Help me decide.

international shooter

What's up guys/ladies,
So since you were so helpful in helping decide what rifle to get I'll throw another on at you. This time its about scopes. Its between two. Either the Burris eliminator 3 or Zeiss victory diarange with ASV. I like the thought of long range shooting and so like these a lot. The eliminator 3 gets good reviews online as does the Zeiss but the Zeiss costs more.
So which one would you buy.?? Any experience with either of them??

Thanks.

FISMA

international shooter wrote: »

I like the thought of long range shooting and so like these a lot.

Long range? Absolutely neither.

First, how many moa have the scopes you mentioned? Would either zero at 1000ya before being clicked out?

Second, have you looked through 3-12 or 4-16 glass at 1000ya: Accurate? Maybe. Precise, doubtful.

Marine Corp snipers, shoot a fixed 10x at 1000ya. However, they shoot at large targets. In matches, at 1000ya, I have never seen 10x on the firing line.

For less than the Zeiss you could have a March in 8-80x56mm. Throw on an 2x optical magnifier and you're up to 160x mag!

For a bit more than the Burris, you could have a Nightforce, in 15-55x52mm.

In my opinion, when it comes to scopes, forget electronics - concentrate on clarity and coatings.

You seem to be between worlds here. Give us an idea what do you intend to shoot and what you consider long range and, perhaps, we can better advise.

mil dot

The burris Glass is no where near as good as Zeiss. Range finder in zeiss is also way ahead of burris. Have seen both scope in use. Both are more for shootings deer and not really for targets

international shooter

FISMA wrote: »

Long range? Absolutely neither.

First, how many moa have the scopes you mentioned? Would either zero at 1000ya before being clicked out?

Second, have you looked through 3-12 or 4-16 glass at 1000ya: Accurate? Maybe. Precise, doubtful.

Marine Corp snipers, shoot a fixed 10x at 1000ya. However, they shoot at large targets. In matches, at 1000ya, I have never seen 10x on the firing line.

For less than the Zeiss you could have a March in 8-80x56mm. Throw on an 2x optical magnifier and you're up to 160x mag!

For a bit more than the Burris, you could have a Nightforce, in 15-55x52mm.

In my opinion, when it comes to scopes, forget electronics - concentrate on clarity and coatings.

You seem to be between worlds here. Give us an idea what do you intend to shoot and what you consider long range and, perhaps, we can better advise.

Thanks for the reply FISMA but when I said long range I didn't mean 1000 yds. I meant long range deer shooting which for me is around 600-700 yards. Hence the reason I put this thread in the hunting forum. What I like about the Burris is the fact that you aim at the target, range the target at the press of a button and it calculates for you the compensation needed for bullet drop. With the Zeiss, as you said its better in terms of clarity and once I range the target myself I just turn the asv dial accordingly and its ready to go. I don't like the whole range it yourself, look at ballistics table and then adjust your scope after you've calculated the adjustments needed. That's the reason I'm going for either the Burris or the Zeiss. Although the Zeiss doesn't range the target itself it does cut out all the calculating adjustments needed with the ASV system.

international shooter

mil dot wrote: »

The burris Glass is no where near as good as Zeiss. Range finder in zeiss is also way ahead of burris. Have seen both scope in use. Both are more for shootings deer and not really for targets

Thanks for the reply. I understand that the Zeiss glass is better but the Burris will range and compensate for bullet drop all in the one system. The Zeiss I'm talking about doesn't have the rangefinder in it. That's the diarange model and I'm not spending 3000 on a scope. And yes both are more for shooting deer hence the reason this thread is in the hunting forum. I just can't seem to choose which one.

tac foley

international shooter wrote: »

Thanks for the reply FISMA but when I said long range I didn't mean 1000 yds. I meant long range deer shooting which for me is around 600-700 yards. Hence the reason I put this thread in the hunting forum. What I like about the Burris is the fact that you aim at the target, range the target at the press of a button and it calculates for you the compensation needed for bullet drop. With the Zeiss, as you said its better in terms of clarity and once I range the target myself I just turn the asv dial accordingly and its ready to go. I don't like the whole range it yourself, look at ballistics table and then adjust your scope after you've calculated the adjustments needed. That's the reason I'm going for either the Burris or the Zeiss. Although the Zeiss doesn't range the target itself it does cut out all the calculating adjustments needed with the ASV system.

Sir, your 'long-range deer shooting....600 -700 yards' IS long-range target-shooting no matter how you put it. Your target is STILL about an 8" circle superimposed on a deer instead of the same size circle superimposed on a target backing.

