Burris 1.75-5x20 Fullfield II - Changes?

I would like to buy the Burris 1.75-5x20 for my Marlin 336.  I have been lurking on this form for weeks, and the smart people here have influenced my decsion.  This Burris sounds like a great value in a low-mounting low-power scope.

 

The only quibbile I have is that my gun is glossy blue, and the current production scopes are not.

 

It seems that Burris used to make this model in gloss finish, but now just make it in matte and camo.  I have found some (old manufacture?) gloss scopes on the internet.  Is the glass on the older scopes as good as current production?  The sites that are selling the glossy scopes are more expensive than SWFA.  I would hate to pay more and get lesser quality.

 

Another option would be to save $35 and get the Weaver K 2.5x20, but with the new Hornady ammo I would like the option of dialing up the magnification for the occasional 200 yard shots.

 

Thanks in advance.

If you are considering a Weaver K series, why not a K4. I used one on a Marlin lever action for a couple years before upgrading to a Nikon 4X. For an inexpensive lower power scope, my personal favorite is the Weaver V3.

If it is a Fullfield II, than it is the same scope as currently produced, just with a different finish.

As for Weaver scopes, V3 is a very nice little scope with a true 1x at the bottom end.  However, if you want to shoot a little further out, 1.75-5x20 offers a bit more versatility.  Optically, Fullfield II is a bit better than V3, but both will impress you with how good they are for the money.

ILya

wecole wrote: I would like to buy the Burris 1.75-5x20 for my Marlin 336.  I have been lurking on this form for weeks, and the smart people here have influenced my decsion.

 

By "smart people" are you referring to koshkin??   

 

Welcome to the OT!!!.....

(Humbly submitted by us "less intelligent" OTer's.)  

I am not sure what Burris' sales numbers are, but I strongly suspect, that I am not the only person who uses low range Fullfield IIs out there. 

Besides, what is the alternative you propose?

If it's that 1.5-4.5x20 Nikon of yours, than you'd better look at them side by side.  Besides that Nikon, depending on the model, is adjusted to be parralax free either at 75 yards (duplex model) or 50yards (Turkey Pro Model).

ILya

koshkin wrote: Besides that Nikon, depending on the model, is adjusted to be parralax free either at 75 yards (duplex model) or 50yards (Turkey Pro Model). ILya

 

You been reading up on Nikon specs, huh???   

That makes me happy.....

 

Don't tell me......Your next scope is going to be a S/F Buckmaster!! 

 

Just wanted to remind you, that I nver said anything bad about Nikon scopes.  As for my next scope, it is going to be a low range variable of some sort.  Current candidates are Fullfield II 1.75-5x20 and Weaver Grand Slam 1.75-5x32, although I am also considering trying the new FUllfield II 2-7x35.

Ilya

Burris offers a lot of low powered scopes, to be sure.

 

I checked out a FFII 3-9 the other day was very impressed.

Edge to edge clarity, lightweight, and compact.

Perfect for some applications.

FFII has been one of the best scopes for the money for a while now, although they truly became popular only with the introduction of BPlex reticle.

One of the things I like about Burris is that they do not make any truly low end scopes like Nikon's Pro-Staff and Leupold's Rifleman and VX-I.  Decent scopes are getting more and more affordable.  I am not sure what Leupold and Nikon were thinking when putting their name on crappy glass.

ILya

koshkin wrote: One of the things I like about Burris is that they do not make any truly low end scopes like Nikon's Pro-Staff and Leupold's Rifleman and VX-I.  Decent scopes are getting more and more affordable.  I am not sure what Leupold and Nikon were thinking when putting their name on crappy glass. ILya

 

I couldn't agree more, Brother.

 

The Pro Staff and Rifleman are pretty bad, and the VXI isn't much better, if any. 

Thanks Folks. 

 

JPinSC,  That Weaver V3 sounds good, and I am debating between that and the K 2.5 for my muzzleloader.  BTW, my in-laws are from the Greenville area.

 

koskin, thanks for confirming that the glass hasn't changed recently on the Burris.  That Weaver Grand Slam you are considering costs about twice as much as the Burris!  I'd love to hear if you decide it is worth it.

 

cheaptrick, if it is any consolation, I am considering a Nikon for my son's 30.06.  The FFII 3x9 is also in the running.  I hate to admit it, but the free bino special that Burris is running on the 3x9 might influence my decision.

 

I wish the IRS would hurry up with that refund check!

wecole wrote: cheaptrick, if it is any consolation, I am considering a Nikon for my son's 30.06.  The FFII 3x9 is also in the running.  I hate to admit it, but the free bino special that Burris is running on the 3x9 might influence my decision.

 

Yeah, that 3-9 with the free binos thrown in is a good deal.

I think some models of Burris, maybe the FFII's, offer a spotter with your purchase, instead of the binos .

That's nice.

The newer Burris-after 2002- are much better optically than the earlier scopes. I really like the Signature Safari with the post reticle. It is  the fastest target acquisition I have ever used.
 I lost a Zebra to an older Burris at dark. Just could not see him. The new scope is better.
 I have one or two of the Fullfields and they are decent scopes. I have them on relatively light kicking rifles. I put  a steel tube Weaver 2.5X on my 416 and so far so good.

There is a difference between Fullfield and Fullfield II, but I do not think that Fulfield II has changed glass since its introduction.

 

ILya