Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Burris Signature Select 3-12x44??

Anybody have or use one? Havn't found much in searches. I'm interested in one, but can't find one locally to look at, so I'd have to order it. How do they stack up against VX3's, Conquests, Monarchs, and the new Bushnell Elite's? Opinions appreciated. Would most likely be going on my TC Icon WS .300WM, but could see duty on a few other rifles.

How about a good, old fashioned "I don't know."

I have used and hunted with a Signature Select 3-10 x 40 for the last six years: Signature Select 3-10 x 40 At that time: To make this a thorough test, I decided to compare this scope heads-up in image quality against a Leupold Vari-X III 3.5-10 x 40mm Mil-Dot, a Sightron SII 3-12 x 42mm Mil-Dot, a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-10 x 40mm, and a Bushnell Elite 4200 2.5-10 x 40mm. The results may surprise you, as they did me.

Snellen eye charts, the ISO 12233 resolution chart, and Joel Schneider's block letter eye charts were all used to test image quality. Additionally, the scopes were all viewed in blind comparison tests before sunrise and after sunset in the field grading contrast of various hues of brown grasses, shoreline, and cattails before, at, and after the water's edge at 100-150 yards.

All of the scopes compared were found to be competent for big game hunting during legal North American hunting hours. When it came to image clarity, a subjective blend of brightness, contrast, resolution, and the ability to distinguish detail, the Burris finished at the top in a virtual tie with the Bushnell 4200. I found the Burris Signature Select 3-10 x 40mm to have at least equal image quality to the Elite 4200, if not marginally higher contrast.

So, that scope optically, seemed in the same league with the 4200 at that time. But, I've not used a 3-12 x 44.

I have a 3-12x44 mil-dot on my AR15 - it's on par with a VXIII, but as good to a Conquest in my eyes. Eye relief is shorter, about 3.25" pending magnification.

Either way, a Sig-Select isn't going to cause you to miss a shot. My only complaint is that they are somewhat heavier.

Thanks for the responses so far! Randy, I had read your review of the 3-10x40, and liked what I read. Thank you as well rnovi! Surprisingly, I've found it virtually impossible to find anything, anywhere on the 3-12x44. Had me wondering if there was something wrong with them that I had missed. I like the idea of the 44mm objective for potential shots in low light for a hog hunt in Texas later this year. Please keep them coming!

You're getting into a fairly crowded area. The 3-12 SS is around $480, as best I can tell. You'll have to ask yourself what magnifications you are likely to actually be shooting at. For me, it wouldn't often be above 6X, normally less than that. If that is the case, large objectives don't do much for you.



To the left is a Swarovski Z6 1-6 x 24mm. Optically superb, this 30mm tactical scope goes for $1850 or so, retains a 4mm exit pupil throughout its zoom range, and you'll note that this optic has what many might think is a diminutive 24mm objective. Can you use larger than a 4mm exit pupil?

Reticle selection has a lot to do with it, for in extreme low light running out of reticle is more the issue than running out of image. One of the very best scopes I've used recently, for low light, is a Minox ZA-5 1.5-8 x 32 with a German #4.

Beyond that, illuminated reticles can be a big plus. The Hawke Endurance 30 3-12 x 50 is very, very good in extreme low-light-- 30mm tube, L4 illuminated reticle, and something like $340.

My favorite low-light scope, the Burris Euro Diamond 1.5 - 6, is discontinued. There is also the Black Diamond 3-12 x 50, new for 2011. I have one on it's way, but haven't seen it as of yet. That's a higher price point than the SS, but it has an illuminated reticle.

This really doesn't answer your question but I used to have a Burris Black Diamond 3x12x50 30mm and enjoyed it but ended up giving it to my son and came full circle to the FF II 3x9x40.
I just found that the FF II served my needs just fine.

I don't have any experience with the 3-12x44 but I do have a 3-10x40 Signature Select. At the time I bought it I compared it to the 3-9x40 Conquest, 3.5-10x40 VX3 and the 2.5-10x40 4200. I thought that it was equal to those scopes and I liked the features and the price.