I fully agree with Mr Gormley in his post below - if you can't consistently place your bullet in the heart/lung kill-zone of a deer at that distance - and I mean EVERY time - then closer - way closer - is better.

The point made above about high magnification are therefore very valid.

tac

Gormley85

international shooter wrote: »

I meant long range deer shooting which for me is around 600-700 yards.

You shouldn't be shooting deer at 700 yards. Generally most hunters would be trying to get in as close as possible so they can guarantee a humane kill.

FISMA

international shooter wrote: »

I meant long range deer shooting which for me is around 600-700 yards.

You're likely to angry up the locals with that statement. Hopefully, your shooting is indeed "international," and that such shots are a requirement where you plan to travel.

Once while researching an antelope hunt, an outfitter informed me that the closest shot I would get was 400ya and that 600-700ya was to be expected. Thus, I understand your concern.

international shooter wrote: »

I don't like the whole range it yourself, look at ballistics table and then adjust your scope after you've calculated the adjustments needed.

Have you tried a ballistics ap like Strelo or Applied Ballistics? They are fast and work very well.

I prefer to glass the field with a rangefinder and get on scope once I am ready to shoot. Usually, I spend hours glassing before a shot presents. I much prefer using the smaller rangefinder than glassing through a rifle all day.

Although, I would agree with the general statement that Zeiss glass is better than Burris, Burris' high end glass is very impressive. I looked through a Conquest and an XTR II and could not see a measurable difference. I was leaning towards the Burris based on a personal preference for a reticle.

I hunt an area, that has a lot of cover for deer to pop in and out of view starting at a forestry 800ya out. The best shots are between 250-450ya.

In this area, I have a few spots marked off that I have ranged and determined the clicks necessary to center. I marked the clicks on a bit of tape and put on my scope. As the deer walk, I simply click along, and when the shot presents, take it.

At 600-700 yards, you would probably get away with the magnifications under ideal conditions. However, I still think the magnification is a bit low and anything under a 50mm bell will leave you wanting more at dusk or dawn.

If I had to choose between the two, I would go with the Burris, based on price.

How much are both in Eire? $4k is a lot to spend on the Zeiss only to find out later that it isn't your cuppa.

international shooter

FISMA wrote: »

You're likely to angry up the locals with that statement. Hopefully, your shooting is indeed "international," and that such shots are a requirement where you plan to travel.

Once while researching an antelope hunt, an outfitter informed me that the closest shot I would get was 400ya and that 600-700ya was to be expected. Thus, I understand your concern.


Have you tried a ballistics ap like Strelo or Applied Ballistics? They are fast and work very well.

I prefer to glass the field with a rangefinder and get on scope once I am ready to shoot. Usually, I spend hours glassing before a shot presents. I much prefer using the smaller rangefinder than glassing through a rifle all day.

Although, I would agree with the general statement that Zeiss glass is better than Burris, Burris' high end glass is very impressive. I looked through a Conquest and an XTR II and could not see a measurable difference. I was leaning towards the Burris based on a personal preference for a reticle.

I hunt an area, that has a lot of cover for deer to pop in and out of view starting at a forestry 800ya out. The best shots are between 250-450ya.

In this area, I have a few spots marked off that I have ranged and determined the clicks necessary to center. I marked the clicks on a bit of tape and put on my scope. As the deer walk, I simply click along, and when the shot presents, take it.

At 600-700 yards, you would probably get away with the magnifications under ideal conditions. However, I still think the magnification is a bit low and anything under a 50mm bell will leave you wanting more at dusk or dawn.

If I had to choose between the two, I would go with the Burris, based on price.

How much are both in Eire? $4k is a lot to spend on the Zeiss only to find out later that it isn't your cuppa.

Thanks for the reply. It was very interesting and you werent like the others who replied. Ready to start an argument. Typical Irish. The Burris is around €1600 new here and the Zeiss diavari, a good second hand one, roughly €2000 but then I would have to buy a rangefinder on top of that. The Zeiss diarange (which has the built in rangefinder) is €3200 new.

tac foley

I'm not here to start an argument, but this being an Irish site, it is supposed that you are asking about shooting deer in Ireland.

You did not actually say where you were going to be doing this long-range deer stalking, but you can hardly blame the regular and very experienced deer shooters [excluding me, since I don't live in Ireland] from giving you an answer that you don't like by supposing that you intended to do this in Ireland.

