the FFII instead. The FFII definitely doesn't have the Leupold eyebox, although at 3x it's tolerable. My concern is turned up to 9x and in a contorted position trying to make a shot on a critter with a light rifle I might be getting a little too close to the ocular.

By gum, the Burris did adjust accurately when sighting it in, but I haven't and don't intend to dial it.

MD has mentioned they are reliable.

But I haven't found anything that matches the brightness, eyebox, lightweight and smallish dimensions of my Leupold 2.5-8's for a hunting rifle. And yes, my 2.5-8's hold zero......

And as mentioned, for the money it's a lot of scope.

probably about the best cheap scope out there these days, especially since nikon folded the tent.

Yes. The reticle is OK for a range toy, but I wouldn't use it on a big game hunting rifle. Search for vids and pics online, to get an idea.

Thats what i have used for years. The 3-9x40 with ballistic plex reticle. I have them on most of my hunting rifles. The next ones that i like is the Zeiss conquest

Ive been using them for almost 20 years now. No problems with them whatsoever. I put a lot more faith in the FFII than i do any L scope. Ive used the FFII on everything up to 9.3x62mm and 375H&H. in fact, just in the last week i bought 2 FFII 3-9x40's and 1 NXS 3.5-15x56. We cant all afford the ACTAR or schmidt and bender, so we use what we know works. And for a fairly lightweight, reasonably priced hunting rifle scope, the Burris FFII 3-9×40 is hard to beat.

I guess if you opened the link you'd know that's not what you've been using for almost 20 years. But that would require some work and understanding on your part.

The poster you quoted was talking about the E1 Reticle, you ain't.

BSA1917hunter???

I have been looking at the reticles. Not sure sure about the E1. Wish the posts were longer but maybe I am not seeing it right?

I have the ballistic Plex e1 on my Veracity and it looks different. I love that reticle and have no need to dial for the hunting I do.

He can’t help himself.

You're seeing it right.

I've had three of those with 30mm tubes and slowly worked my way up the scope chain replacing them as I got more expensive scopes. I'm down to my last one that's getting replaced with a LRTS I got from Doug. If that E1 reticle would have had a heavy plex around it, it would have saved me a lot of money. I like those scopes a lot for what they are.

It's a funny thing, this last one has stuck around so long because of the quality of the box. It's great to stick a spare scope in and take on a trip.

The e1 reticle sucks. I was agreeing with scotty about the ffII. I also prefer it over the newer E1

What?

Thanks. Not interested in that.

That was my point. Thanks to Girlhunter for posting that pic.

Jason

Here is the E1 I bought this year. It is an E1 but with the standard plex reticle. Model 200321.

If I had know that the new power ring was so large, I would have bought the FFII. I had to go to medium dual dovetail rings to get the bolt handle on my Rem 700 to clear.

I like the scope but it may be no better than the standard FFII.

https://www.opticsplanet.com/v/200321-burris-fullfield-e1-3-9x40mm-1in.html

Prices jump all over. Just wait until the one you want hits a low point.

I definitely prefer the ballistic plex of the FF II to the new one. The E1s look like a cosmetic redesign, though
I suppose coatings or other details may have changed. Like the look of the old one better too. Found one with the BP on Amazon for $159, free shipping (but with sales tax). Still looks like the best price overall on that particular one.

I bought four closeout Hawkes over the last couple of years for from $100-$200 ($200 for the 8x56). I'd say the quality overall is similar, and the Hawkes are all illuminated and have long ER, but the clicks on the Burris are much more positive, and naturally without illumination, they're a little lighter. All decent scopes. None of them have the fuzz, lint, whatever, on the reticle like my VX-5HD 2-10 has; WTF is THAT?

That Ballistic Plex Reticle looks pretty damn simple.

I have 3. Haven't had any issues as of yet.