I need a scope to replace a less than great one. I'm thinking of the Burris FFII 4.5-14x40 for $300. I have one and it's very nice, and it's comparable to my Leupolds. I want the same or a similar power range (NOT a 3-9 or 3-12). I could buy a Nightforce or Swaro but won't. The Leupold is about $600. The thing is that the Burris is a good scope and is only $300. Is there anything better in that price range. I don't think so, but what do you think?

Zeiss conquest.....period.

www.swfa.com

Weigh your options with its intended purpose. If you're going to invest in a quality piece, make sure it has a lifetime warranty. All choices are good IMO. The Conquest is hard to beat, especially if its still on for $299.

I don't want a 3-9. If I could get a Zeiss 4.5-14 at a good price, I might go for that. Still...the Burris is only $300 and I prefer it to the Zeiss 3-9. I've compared them in my back pasture and on my shooting bench.

Wouls suggest Vortex, but it looks like you mind is made up on Burris. Have only owned one Burris, but will never own another.

Well, Burris is a known quantity to me, as is Leupold. I don't know much about Vortex and their pricing (for their good stuff) looks to be right there with Leupold. I'll recheck prices to see if I'm correct.

The Leupold is a good scope. I hear good things about the Burris and Vortex too.

Only problem with Leupold right now is they are charging for their name. They are not marketing competitive scopes. On their higher end optics you can often spend $200 less and get a better scope. I am a huge Leupold fan, it kills me that they are slipping to other companies.

The Burris is $300 for a good scope. The Leupold is $600 for a better scope, and they might indeed be trading on their name. But, that Zeiss Conquest is a good but not great scope and maybe they are trading on their name also. I don't see the Zeiss Conquest line as better than the Leupold VX3 line. My problem is to determine if the next level of Zeiss or Swaro or S&B is worth the extreme price. I really don't think so, at least not for what I need a scope for. I'm just not willing to spend that much money for a slightly better scope. I can do it if I want to, but I just cannot see the extra small benefit for the way bigger price. I guess bragging rights are worth something, but not if it's my money. Maybe, if this was my primo rifle that I was going to use all the time, I'd spend serious money. But it isn't, so I don't need the best. I need a good scope for the money, and right now I can't see anything better for $300 than the Burris. That's a lot of scope for $300, if my history with the one I have is representative of the line of scopes. And I couldn't care less about not using lens covers on the scope. That isn't of consequence to me. I used lens covers for a while, then took them off and put them in my general use box.

So I'm not saying that Burris is the best. I'm just asking if you have a better suggestion in the range of $300. Or $400. And again...I don't want a 3-9 scope. I want a 4.5-14 or a 4-16 or something similar.

I first purchased a Burris 6X24 Ill w/the lock for around $465 about 10 yrs or more ago for my 22-250, then me and my hunting Buddy purchased the Burris XTR 3X12 Ill, w/Tact Crosshairs a few
years back..I think it ran about $800. All three were good scopes. He got a rifle in trade w/the lower priced Burris on it
and I didn't care for the optics..it was a little Blurry..I've had Leupold Mark 3's, which ran about $825 that were great and I
have Leupold Mrk 4 w/rangefinding rect..Tactical on my TRG and it
is an extremely good, but expensive item. I've shot, zero'd, mounted about every scope made at different times when working at
the Gun Club. Most hunting rifles are all right w/a medium priced scope, but we did used to advise spend about what you spent on the rifle for the glass..you cannot hit what you can't see..Don

I'm a little worried that you find the Conquest inadequate. Count me among the legions who believe that the Conquest is the best buy going now, but different eyes see things differently.

That said, the Weaver Grand Slam is a Best Buy nowadays, and its optical clarity is superior to the Fullfield II:

http://www.natchezss.com/Optics.cfm?cont...rodTitle=Weaver 4.5-14X40 Grand Slam AO Riflescope Ballistic-X Reticle Matte

I have the 4.5x14 on a custom .25-06. I also have 3 3x10 Grand Slams.

The weaver Grand Slams are so underrated it is unbelieveable. I agree they are one heck of a deal going today. Truly the biggest sneaker scope mentioned in this thread. Everytime I am looking at optics I always consider them, but then I get nostalgic and get upset because they aren't made in El Paso anymore.

Hmmm, I admit that I hadn't considered the Weaver. For a time I had a Weaver V10 (2-10x40). It was decent, but it wasn't that great, so I got rid of it and that's the rifle the Burris 4.5-14 is on now. My comparison was the Weaver 2-10 versus the Burris 4.5-14, so it wasn't a comparison of equals. The Weaver had some sort of tunnel view to it that I didn't like. The Burris doesn't have that. The Zeiss Conquest 3-9 that I had for a while was Ok, but it wasn't better than the Leupold. That said, if I could get the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14 for a good price, I'd consider buying it. Then I could straight up compare the Leupold, Zeiss, and Burris in dim light.

Thanks for the heads-up on the Weaver. I'll go look at one.

Check out the prices at nycameraland when you decide.
No tax and no shipping.
Bought a swaro z5 from them.
Great deal!

Lower end burris's would be my last choice of the one you mentioned. I think cameralandny has some demos of the zeiss right now for a rockin price. Call doug and he will hook you up

Ive always been a fan of nikon products

Well, I've been chewing on this for a while now. I'm probably going to get the Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40AO with the Boone&Crockett reticle. Best price I can find so far is $609. I see that maybe I could get the Zeiss 3.4-14 for a bit less, if you count the rebate, but that Z 600 or Z800 reticle is awful busy. I'll see what Cameraland can do tomorrow.

As for the Burris, I've got one FFII in 4.5-14) and it has been a really nice scope. I've been very impressed. It's not the quality of the Leupold, but it is almost exactly half the price. I've found things that I didn't like about a Weaver V10 and a Nikon Monarch (it broke), but there isn't much to complain about on the Burris. The only thing is that the windage and elevation dials aren't as fancy as the Leupold. That's not a big gripe. I'd be perfectly happy with the Burris, but I just want the Leupold (or maybe the Zeiss).

good glass trumps magnification

check out the Meopta Meopro 4-12x50

Better glass than a Conquest or any Leupold

Leupold has always been my favorite. I have, or have had, Burris, Zeiss, Weaver, Simmons, Tasco, Bushnell, and several Leupolds. The VX-3 is hard to beat and their customer service (if you ever need it) is hard to beat. And when you call an American who speaks English answers the phone.

Add vote in for Zeiss Conquest.......

I'm fan of the Bushnell Elite series of scopes.

Zeiss Conquest

www.camerlandny.com

love my burris ffII 4.5-14. best scope under 350 in my opinion. I would and have recommended it to anyone looking in that price range. then again, my trijicon 3-9 is my best scope. just depends on what you want and can justify to spend.

aonther vote for the Zeiss Conquest. I just snagged another yesterday for my new to me Rem 700 300WSM.