- Thread starter D_TROS
- Start date
I will give some more feedback. Obviously won’t be able to do a side to side again since im shipping the kahles out to its new owner today but I’m very excited to get more time with the pro and compare it to my xtr3 I got last week.
I’m waiting on my invoice for the pro as we speak from liberty optics, any one looking it’s worth a message or a call to liberty optics, I promise
I guess they sold out because I do not see a Burris XTR Pro listed on their website.....am I missing something?I will give some more feedback. Obviously won’t be able to do a side to side again since im shipping the kahles out to its new owner today but I’m very excited to get more time with the pro and compare it to my xtr3 I got last week.
I’m waiting on my invoice for the pro as we speak from liberty optics, any one looking it’s worth a message or a call to liberty optics, I promise
Might not have it set up on the site yet. Give them a call or shoot them a message.
Sam runs a ZCO in Cheyenne. I refused to look through it at the last match when I was running the strike eagle because I didn’t want to get glass envy. I’ll probably shoot that match again at the end of the month and compare them for fun. I know the ZCO should be better but I want to know how much better.I will give some more feedback. Obviously won’t be able to do a side to side again since im shipping the kahles out to its new owner today but I’m very excited to get more time with the pro and compare it to my xtr3 I got last week.
I’m waiting on my invoice for the pro as we speak from liberty optics, any one looking it’s worth a message or a call to liberty optics, I promise
I would like to look through a ZCO. I have looked through premiers, and Schmidt and benders. And honestly couldn’t justify the price. Glass really plays such a small roll in our style of shooting in my opinion. My friend was one of the top finisher in wyco last year shooting a tikka with an athlon Midas Tac. As long as it tracks well and glass is good enough to spot the impacts/misses that’s all you NEED. But nice glass is much more pleasant to use for sure.
ok so I played some more with the brass triangle.
on my 6.5x47 with 20 moa base and 100 yard zero
I have 21.3 mils of up to dial. that was cool to see. (IIRC I had very similar to that on my rimfire with a 50 yd zero)
pulling the triangle out, and pushing the turret all the way down gets me -.7 on my scope. I imagine it will be close with most rifles.
heres the catch I cant believe I didnt think of before, and what the tooless quick detach turret allows: if you loosen the throw lever and lift up the turret even a tiny bit, and re-tighten the throw lever, I instantly had 3 mils under I could dial.
So essentially it is a super easy super fast way to have as much under zero as you desire that you could use in a match situation or leave on all the time.
GL!
DT
on my 6.5x47 with 20 moa base and 100 yard zero
I have 21.3 mils of up to dial. that was cool to see. (IIRC I had very similar to that on my rimfire with a 50 yd zero)
pulling the triangle out, and pushing the turret all the way down gets me -.7 on my scope. I imagine it will be close with most rifles.
heres the catch I cant believe I didnt think of before, and what the tooless quick detach turret allows: if you loosen the throw lever and lift up the turret even a tiny bit, and re-tighten the throw lever, I instantly had 3 mils under I could dial.
So essentially it is a super easy super fast way to have as much under zero as you desire that you could use in a match situation or leave on all the time.
GL!
DT
I figured this was the case, but I didn't want to say anything until I had a chance to play with one.
I’ve looked through a first gen Premier when they first came out and a couple of S&Bs and the glass was indeed nice, not so much the price though. I totally agree with you that there is an acceptable level of glass to get the job done and the rest is just luxury. Nice equipment can help a small amount but it can’t replace determination, practice, or skill.
I've compared the Pro to a 20x ZCO on an overcast day the very first day I took it to the range. I also had a 35x ATACR, an XTR3, and a Cronus BTR along for the ride. I'll let others folks decide how they feel it stacks up to the ZCO, but it definitely left a smile on my face bouncing back and forth. It was pretty clear the Burris had really upped their glass game. The clarity has made a big step up.
I have a theory that mid tier scopes are about to narrow the gap between themselves and "alpha" glass. Six to eight years ago, $1000 to $1500 scopes started hitting the market that were great quality and durability. All they lacked was high end glass, which left a large gap between mid tier and top tier scopes. And they sold like gangbusters, recreating the definition of a mid tier optic. I think that is happening again in the $1700 to $2500 price point. These optics are improving to a point that they are so close to top tier optics that they become an amazingly good value for folks wanting a top of the line optic at less than a top of the line price.
Optics like the Gen III Razor and the XTR Pro are going to cultivate a lot of scope buyers who are more than happy with the quality and features of the optic without feeling like they are missing out on any measurable performance by not buying a ZCO or TT.
