Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics WTF's wrong with Burris??

Ballistic plex

Click on the first box that says “reticle analysis”
You don’t have to log in to use it

Thank you!!

I'm very thankful to Burris for being one of the first (if not the first) scope company to put a ballistic reticle in their LER line of optics for specialty pistol shooters. Their LER version of the BPlex reticle (subtensions are different) help start many SP shooters on the journey of long-range shooting back in the '80's. Ernie Bishop and I competed in the International Tactical Rifleman's Competition up in Gillette WY in 2004, and did pretty good against the rifle boys thanks to the 3-12X Burris's/BP reticles we had on our Gre-Tan built XP's.

I have gone back more to the fixed scopes. It is sad to see them go. That is part of the reason why the SWFA scopes are becoming so popular. My favorite scope overall. No screwing with a power ring.

CC:


Thanks for talking the time to reach out and explain your process.

Please feel free to post your reply here if you choose. No objections from me; it's your process and explanation.

I do have a few more questions, but I'll wait until you post, unless you'd rather I pm you?

CC:


Thanks for talking the time to reach out and explain your process.

Please feel free to post your reply here if you choose. No objections from me; it's your process and explanation.

I do have a few more questions, but I'll wait until you post, unless you'd rather I pm you?

Yep. I bought a couple of Muzzle Loader Swarovski's on the used market for a great price. I just focus on the main reticle & have had no trouble.

I’ve never even had any problem with 2.5x at that distance.

I've become pretty fond of their Ballistic Plex E1. I'm not a big time dialer but the Veracity has been solid both dialing and taking being banged around alot. On 5x, the reticle almost fills the field of view. At 2x it mostly worthless but I've used it on 4x without issue.

I'm also with MD on the FF II E1. I had several on deer rifles and they are solid set/forget scopes.

If i wanted a plain crosshair scope, I'd go FF II E1. For hunting/dialing, I'd look at the Veracity. Mine has a few beauty marks from 2 seasons of elk hunting. I'll shoot it next week and will bet it hasn't moved......

I like more magnification than 6, but then I am pretty fussy with shot placement
Moot point anyhow for me, my 3-9 scopes basically stay on 9, been doing that since I was a teenager

I agree with you on both the FF E1 and the Veracity. I don't think there is a better low power set and forget scope on the market for the money than the FF E1. Especially when you could find them on sale for $150ish. Put them in a tough mount and they are pretty idiot proof. I also found that the M.A.D. system turret dials work for the FF E1 one day playing with the dials for the Four-X series of scopes.

I also like the FFP of the 2 - 10 X 42mm Veracity E1 I put one on a 308 AR and then added 2 more for 338 Federal and 358 Winchester ARs. Once I got the dope figured out and verified for the hash marks, I find it a very easy to use system with all 3 rifles. I even ordered the correct elevation dials from Burris even though I have not used them yet.

I may take off my VX-3i 2.5-8 With their duplex and replace with my Fullfield II with the B-Plex. I strongly dislike Leupold’s duplex as there is nothing it’s really good for. The B-Plex might even be better in low light and dark timber. That Burris has been a very solid scope.

How about LEARNing how to use the reticle and how to shoot game beyond 300 yards ?

It's not that difficult if you toss the mini cartridges away and get something that offers the same velocity/energy at 600 yards as the lil shyts do at the muzzle, and PRACTICE ... A LOT....

most guys screw up their hunt before leaving the house due to their cartridge and optics choices.....

I know a guy that worships his dumb 45-70 levergun and claims it's the best "moose thumper" ever, problem is he never gets a moose, skunked every year because the moose ran off before he could get in range .... stupidest thing I ever heard , could have dumped the moose at 500 yards with a 300 RUM like I do

the ballistic plex reticle and the christmas tree reticles are your best friends who want to help you to LEARN how to shoot .... you just don't know it

Some of the hard heads never learn. Recently, one of the guys in my hunting gang got into a discussion as to why he would not shoot at a good mule deer about 325 yards away. He has a really nice old Savage LH .308 bolt gun with very good wood and a pos 4x scope with a fine wire crosshair that you have to get a flashlight to see through. I think he has realistic reservations about shooting past 200 yards with his favored 180 gr Core-Lokt (ugh) ammo. I’ve tried to convince him to upgrade to a Burris FF II and get some better BC ammo and practice out to 300 yards to no avail. It does save money on processor fees to not kill anything. Maybe he should stay with stick and string? Happy Trails

Well, yes, assuming only moderate wind. 300 yards isn't far outside MPBR for most full-power cartridges so it'll more-or-less be a dead hold.