Bought 2 with the posi loc feature for a Africa trip.. Put on 300 WM and 257 roy rifles and took to Africa. The recoil of the rifles moved the POI. POI changed every time I shot them, zero was NOT supposed to change once sighted in a locked in according to their BS claims, missed several animals and ended up having to use the PH's gun. Contacted Burris when I got back and told them what had happened. Sent them in, got a reply back that the scopes were working properly. Told them BS got rid of them and now am making it a mission to ruin their reputation just like they ruined my Africa trip and didn't care one bit that their product failed and couldn't take responsibility for it. My 2 cents, sure there are lots of happy Burris owners, but I will never be one again, I even took off all the Burris scope rings and bases I had on my rifles. [bleep] BURRIS PRODUCTS!!!!

Are you sure that you were using the PosiLock correctly?

When sighting in, if you left the screw loose, then tightened it after sight in, it will often move the alignment.

To get it right, you have to fully tighten the PosiLok each time you make an adjustment, then check to see if it ended up where you wanted it (it often does not, then you have to try again). That is a pain, but it is how it works in real life.

Many people don't. I don't care for it because 1) it isn't necessary and 2) it does change the POI every time you lock it down. It might take a lot of patience to get your rifle sighted in. More patience than I have.

But, it works just as described, even though few use it correctly.

Yes I used it as in the instustions before leaving. While I was practicing I notice changes so I called Burris and they walked me thru it. So it was done correctly. Just sucks a pair of $600 scopes ruined a $15000 safari. Thought I was buying quality scopes that worked as claimed by the company.

I have 4 of the old 3x12x44 mm with the light collectors, two posi locks. None of the scopes has given me any problems.

Two of these scopes have a minimum of 1000+ miles each on them in a scabbord on a horse or mule in some of the roughest terrain that Arizona could offer.

On my posi loc scopes, I never even locked them down...just used them as regular scopes.

pdkillr, sorry to hear of your bad fortune.

Should have just stuck with my Sightrons, but their BS adverstising had me convinced.

I had a posi lock on a 7 RM for about twenty years. Did have to send it back to be refilled with gas after my brother unscrewed the lock all the way. Other than that, no problems. POI didn't even change when locking it down...
pdkillr...next time you're having problems with any of your equipment, leave it at home. There's nothing made by man that can't have problems. Heading off to Africa with something you know is a problem, isn't the smartest thing to do.

Alex38, I'll share my Burris Signature/Pentax Lightseeker experience. The reason I added the Pentax Lightseeker is mine was made by Burris. I had a Signature 1.5x6 and liked the scope. My 2x8 Lightseeker is a twin to a Signature 2x8 for all purposes. The glass is better than a VX-II and at least as good as a VX-III. I still have the 2x8 on my 243. The only complaint I have with them is the eye relief seems to be measured from the rear lens and not the end of the scope so it's about 1/4 short.

The stats shows the 3-12x44 having 3" of eye relief at 12X. That's too short for me on a rifle that will have some recoil.

If you use over 10x and plan to shoot long ranges a scope with an adjustable parallax may be needed.

That 1.5X with a 6mm objective is the smallest I have ever heard of.

I've owned the Sig. Select 3-12x44, FFII 3-9x40, Conquest 3-9x40, a few Leup's, etc. The Burris is optically on par with the Conquest, but I honestly couldn't see enough difference between the FFII and Sig. Select to justify paying 3x more. The scope is also heavy, but it is built like a tank. Anything man made can fail, but these are some tough, clear scopes.

+1 What Jordan said, I've owned most all those scopes at one time or another and found them to be very good but the FF II has been my "go to" scope for alot less $$$.
I really like the standard plex for my aging eyes in low light situations.
This thread reminded me of Michael Douglas in the movie "Ghost in the Darkness" when he said.... "you went in to battle with a non-proven weapon?

Thank you to everyone for the information. I ended up going with a 2.5-10x50 Monarch. Not exactly what I started off considering, but what ended up forcing me away from the Sig Select was that the distributor that my local guy buys Burris from had no Sig Select 3-12's in stock. He couldn't get me one as soon as I wanted it, but I got a heck of a deal on a new Nikon. I put the Nikon on my .300 last night, but have not yet been able to shoot it. Is it normal to be able to see a bit of the end of the barrel through the scope at the lowest magnification? Never had that happen with any of my other rifles, but then again, none of them have a magnification lower than 3, and none of them have a 50mm bell. Was thinking maybe that would go away after I got the rifle zeroed, perhaps in just needs to be adjusted up and the end of the barrel will leave the sight picture? Thanks!