Just a theory of mine..
I have a theory that mid tier scopes are about to narrow the gap between themselves and "alpha" glass. Six to eight years ago, $1000 to $1500 scopes started hitting the market that were great quality and durability. All they lacked was high end glass, which left a large gap between mid tier and top tier scopes. And they sold like gangbusters, recreating the definition of a mid tier optic. I think that is happening again in the $1700 to $2500 price point. These optics are improving to a point that they are so close to top tier optics that they become an amazingly good value for folks wanting a top of the line optic at less than a top of the line price.
Optics like the Gen III Razor and the XTR Pro are going to cultivate a lot of scope buyers who are more than happy with the quality and features of the optic without feeling like they are missing out on any measurable performance by not buying a ZCO or TT.
Just a theory of mine..
Ive had a couple premiers. sold because no warrenty. great scopes. have a TT. amazing. dont like the close clicks on the turrets tho. so glad the new PRO has wide spacing. looked though a pile of ZCO's and never owned one. Very nice scopes also. but that price tag. but 2-3 normal nice scopes makes it easy to not buy another again. and I only paid $3k fo my TT.
My best overall 308 finish in a match. Over 100 shooters. ive had 2 top 5's shooting a plain jane xtr2 with shitty glass
super excited the pro offers everything the xtr2 did in tracking PLUS glass, features, retc, etc etc.
as mentioned, there is no crutch for practice practice practice.
GL
DT
I would agree with your theory for certain. It is funny to see mid tier being correlated to a price between $1700-$2500. When you actually think about spending that kind of money on an optic and have it categorized as "mid-tier" is pretty amazing.
I am fortunate to be able to buy whatever I choose to buy. Once you have used tier one, and provided you are honest with yourself, you will have to admit that the image differences are asymptotic. Do I think that my ZCO is better than my S&B and NF ATACR , etc. I think it is but it took a while to really figure out how and why. I am not an image guy quite frankly because after working with optical systems in astronomy for many years, I truly believe that image aberrations are seldom noticeable by eye unless you have a damaged scope or it is really junk. Other than that, you need to do specific optical testing under controlled conditions to produce data that means anything and even then the question is how apparent will it be by eye. I think image "quality" is very personal and subjective.
I buy a scope and KEEP it provided that it arranges a perfect intersection of POA and POI under all conditions and elevation and windage settings. If it can't track...it isn't worth shit to me.
In all fairness, the kahles by far has the worst glass and optical package of all the premium brands. If it is slightly better than a 624, then its still pretty far behind the rest of the pack, including the G3 Razor. At 2K you are into used Minox, NF, March and even S&B prices.
I really liked the XTR3 and thought the glass was great for a $1K scope. For one pushing over the $2K mark, its tough sledding.
Add to the fact Burris can never produce more than a handful of these a week and people will just buy something else they can get now. I spend almost a year trying to get a 318 SCR2 before giving up and just getting another ZCO.
I suppose it will differ for some people, but the ATACR holds that spot to my eyes. I think the Kahles K series has much nicer glass than the NF.
And you're right, production numbers is a challenge for the scopes coming out of Greeley. They are doing their best. They've created high demand optics, now they need to up their game to meet demand.
I am right there with you on the ATACR. To my eyes, the Gen 2 razors and many of the other LOW OEM optics look just as good if not better than the ATACR until you get into the 7-35. I still think the 624 and even 525 looks horrible for the price they fetch. Doesn't mean you can't win with them or hit the target, but If I am spending that kind of money, i want glass that is commensurate with it.
I wish Burris would ramp up their numbers. Its kind of a catch 22. I almost never see XTR at PRS matches. They are out there just not in the numbers that make people start to pay attention. The XTR3 IMO was the best bang for your buck optic from 1-1.5K and the glass put everything else in that region to shame. Thin reticle, but not a total deal breaker. Knurling was pretty aggressive but otherwise it was a banger at that price. The problem is no one knew about it. So few are out there, guys don't have a chance to look through one with their own eyes and realize its a really nice design for the money. They can make an amazing optic, but if they can't get them out there in enough numbers, its hard to get traction. I know a ton of guys getting into the rimfire game ect, and don't want to drop $4K on another scope. This is where something like the XTR despite the 50m focus, could really sell a ton of units. Lots of elevation, good glass and nice reticle for shooting small stuff like KYL/TYL.
Instead they will buy athalon and arken garbage because that's what they see other people using and don't realize for a bit more money they could have something significantly better. Sorry for the long winded rant, just something thats frustrating to see in real time.