If you were to give us a clue as to where you might be shooting, it would be handy, and less likely to cause you offence.

tac

international shooter

tac foley wrote: »

I'm not here to start an argument, but this being an Irish site, it is supposed that you are asking about shooting deer in Ireland.

You did not actually say where you were going to be doing this long-range deer stalking, but you can hardly blame the regular and very experienced deer shooters [excluding me, since I don't live in Ireland] from giving you an answer that you don't like by supposing that you intended to do this in Ireland.

If you were to give us a clue as to where you might be shooting, it would be handy, and less likely to cause you offence.

tac

I do agree. I should of gave more info but on the other hand they could of enquired before jumping to conclusions. When I'm in Ireland I plan on shooting red stags on completely private ground in Kerry. When I'm away I'll be shooting plains game in africa or hog in Finland.

The Aussie

international shooter wrote: »

When I'm in Ireland I plan on shooting red stags on completely private ground in Kerry.

Can you just run this one by me again if that is possible.


:pac:..................

international shooter

The Aussie wrote: »

Can you just run this one by me again if that is possible.


:pac:..................

What.?? Just read it. I'm going to shoot on ground in Kerry that has Irish red stags and the ground in which they are located is private. The reason I mentioned this is because people don't need to get all butt hurt about what im shooting at and at what distance (as seen earlier on in the thread) the land is private and the game is a part of it so it won't affect them. Any way we are all going way off topic. I asked for help on choosing between two scopes. If you can't help don't post. If I see a thread and can help I'll post something if not, even if I don't agree with what I'm reading, I'll just move on and forget about it. Can't understand why people don't do the same.

The Aussie

international shooter wrote: »

What.?? Just read it. I'm going to shoot on ground in Kerry that has Irish red stags and the ground in which they are located is private. The reason I mentioned this is because people don't need to get all butt hurt about what im shooting at and at what distance (as seen earlier on in the thread) the land is private and the game is a part of it so it won't affect them.

Ahh yeh.

Red Deer are a protected game species and may only be hunted with a licence from the National Parks and Wild Life Service. Red stags may be hunted from the 1st of September until the 31st of December (no season in Kerry for stags) and Hinds may be hunted from the Ist of November to the 28th of February 28th. Hunting of Red Stags is strictly prohibited in Kerry

What you are proposing is Illegal and unethical (700m on a Deer), you are the sort of person the Sport of Shooting does not need in any Country.
Infact you are what is wrong with the direction the sport is heading, to many Hollywood movies and to much dreaming, anywho... I'm out, enjoy your Shooting in Kerry, just don't end up like "Kanturk Man"



http://www.killarneyonamap.ie/things/id86/

international shooter

My bad. My father just told me that it is in fact Wexford. Look like a right pleb (actually worse but I can't say it on the forum) but all the rest still stands. I'm still hoping for some goods advice/opinions.

clivej

international shooter wrote: »

What.?? Just read it. I'm going to shoot on ground in Kerry that has Irish red stags and the ground in which they are located is private. The reason I mentioned this is because people don't need to get all butt hurt about what im shooting at and at what distance (as seen earlier on in the thread) the land is private and the game is a part of it so it won't affect them. Any way we are all going way off topic. I asked for help on choosing between two scopes. If you can't help don't post. If I see a thread and can help I'll post something if not, even if I don't agree with what I'm reading, I'll just move on and forget about it. Can't understand why people don't do the same.

Can someone please explain to me how the shooting of Red Stags in Kerry is allowed.
Or has this lad got a special dispensation??
And who the f uck shoots deer at the distances he is looking to TRY to humanely kill them.

A good hunting rifle will shoot 1MOA which equates to 6"/7" at the distance you are saying you'd like to shoot them. Add a little cross wind and now your into maiming animals. Not not a clean kill that every hunter will try to do.

I would suggest you learn more about bullet drops, velocities and trajectories before getting a scope to estimate it all for you.

Cass

clivej wrote: »

Can someone please explain to me how the shooting of Red Stags in Kerry is allowed.
Or has this lad got a special dispensation??

It cannot happen. It's illegal. They are, beyond, protected in Kerry all year round.

I've also heard of this "loophole" that if you shoot them on private land you don't need a license, etc. It's crap. Any form of deer stalking.hunting /culling requires a license and/or permission/authorisation from the NPWS.

international shooter wrote: »

What.?? Just read it. I'm going to shoot on ground in Kerry that has Irish red stags and the ground in which they are located is private.

As i said above it's illegal, but i also seen that you have changed the location. However that aside the fact that you thought it was okay to shoot Reds in Kerry without knowing the law behind it is worrying.

