Other than one $80 Bushnell Banner (good scope for the money) I've bought nothing but Leupolds over the past 30+ years. I like Leupolds and their service has been great the few times I've needed it. Still have five or six of their scopes.

Because of the favorable comments here re the FF2 and the favorable price $149.97 & free shipping I bought one a couple of weeks ago. Had it to the range twice.No problem understanding why it's so well liked. The only way I see where Leupold has it beat is the eyebox. The Burris doesn't give me as quick a target acquisition as the Leupold. For anything that requires me getting on target fast I'd still want a Leupold, once I got it sighted in. The FF2, IMO, has good clear glass and windage & elevation adjustments are right on, which saves a lot of time and ammo/money unlike some of the Leupolds I've bought in the past few years.

So far, so good with the ones I've bought too. Bushnell Trophy scopes have all been fine too, and at even lower prices. I like the Burris better though, but wish the E1 was available with a standard duplex.

to me the leupold user friendly eyebox is there best feature.

Ed

Pappy348- Not sure if it is a current offering, but a Fullfield E1 3-9X40mm w/ a Plex Reticle sits in my safe, waiting for a rifle. The item # is 200321. I purchased it in April of 2019.

Fan of the Burris myself. I have one on a M&P 10, 308. Pretty impressed with it. And it’s hard to beat the eye box of a Leupold. It’s the reason they’re on all my hunting rifles.

personally , I see no problem whatsoever with the FF2 eyebox


have made a number of quick shots with FF2 s

+1

I've made plenty of quick shots on game, with the FFII 3-9x40, as well. If you have the scope positioned properly, there is absolutely no problem with the sight picture. Should be instant,as soon as you lay your head on the stock. If not, it's not the scopes fault..

Not listed on their website now, but the Fullfield IV 2.5-10x42 has it, whenever they show up. Don't need any scopes right now, have some homeless ones on the shelf. Those scopes are described as Airgun capable, btw, a good thing.

I bought a E1 3-9 not long ago, and it was a 30mm, surprise surprise, also discontinued.

They have some new stuff on the site, how much actually available, who knows.

Brought to you by Field & Stream.

Burris ER/eyebox is lacking, not as bright, but if you hunt by the seat of your pants or are a F&S subscriber, they are perfect.

I have one of those also, bought 2 or 3 years back. It came from Midsouth or Natchez I think as a special purchase, might have been for European market.

I'm curious as to how good the new Burris Fullfield IV 2.5-10x42 will be.

Maybe Doug from Cameraland and chime in and give us his opinion on these vs the Leupolds.

They also have a Signature HD rifle scope line coming out sometime too which interest me. Especially the 3-15x.

Optics Planet carries the 200321.

not sure what F&S has to do with it , but if you have trouble making a quick shot with a FF2 , maybe walking and chewing gum is also an issue ?

Well, I never knew my real mom and dad [bleep] a bunch of SD retards, so maybe you are right.

Same-o here...

Is this the standard plex or their ballistic plex?

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/13717504/burris-e1-3-9x40-deal-alert

Have been trying to stay out of the "eyebox" comments, but finally find I cannot.

I agree with this comment: "not sure what F&S has to do with it , but if you have trouble making a quick shot with a FF2 , maybe walking and chewing gum is also an issue ?" Here is some more technical stuff:

"Eyebox" is a term for the slightly longer near-maximum exit pupil that's a result of slightly longer eye-relief.

I looked up the eye relief of both the latest Leupold of the same basic size and price, and the Fullfield II 3-9x, and the difference in listed eye relief is about 1/2" in the two, when set at the same magnification. This is a lot like saying there's a major difference between 38D and 36D bra sizes.

Here I must admit to not using the latest Leupold 3-9x (whatever the model is) in the same price-point, but have actually measured the eye relief in a number of 3-9x40 FFIIs, and their listed numbers are spot on.

I have been using 3-9x40 FFIIs for a long time now (along with the Pentax scope that was the same scope with a different name), and have killed a BUNCH of big game with them from pronghorns to my biggest bull elk, both in body and antlers. My suggestion to those who are so sensitive to "eyebox" is to practice more, with all their rifles and scopes.