Yep, all great points. Burris management is aware of it. And with the success of the XTRIII, I think they created some capitol that I hope they are able to channel into growth.
They certainly used some of that money to R&D the Pro. And moving the XTR3i to the Phillipines and selling it at such a competitive price is just going to open more doors. There will certainly be higher production rates on those. And they parallax under 25yds. So definitely a great rimfire option.
Fingers crossed they can get themselves into a position to really crank out those Pros once they have a good feel for the demand.
They certainly used some of that money to R&D the Pro. And moving the XTR3i to the Phillipines and selling it at such a competitive price is just going to open more doors. There will certainly be higher production rates on those. And they parallax under 25yds. So definitely a great rimfire option.
Fingers crossed they can get themselves into a position to really crank out those Pros once they have a good feel for the demand.
tough to compare new prices to used prices...
I would take a pro over these scopes Ive owned (and used in matches) and only the minox, M7 and S&B is close overall:
kahles (sold), USO (sold), Minox (sold), NF (have), March (have), GenII (sold) M5 (sold) M7 (have) and S&B (sold) (old ones that can be had for under $3k) and Im not even sure yet the price on the GenIII. It looks promising but what cost? Lets compare used to used. Ive looked through and shot the Gen3 but didnt get to do a side by side. Promising but not at $3500. Get a ZCO 10/10 at that price (even tho their prices went up also)
Im obviously interested in more than just glass (cost & features) but the PRO has closed that glass gap thank goodness.
the $2k market is very tough sledding for sure and VERY good for us consumers. I think the pro will be at the bottom of the $2k market which none of the scopes above are in other than the Gen2 and M5 and the PRO blows them both away overall. The Gen2 at 1500 tho...very good option. Just hate the locking turret.
I dont expect everyone in PRS to start shooting the PRO but if keeping up with demand is the biggest concern for Burris...then they have a winner.
GL
DT
Extras are posted on the PX, price for yall is $2300 shipped, price for everyone else on here who hasn't been following the forum is listed. Again, I am paying taxes and shipping so the price would be the same or less as if you bought it in a store at MAP depending on state sales tax rate.
The reticle is reported to be a tad thicker in the illuminated scopes (pro and 3i) but the subtension on the website don't reflect that and there are so few out in the wild no one has really confirmed if it makes a notable difference.
I'm hanging out for the xtr3i to surface so can see what the illuminated reticle looks like in the 3 3-18.
same here, maybe my tired older eyes, but i loose these fine reticles too often in the shade or high contrast backrounds. i only have 1 illuminated scope, an older PR 3-15. the reticle is awful small, but i can turn on the illum and see it against the backround if needed. also makes the scope more useable at 3x, at least i can see the crosshair clearly w the illumination on
I don’t have an original XTR III to compare too but I did put up a picture on post 388 with a vortex ebr7c at 25x. The SCR2 slightly thinner than the vortex for reference. I think it’s just about right as far as thickness.
Last edited:
Yep. I thought someone would have put up an informative review by now. Hopefully soon.
I experience the same, used to love the thin reticles when I was younger but my 50+ year old eyes find they get lost in the same situations you mention. The SCR2 was too thin in my 3.3-18 because of this, but I also have the SCR2 in the 5.5-30 and the reticle feels thicker in this scope than it did the 3.3-18. I sold my 3.3-18 for this reason and have been waiting years (literally) for illumination, and it’s finally here (almost… maybe… I’ll believe it when I see it
) I posted old versus new SCR 2 pics on this thread I thought?
@Birddog6424 yes you did, hard to see what (if any) practical difference there is by these pictures though.
Appreciate you tried to make some at 5.5x but didn't have any luck.
The SCR2 in the illuminated 3.3-18 at 3.3x will be where the rubber hits the road as far as reticle thickness goes.
To the naked eye I can see the difference. But its not huge, this isn't suddenly a thick reticle.
I just spoke to the Burris production manager about this last week. He's going to see if he can pull some rank and get the web team to update the reticle photos and information on the website.
Just got my PRO in from @TheHebrewHammer. Fit and finish is good. I'm very happy with the turrets, just the perfect amount of tension and very nice nice clicks. All adjustment knobs are good for tension except the illumination knob. For the life of me i can't get it to turn. I'm going to have to look into this when i have more time. I like the new knurling. It's a big improvement over the dragon scale. I have not had a chance to check out the glass yet.