That is not an attack, but you seem somewhat "out of touch"" with regards to the law here. If you intend to shoot in Kerry or anywhere for that matter i'd suggest you get acquainted with the minimum amount of legal stuff you'll need.

The reason I mentioned this is because people don't need to get all butt hurt about what im shooting at and at what distance (as seen earlier on in the thread) the land is private and the game is a part of it so it won't affect them.

Frankly its a worrying thought. Shooting at, and i say it that way for a reason, any animal at that distance is reckless unless you know you rifle inside and out and know your own limits. Even then the sport is stalking, not sniping. The sport is in the animal having as much a chance to escape as you do to get it. The distance makes it such that an increase in wind strength, a drop in it, the bullet traversing a valley, by trees, etc, etc. can all have a serious impact on it's performance and drift.

This is something i have NEVER seen a ballistic scope being able to accurately account for, and most certainly not at the distances you speak of. I have never had a constant, and i mean not so much as a 0.1mph variance, wind in my life. Over short distances the scopes you are discussing would work because the margin of error is so small that if they are out by half an inch it's still a clean kill. As you go out further and further that variance becomes so large that it's the difference between a hit and miss. Or in an animals case kill and wound.

At 700 yards a 150gr, .308, hunting round, doing say 2,800fps can be blown off course by up to 5 feet. That is with a 90 degree and constant 10 mph wind. Problem is a ballistic calculator, much like the ones in the scopes above, only allow for constants. Not varying conditions. So say the wind gusts to 15mph as you pull the trigger, then you are looking at upwards of 2 feet of extra drift meaning your allowed for margin of 5 feet is no longer valid, and the animal gets hit in the ass, or you miss altogether.

As was said above in some countries this type of shooting is common place and at times a necessity due to the lay of the land, etc. However in Ireland no such shooting is necessary, and you'll find in most cases where this shooting does occur (abroad) tat the person is well and truly adapt at his sport. IOW has spent years learning to read the wind, his drops, his own ability, etc.

So when people seem displeased with this type of shooting its not so much you they are displeased with, but the concept of it, the lack of need of it here, and the fact it should not be attempted by someone with little to no experience with this kind of shooting. Most definitely not by trying to "skip" the learning process with technology.

Any way we are all going way off topic. I asked for help on choosing between two scopes. If you can't help don't post. If I see a thread and can help I'll post something if not, even if I don't agree with what I'm reading, I'll just move on and forget about it. Can't understand why people don't do the same.

Because it's a discussion forum. You ask a question and you'll get your answer which generally leads to more question (not always by the Original Poster) and as with most threads they tend to go off topic to some extent over the course of the thread.

People are free to comment as they wish, as you are too, and back seat modding (the highlighted part above) is not tolerated. As was said above if you give all the details you can like location, intent, and accurate information (like you intending to shoot protected Kerry reds then later retracting it), it'll make for a much smoother thread.


Lastly on the topic off the scopes, and as i touched on above. I have owned one and tried a few and while some were decent and others downright gimmicks i never found one that could do what a person with a good setup, knowledge of their setup, knowledge of their own ability and a range finder could not do as easily and at a much lesser cost.

4200fps

international shooter wrote: »

What's up guys/ladies,
So since you were so helpful in helping decide what rifle to get I'll throw another on at you. This time its about scopes. Its between two. Either the Burris eliminator 3 or Zeiss victory diarange with ASV. I like the thought of long range shooting and so like these a lot. The eliminator 3 gets good reviews online as does the Zeiss but the Zeiss costs more.
So which one would you buy.?? Any experience with either of them??

Thanks.

Back to the scopes. That particular burris had some negative feed back in the states, not holding zero most of all, battery life, range button could be better, google urself. Anyway Burris scopes be fairly blury at distance and average in low light, brother had the Burris full field II. Anyways if your thinking of the zeiss that Diarange is antique. Not hate wrong with it tho but recon it be hard shifted secondhand, you could be out easy 1800euro. If I was in your shoes i'd buy a Victory Diavari FL with ASV or Zeiss HT with ASV+. The HT and V8 both will dial long range with ASV+. The ASV+ has roughly 9 ballistic rings to choose from. When its set its range, aim and shoot and youve very good light transmission for your deer stalking. Zeiss hold their value

international shooter

4200fps wrote: »