The 3x9 Burris FFII’s are champs until you spend a whole lot more money in my book. I’ve always thought they were very easy to get behind and they actually move pretty well.

This may have been asked before, but how do the FF 2's compare with Bushnell 4200's?

I'm probably making too quick a judgement assuming Leupold's better at getting me on target for a fast shot as I've never tried a fast shot with the Burris. I've only had it for a couple of weeks and it's on a ground squirrel rifle. I'm basing my opinion on it taking me longer than it would have with a Leupold to get the Burris mounted where the eye relief worked for me and in the past I've never had a problem hitting on fast shots with a Leupold.

Based on this scope I'd get another Burris FFII next time I buy a 3-9. As I said initially IMO they have good glass & their adjustments work. Sight in's a lot easier when the adjustments show up on the target where they're supposed to.

Thanks. Optics Planet says "plex" but their pictures show, and the description says, ballistic plex. I wonder which it really is.

Mike check out the Burris website...it should be able to answer the question for you.

I did. It's ballistic plex, but the item number is also a bit different - 200320 vs 200321.

OK..I'm just guessing but the 200321 is probably the E-1 reticle..

I was searching for a 200323 which is the German 3P#4 reticle...no luck..

But I bought a 1.75-6X with that reticle instead...to go on a calling rifle.

I just sent a note to Optics Planet. We will see what comes back.

Leupold?

No it was a Burris, with a 30mm tube. Much of my calling is done at night so I didnt feel the need for more than 6x and I DO like that reticle ( illuminated) at night!

Which is this?

I have one of the 3-9x40 E1 30mm tube scopes bought on closeout cheap a couple of years ago. While I think it is a good scope, the E1 Ballistic Plex reticle takes a bit of getting used to. I replaced it with a Burris FourX 1.5-6x illuminated dot reticle that I bought from Doug a while back. Not sure what I’ll do with the E1. Happy Trails

To save you the angst of interacting with Optics Planet's customer service, here you go.

Outstanding!!!

I purchased two of those for just under $200.00/scope. I mounted one on a Model 70 Featherweight 30-06 and the other on a T3x Tikka 260 Rem. At 200.00 per copy, the fit and function of my E1 plex scopes work just dandy for me.

Mike- I should have used agony instead of angst when dealing with OP CS.

I have heard way too many credible complaints about Optics Planet to do business with them. Whatever they have, I can find for a better price elsewhere.

Nobody else sells this scope that I can find. I still do business with OP when the price is right and when it's a simple order and delivery goes well enough. But when their CS gets involved, look out.

Thanks for the warning!!

Yep, that is exactly the one I have.

Mike, FWIW I like the Burris E1 line slightly better than the FF II...can't really explain why, just seems more better for me...

Used a 3-9x40 E1 the first year they came out on prairie dog shoot south of Miles City sponsored by several companies, including Burris. The guy running the deal (who was not affiliated with any of the companies) thought the E1 was optically very bright and sharp--but dunno how many FFIIs he'd ever used, if any. I couldn't tell any difference optically, but did find the elevation clicks very repeatable. Have a couple E1s on my rifles now, both varmint rifles.

Also don't know they differ in other ways from FFIIs, Do know the 3-9x40s are listed as being exactly the same length and weight, with the same eye relief, in both models. And the ones I have check out the same in all those things.

Have an E1 4.5-14 on my Mini Grendel. Zeroed at 100, then used the Burris ballistic app on their website to figure the magnification setting that put the first hashmark below center on at 200. Bingo! right on the money. Pretty good considering my velocity was guestimated.

Only complaint is that the Ballistic Plex seems a bit fine in shadows. Maybe I'll pop for an illuminated FF IV.