Also, I didn't get a battery or throw lever. I'm not worried about the battery, but would like to have a throw lever.
Also, I didn't get a battery or throw lever. I'm not worried about the battery, but would like to have a throw lever.
Last edited:
I got mine in today also, I looked through the glass standing on my front porch around last light during rain and I was impressed with the low light quality, ready to get it mounted and compare it to my XTR 3 and also a Steiner m7 4-28.
As Big Timber stated, it was disappointing that a throw lever wasn't in the box but the dial was loose enough to be able to turn it without problems but there was some "bumps" along the dial like it was dragging on something, it didn't make it had to turn but it was noticeable.
Also, it took some effort to remove the race dial and that's when I figured out where the quick release dial was! ha
Lastly a big Thank You to @TheHebrewHammer!!
How is your illumination knob? That thing really has me stumped.
It's smooth, Like the way you change colors for the reticle.
The illumination should turn pretty easy. Rotation is forward to increase brightness and hold at the end to swap colors.
Yeah, mine must be jammed. I'm debating between getting after it with a pliers or just sending it back.
Do you guys have any lash in your turrets? I have a little, but I've noticed on my other burris products, that the turret alignment improves with use.
I also received my XTR Pro from @TheHebrewHammer yesterday, mounted it up this afternoon and hit the range. In short glass is a noticeable improvement over my XTR III especially on the upper half of the mag range, slightly larger FOV when comparing them side by side and colors have more pop. Turret feels great, IMO some of the better turrets I have felt, love the big knob and large numbers, and the new knurling on it seems near perfect, Parallax is smooth, but isn't quite as smooth as my XTR III, but it might get better and smooth out over time. Illumination works great, I love the red and green option! I also didn't receive a battery which isn't a major deal, but I mean I don't think I have ever bought an illuminated scope that did not come with a battery. Mag ring is smooth, again knurling is great, but no throw lever with mine either, which sucks!
I am always a little skeptical getting something that just came out as I feel like there is always some kinks to work out. After almost 3 hours on the range I couldn't find anything I didn't like about this scope. All in all I think this scope is gonna be a hit and I'm not sure if there is anything in this price range that will compare.
I am always a little skeptical getting something that just came out as I feel like there is always some kinks to work out. After almost 3 hours on the range I couldn't find anything I didn't like about this scope. All in all I think this scope is gonna be a hit and I'm not sure if there is anything in this price range that will compare.
Last edited:
Ok, couldn't resist the urge. I wrapped a thin piece of leather around the illumination knob and grabbed it with a pliers. It popped loose and now my illumination works!
I'm not sure what causes that drag. I'll bring it up to the Burris guys.
Mine did it when it was new, but at some point along the way it stopped. Its smooth throughout the elevation now. So whatever it was its broken in.
I would say everything on mine has really smoothed out, parallax, turrets, and mag ring.
I did end up adding a little more tension to my toolless turret throw lever. I just tightened it slightly with the torx bit. It was slipping a little when I took it below zero to bring down my poi. I should have slipped it up a little higher on the shaft though. Bottoming it out on the turret housing is what made it slip. But its good and snug now.
Edit; Reach out to Burris on those throw levers fellas. They will send you one.
It looks like a bunch of early ones got boxed up and sent out without the throw lever and battery. Its Burris' intention to include those in every box. So call the CS and get one!
I got home from work early today and thought I'd do a informal comparison with the pro and my Steiner m7 4-28, first off is the fact I've spent a lot of time behind the Steiner and make some quick adjustments to the pro (it's not mounted yet) so the reticle details wasn't really part of what I was looking at yet except the Steiner reticle on the highest setting is much thicker and earlier for these old eyes to see. The first comparison was around 3 this eve and the Pro seemed brighter on the highest setting and the contrast( if that's the correct term) in details was about the same, on the lowest settings both scopes seemed about equal. I set everything down till sundown at 7:15 this evening, on the highest setting it was still easy to see objects close to at distance but the Pro was now about equal in the brightness. I turned the illumination on in both scopes to see how the Pro would work in low light and with about 30 minutes of light left everything looked good.
At 7:45, the last little bit of light left both scopes had to be cut way down to see anything, I moved my setup so I could look at a target about 200 yards away and at the lowest setting I could see the target with both scopes but the Steiner showed more detail, after cutting on the reticle the Steiner did win because of the fact that only the center was lit and you can turn it down to a very low dim setting that barely glows and the Pro just wouldn't get that dim plus more of the reticle was lit washing out my target. I changed it from green to red and that helped me out but the recticle was still a little to bright. Overall I was very impressed with the Pro, during all but the darkest of light it held it's own against a scope costing 1000 more and even then it wasn't like that big of a difference.
