https://www.sportsmans.com/hunting-...fullfield-ballistic-rifle-scope/p/314458
How does this scope compare to the fullfield 2?

Fast focus eyepiece. Reticle is etched in the glass

Well for one...when the FF2 said it was ballistic- it had the ballistic reticle. This one mentions windage an elevation dots but shows a traditional Plex.

Burris reticles- E1 has small centralized crosshairs that do not extend to the ends of the ocular view and has pyramiding windage -elevation dots below the horizontal. Like an inverted 'V'

Ballistic plex is the more traditional full length plex with a few elevation dots on the lower vertical

As mentioned, it has the fast focus eyepiece and, if the picture of the reticle is accurate, does not have the Ballistic Plex, just a regular plex. I picked one of these up last year from Optics Planet when they were on sale, only the one I have has a 40mm objective. According to Burris, other than the reticle and eyepiece, it is basically the same scope as the FF2.

Good post. I hate that reticle that does not fully extend. Burris called that the ballistic plex reticle as well and it was not the same as the traditional "ballistic plex" reticle of the FFII that I love. Here's the E1:


However, even though they call the scope in the link "ballistic rifle scope", in the description it says it has a plex reticle. Just be aware of which reticle it is exactly. So here are more differences:

1. E1 is a 1/4 pound heavier.
2. FFII has a more traditional look which is quite a bit more svelte than the more tactical looking E1.
3. Whole eyepiece turns when you adjust magnification on the FFII. Some do not like this feature.
4. Fast focus eye piece on the E1.
5. Ballistic plex reticle in the FFII is a winner and a great selling point for the FFII.
6. The E1 has an unnecessarily big objective and ocular.
7. Similar glass and coatings.

They are second focal plane scopes so you need to carry a cheat sheet to know what the distance between each line/dot is at various powers.

First focal plane solves that problem.

JOC killed everything with a 5 inch Lee Dot on an 2.5x Lyman Alaskan.

I have had and still have numerous FFIIs and only one E1, which was a 4.5-14.
For the reasons already stated by bsa1917, I prefer the FFIIs for the money.

One difference between the "standard" FF2s and the E1 is the elevation turret is designed to be twisted in the field. I tried my first one on a gun-writer prairie dog shoot partially hosted by Burris in 2006, putting it on my very accurate Remington 700 Laminated Varmint, and dialed it up and down for two days for ranges out to 400 yards. It always worked correctly, including returning to the rifle's 100-yard zero.

Have a 3-9x40 E1 now on my CZ 457 .22 Long Rifle, and its elevation dial is similarly consistent.

Don't know how the E1s would hold up on a rifle with more recoil than a .223, but have used the standard FF2s on rifles chambered for cartridges up to the .300 Weatherby Magnum. The only problem I ever had was with the very last American-made 3-9x40 I acquired. After a decade or so, after being on top of a BUNCH of different rifles in various chamberings for a bunch of shooting, started adjusting weirdly on my NULA Model 24 .257 Weatherby Magnum. Sent it back to Burris and they got it back to me two weeks later. It has been (again) working perfectly ever since.

I have a 3-9x40 E1 on a 308. As BSA said it is a more tactical looking scope that the FF2. I use this as a rainy crappy day rifle and it has been fine. Mine has a #4 reticle with an illuminated dot which is exactly what I wanted. I’ve had zero issues but I’m not in love with the reticle

It has been a good scope but the FF2 is more svelte.

About the only gripe I have with the FFII and/or this E1 is that not only is the eye relief a little stunted (I don't stock-crawl), but there is about 3/4 inch difference between ER at 3x vs. 9x. I wish the manufacturers would opt for about 4 inches of fixed ER, sort of like what some of the other manufacturers have done. I know it might move it beyond the $125+/- price point, but it sure would be nice.

I have this one on my 7mm rem mag SAKO 85. works great


Long-Range MOA reticle

https://www.burrisoptics.com/scopes...ries/fullfield-e1-riflescope-4.5-14x42mm

I can’t help with the comparison,but bought one of these on clearance @$130.Decent scope for the price,although I wasn’t impressed with the glass.But the reticle was a strong point,as it was fairly thick for low-light use…

I think that’s a good price for a 50mm, if you need one. I prefer the old-style BP or plain duplex to the E1, but can deal with any of them. Don’t need to dial for the most part, so it’s easy to crank one to the high end for holding, though I have also played with the various apps to figure out what power makes the extra holding points work, just like a crossbow scope. Whatever works works, but only at the range as a practical matter. Don’t see game here at ranges where either method is necessary, and they don’t stand around while you ponder your solution either.

I turned a bunch of folks on to them when Natchezss had them on sale. I love it. Not great for precision shooting as the dot is a bit big but it is my favorite hunting reticle.

I passed up a small bear just before dark tonight and admit that the illuminated dot was outstanding.

Yes I bought that scope from Natchez.

If I need any aiming point on the reticle besides the center, I'm far enough from the target that I'm going to have the scope's power ring maxed out, so no need for cheat sheets.

I updated most of my scopes to E1 ballistic plex's when Cabelas had them on sale, then I joined this forum

Now I have better scopes for backups