Well, I'll be damned. I haven't heard anyone on this thread saying " I'd never buy any scope made in China" Your Fillfield II's are. Me, I personally don't give a damn. If it's a good scope for the money and I want it, I'll buy it. A couple of years ago and recently, I have commented on a couple of threads that, In 5 to 10 years or so, many of the best rifle scopes will be made in China. And, they will be priced below the best produced in Europe and America. Hunters and shooters will be lining up to buy them, even the ones that are now screaming, " I'd never buy a scope made in China". It's kind of like the oil thing. If oil were to get scarce, people will not care how many people have to be killed to get it. They will be lined up at the gas pump with money in their hands. Sorry for the off track rant. RJ

The Fullfield II scopes I have were made in the Phillipines .

One quick question: what is the mounting length of the 3-9?

This is where I got my info. https://www.optics-trade.eu/en/burris-fullfield-e1-3-9x40.html I suppose that it could be incorrect. If the info is incorrect, Phillipines today, China tomorrow. I believe the stuff I said about China, concerning rifle scopes, will come to be. RJ

How many times are you going to state this and be shown you're incorrect? https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...ight-options-alt-to-leupold#Post14707850

rj308,

The whole "where are FFIIs made?" question has long been known--and Burris did NOT just go to a company in the Philippines and say, "Make us a scope something like this."

Instead, Burris supplied the machinery to the Philippine company, which was identical to the machinery Burris used when they made Fullfield IIs in the U.S., and also trained the Philippine company how to use it. (The lenses were already being made in Asia, so they did not change at all.) I reported on this years ago, comparing one of my American-made 3-9x FFIIs with a Philippine scope, and the only difference I could find was slightly better machining of things like turret threads, and overall finish--in favor of the Philippine scope.

I still have the American 3-9x40 FFII used in that test, and in fact mounted it on a rifle a couple weeks ago to run some tests, because its adjustments are so reliable. But part of the reason they're so reliable is it's the ONLY Fullfield II I've ever had to send back to Burris for repair, no doubt because it's also the ONLY American-made 3-9x40 I still have--so has obviously been used more than any of the several Philippine 3-9x40s I also have, made from shortly after Burris sent the machinery over there until the last year or so.

Might also point out that Burris E1 scopes are NOT Fullfield IIs--the scopes you claim are made in China based off an ad on a website. (Have seen so many mistakes on websites I disregard them unless they are confirmed from more than one other source.) But all the E1s I own are marked made in the Philippines. And the website you posted a link to says ALL the Fullfield IIs (not E1s) are made in the Philippines.

OK, now I feel stupid.... what is "mounting length?"


Its the same length it was when it wasn't mounted.....

The distance between the beginning of the objective flare and the power ring. I think most schematics list it as "Length B" - I know Leupold does - but I can't find that number for this particular scope.

You got me on that one. I don't pay attention to things like that, I just mount scopes as far back as I can get them, JeffO style...I have been ridiculed repeatedly for that, but my coke bottle bottom glasses thank me.

Lots of minutae I don't pay attention to that many do. 50+ years in the reloading game and I have no idea what "run out" is....I routinely load ammo that shoots so much better than my ability to shoot it, that I don't feel the need....

I feel so much better now. I have the tools for measuring it, inherited from my brother, and even mess with them from time to time, but the results always seem to be in the "okay" range, neither bad nor outstanding. My ammo shoots well, stuff dies, life is good.

With you on the scope positioning too. Mine always end up at the rear. My goal is to be able to stay on the stock while running the bolt without marring my perfect nose. The M8 I mounted on my "new" .270 FN yesterday just barely made it.

Then you're not tightening the rings enough.

😛

I've been going to the Philippines since 1997 and I'm here to tell you there's nobody has a better work ethic and more pride in there work than a good Filpino. I'm married to one and she's a great lady. I don't have any problem buying anything made in the Philippines. I love the place and the people. I've been interested in the place all my life. I had an uncle who was a West Point Grad, Class of '39 who was a captain in the 57th Infantry, Philippine Scouts on Bataan and made the death march but died in one of the camps there in 1942 from Diphtheria. He received the DSC posthumously in 1948 for bravery in the Battle of Bataan. My aunt said Wainright was a good man. He presented the award to her and his father in San Antonio after the war. I heard his story all my life. I always said I wanted to go there and see what he went through. I've been down to Marvelous at the tip of Bataan and seen what they went through on that march. When they surrendered they were sick and starved. What they had to climb coming out of Marvelous would be a challence to a healthy person. I don't see how any of them survived.