Things I really liked about the Pro over the Steiner is the locking eye piece, which is forever getting bumped and changed on the Steiner. Also liked the feel of the turrets better also but I will say the little button for second revolution is pretty cool on the Steiner, but the ability to change turrets with out tools and quickly is the coolest thing too come down the block!!!
I'm very impressed with the Pro and think Burris done themselves proud with this scope, if I could complain about anything it's I wish you could get the scope with a SCR recticle which is thicker and easier for old eyes to see but they didn't build this scope for old fat men with bad eye sight
At 7:45, the last little bit of light left both scopes had to be cut way down to see anything, I moved my setup so I could look at a target about 200 yards away and at the lowest setting I could see the target with both scopes but the Steiner showed more detail, after cutting on the reticle the Steiner did win because of the fact that only the center was lit and you can turn it down to a very low dim setting that barely glows and the Pro just wouldn't get that dim plus more of the reticle was lit washing out my target. I changed it from green to red and that helped me out but the recticle was still a little to bright. Overall I was very impressed with the Pro, during all but the darkest of light it held it's own against a scope costing 1000 more and even then it wasn't like that big of a difference.
Things I really liked about the Pro over the Steiner is the locking eye piece, which is forever getting bumped and changed on the Steiner. Also liked the feel of the turrets better also but I will say the little button for second revolution is pretty cool on the Steiner, but the ability to change turrets with out tools and quickly is the coolest thing too come down the block!!!
I'm very impressed with the Pro and think Burris done themselves proud with this scope, if I could complain about anything it's I wish you could get the scope with a SCR recticle which is thicker and easier for old eyes to see but they didn't build this scope for old fat men with bad eye sight
Good review, thanks for that.
The Pro making a respectable run at the M7 is nothing but good news for the Pro.
I also wish the mil SCR was on the menu. I hope they decide to add it at some point. Though I feel like it didn't do very well in the XTRIII. Not enough interest so they scrubbed from the Pro in lieu of all grid reticles.
The Pro making a respectable run at the M7 is nothing but good news for the Pro.
I also wish the mil SCR was on the menu. I hope they decide to add it at some point. Though I feel like it didn't do very well in the XTRIII. Not enough interest so they scrubbed from the Pro in lieu of all grid reticles.
I was impressed by it as the Steiner is my favorite scope.
What's strange to me is that Burris has the SCR listed for the XTR3i but only in MOA, I'm looking forward to seeing a review to see how close the 3i is to the Pro.
Just wanted to update for the guys that didn't get a throw lever or battery. I contacted Burris support last night about the missing items via the webpage at 9pm CST last night and got a shipping conformation and tracking number at 9:30am this morning.
Glad to hear they are getting you taken care of.
I got it right from the mouth of the production manager that they want everyone to get those. So the rest of you fellas hop on the webpage and get yours.
Ditto, here too, logged into my Burris account and left a incident report and I had a e-mail with a tracking number first thing this morning!!
Excellent customer service!
Huh... I opened a ticket 13 days ago and was told it would ship when they became available. I haven't received a notification yet.
Just got off the phone with Burris. Got my name on a throw lever.
Spent a few minutes last night comparing the PRO to the ATACR 7-35. Obviously the field of view is better on the Burris (I just dialed to the same marked numbers on the dial), but the parallax was less forgiving than the ATACR. To my eyes the glass was a little better on the PRO than the ATACR.
I've compared this same ATACR to the xtr 3 and I thought the ATACR glass was better than the xtr3. I think the PRO beats the ATACR by about the same amount as the ATACR beats the xtr3. Plus I paid about $1k less for the PRO than i paid for the ATACR.
I think this scope at this price is going to steal some market share.
Spent a few minutes last night comparing the PRO to the ATACR 7-35. Obviously the field of view is better on the Burris (I just dialed to the same marked numbers on the dial), but the parallax was less forgiving than the ATACR. To my eyes the glass was a little better on the PRO than the ATACR.
I've compared this same ATACR to the xtr 3 and I thought the ATACR glass was better than the xtr3. I think the PRO beats the ATACR by about the same amount as the ATACR beats the xtr3. Plus I paid about $1k less for the PRO than i paid for the ATACR.
I think this scope at this price is going to steal some market share.
Wow, that’s saying something for sure. That makes my smile even bigger because the 7-35 was on the short list of options I was looking at.