BDC reticles are for longer shots than that, and those with wind holds are for windy conditions. In New Mexico, 25mph sustained winds are not unheard of and that speed WILL affect your POI. My preferred .270 load will drift nearly 23" at 350 yards in a 25mph full-value wind. Personally, I'm not willing to take a shot on a game animal at longer than 300 yards, but paper and steel targets are obviously a different story. My favorite general-purpose reticle is a 4.2 MOA triangle (German #1-style) in a Trijicon TR24, it'll do the trick in a 5.56 carbine to 400 yards and a bit beyond. It's all about knowing your holds and being able to correctly and consistently field-range targets.

BDC reticles don't necessarily bother me. What do bother me are reticles completely dependent on illumination for fast/low-light usage - it's concerningly popular to use tiny reticles floated in the middle of the optic without bars and/or a post to draw the eye to them. This is especially troublesome on FFP optics, where the reticle will be quite small at lower magnification settings.

I wouldn't say there's any particular reticle I don't like other than one I cannot see in dim light.

I have not purchased or used an FFP scope, and part of the reason is that the change in visibility of the reticle as magnification is changed is bass-ackwards in my way of thinking. I'd rather have a reticle I can always see regardless of the zoom. If the target is far enough away to merit the use of graduations on the reticle, then it's far enough away to justify the use of dull magnification IMO and that is why I continue to prefer SFP.

As far as dots and ballistic reticles go, I really can't see why it's so hard to use plain old holdover even with a plain duplex reticle. If I know something about the size of my target and the range it should be no problem. If I am trying to center a basketball at 400 yards and I know I'm dealing with an 18 inch drop I have no doubt I could do it, but I damn sure can't do it if I can't see the reticle. Same thing should apply with wind. But, I'll accept the idea that there are limitations. I would not try Kentucky holdover any further than about 450---depending on the bullet, it's BC, its velocity, and the size of my target and maybe a few other things (including "how do I feel today?").

The fact of the matter is, if your range estimate or your wind estimations are bad enough, you'll miss no matter what scope or reticle you're using.

YMMV.

Interesting views on both sides of this topic. I like the plain old duplex because it suits my hunting needs. I don't have shots over 200 and most are under 100 for deer. I typically set my variables on 4x and forget them. I would have all duplex fixed 4 or 6x scopes if they were easier to find. As far as variables go I like the leupold vx III 2.5-8, it works for menamd that's what matters. I bought a Burris 2-7x32 handgun scope with the ballistic plex for my 44 mag. Ran 24 rounds under it, I don't like it and have no interest in "learning" it It's to busy for my old eyes and is going to be listed for sale soon. If I had a need for a ballistic plex scope I wouldn't be against it, it's no different than pins on a compound bow but the need isn't there.

I am kinda surprised at how civilized this thread actually has been so far. Kudos to all participants, and thanks.



Indeed.

One thing I have observed is that shooters seem to get hooked on hitting targets at extended ranges once they have tasted success.

I always wondered where the fascination with long range shooting originated and I concluded that 21st century operations in Iraq and the M.E. put the spotlight of glamor on snipers, but I more recently remembered the "extreme sports" phenomena of the 90s. Maybe that has a lot more to do with how shooting and optics have changed over the last couple of decades.

I have not played the long/extended range game as of yet, but I've been playing musical scopes on about fifteen different rifles over the last few weeks. I decided to put my "proof" scope, a SS 10x with mil-dot reticle on a Model 70HV in .223 and I've ordered some 70-grain RDFs from SPS. I know the rifle will shoot, so I'll be doing preliminary load development at 200 yards (furthest distance available at the club). Once I think I've got a load that works I'll see about shooting on my employer's property. They do a lot of extended range shooting out there as Huskemaw dealers.

I can't predict how it will all go, but I'm willing to try something new.