Anyway, most of the Filipinos never abandoned the Americans. They are a great people.

I don't have any Burris scopes but I have several Philippine made Nikons that are solid high quality scopes. No flies in their soup.

Mike,

I got curious about the "mounting length" of the 3-9x40 FFI when you mentioned, for more than one reason--but will go into more detail about that later. I just measured it on more than one 3-9x40 (and a 3-9x40 E1) and it's just about 5.75".

Had never measured it before, because have never had any difficulty mounting a 3-9x40 FFII on ANY rifle, and have had them on bolt-actions chambered for some pretty long cartridges, including the .300 Weatherby.

The other reason I got curious was more than one Campfire member has mentioned they have difficulty aiming with the 2-7x35 Fullfield II. I haven't have, and like them as well--but have to assume others have difficulty mounting the shorter 2-7x to match their aiming. This isn't because the 2-7x has less eye relief; in fact it has MORE eye-relief at 2x than the 3-9x at 3x, and the same eye relief at 7x as the the 3-9x at 9x--3.1 inches. (And yes, I have checked those numbers on my own scopes, and they're right on, unlike the eye-relied specs listed by some other scope manufacturers.)

So my best guess about why some shooters have difficulty aiming with the 2-7x is the 3-9x's SLIGHTLY longer mounting length. The ML of the 2-7x is 5.5"--with the difference at the front end of the scope, since its eyepiece/magnification ring's length is exactly the same length as on the 3-9x.

You sound like me. Love my scopes as far back as possible and while I have tried to understand what people mean when they discuss run out, I have never bothered with it beyond that.

Like you, I've encountered a lot of misinformation on scope specs, usually from sellers, but at least once from Weaver's own site. I often download catalogs, and the charts in those seem to be pretty reliable.

As to Country of Origin, I think anyone can make good stuff, but some have to have their feet held to the fire to keep them honest. One-time runs are more likely to facilitate cheating than the stuff designed by the seller and rigorously inspected for compliance before the sale. Not buying any more Hawkes in the current political climate, but the ones I have are solid. If the situation continues to decay, I expect some Western companies to start moving away from China. From a news report I saw today, that may have already begun.

Good info JB, and you of course are one whose opinion I value and believe. I was one of those griping about the FFII 2x7...I bought one and to me the eye relief was SO bad I got rid of it immediately. Maybe shoulda tried extension mounts? ( Im no stranger to them...)

Maybe! The ER is the same.

On the other hand, the smaller objective lens of the 2-7x35 reduces the exit pupil's diameter slightly on 7x, which also reduces the "eyebox" slightly.

You knew what it was, maybe just not what it was called. Fair enough.

Thanks, John, that's what I was looking for. I'm thinking about removing a FFII 3-9x40 (30mm) with the German illuminated reticle that Ingwe likes and replacing it with either a regular FFII or the E1. It's on a Zastava M98, which has enough distance between the bridges that a number of newer scopes, with their longer bells and 4.5+/- mounting length, just won't cut it. Thanks again.

Sounds like Covid-induced tinkering to me, Parson. Put a cold towel on your forehead and lie down for a bit; it'll pass.

BTW, I mounted the fourth sight on my crossbow yesterday. Rings for the fifth are in the pipe.

Could be!

Could I ask a favor of anyone who has an E1 and caliper? Can you give me the diameter of the power ring? I want to make sure my bolt handle will clear when mounted in low Weaver rings. I’m pretty sure the FFII is smaller since it’s also part of the eye piece, but I don’t want to buy an E1 if I need to use higher rings.

Thanks

Rev I get 1.74”.

Has anyone played with tracking on them at all?

I've never had any problems with the eye box on the Burris FFII's that I have, although all of them are 3-9x so I can't comment on the 2-7x.

Thank you!