Back to the scopes. That particular burris had some negative feed back in the states, not holding zero most of all, battery life, range button could be better, google urself. Anyway Burris scopes be fairly blury at distance and average in low light, brother had the Burris full field II. Anyways if your thinking of the zeiss that Diarange is antique. Not hate wrong with it tho but recon it be hard shifted secondhand, you could be out easy 1800euro. If I was in your shoes i'd buy a Victory Diavari FL with ASV or Zeiss HT with ASV+. The HT and V8 both will dial long range with ASV+. The ASV+ has roughly 9 ballistic rings to choose from. When its set its range, aim and shoot and youve very good light transmission for your deer stalking. Zeiss hold their value

Thanks for the reply. Yea I'm so skeptical about the Burris but really like the concept. I actually couldn't find any of those bad reviews you mentioned though I'm not denying they exist. I just haven't found them. The Zeiss is my other option but just doesn't have the range finder built in but it makes up for it in other departments. I viewed a brand new Burris scope the other day and it seemed good. But it wasn't out in the field. The dealer said he's sold a few and all the buyers are delighted with them. But then he said he was out at dusk one evening and his friend had to put down his S&B scope and use the Burris because he could no longer see through the S&B due to the darkness. Pure lie.

FISMA

FISMA wrote: »

Throw on an 2x optical magnifier and you're up to 160x mag!

Actually not. I'll take that statement back.:o

I was thinking about ordering a 4x optical booster for my 8-32 NF, thinking I would get over 120x on the max end and the sales person corrected me.

The coefficient before the x doesn't simply multiply the range you already have. They said that you would get about an extra 30% more magnification - not bad for under $200.

Not sure why they call it a 2x or 3x. Still might try one though!

Cass

Was looking at one of those boosters a few years ago thinking the same. 2 to 3 times mag would be excellent. When i emailed them they told me the actual magnification would be in the 20 - 30% extra i hesitated. It meant my 32 power scope would give 40 power at best. My 42 power scope would deliver 55 power at best. IOW nothing i could not get by simply changing scope. So i did. From nightforce to Sightron or 32 power to 50 power and actually saved money in the change.

The other issue was they only done the screw in version for the nightforce Benchrest and the Leupold LR models. Every other scope booster came with a lens that fitted over the optical lens of the scope exactly like a flip cap would. This concerned my from the point of view of how well would the booster perform. All the lens in a scope are perfectly aligned to give the best clarity possible. So would the booster that is pushed on affect this clarity, give a distorted image, etc.

As said this was some years ago and i never went for the booster. Perhaps they have changed the mounting format since then, but honestly while it's a decent accessory and useful in some circumstances i think it is limited. Just my own opinion.

extremetaz

FISMA wrote: »

Not sure why they call it a 2x or 3x. Still might try one though!

It's because is multiplies the focal length - which doesn't translate directly into magnification.

4200fps

international shooter wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. Yea I'm so skeptical about the Burris but really like the concept. I actually couldn't find any of those bad reviews you mentioned though I'm not denying they exist. I just haven't found them. The Zeiss is my other option but just doesn't have the range finder built in but it makes up for it in other departments. I viewed a brand new Burris scope the other day and it seemed good. But it wasn't out in the field. The dealer said he's sold a few and all the buyers are delighted with them. But then he said he was out at dusk one evening and his friend had to put down his S&B scope and use the Burris because he could no longer see through the S&B due to the darkness. Pure lie.

wasnt online since. I seen the reviews when i went into sites that had them for sale.click on reviews. Yet most reviews are very positive but saying that one said glass was poor clarity. In my opinion most yanks never looked through any optics from other origins only American. About what dealer said about smith and bender vs Burris in low light is also to me a lie. He needs to boast to get a sale. Did you look at anything since? I've good contacts for high end optics at keen prices if you want to mail me your number

international shooter

4200fps wrote: »

wasnt online since. I seen the reviews when i went into sites that had them for sale.click on reviews. Yet most reviews are very positive but saying that one said glass was poor clarity. In my opinion most yanks never looked through any optics from other origins only American. About what dealer said about smith and bender vs Burris in low light is also to me a lie. He needs to boast to get a sale. Did you look at anything since? I've good contacts for high end optics at keen prices if you want to mail me your number

I ended up buying a Zeiss victory diavari 6-24x54. I decided against the Burris because there's just too much uncertainty around it on my part. So I decided to go with the owl reliable. Clarity is great on the Zeiss. So I'm happy.

fallowhunter

Good choice and the best of luck with the new scope

4200fps

international shooter wrote: »

I ended up buying a Zeiss victory diavari 6-24x54. I decided against the Burris because there's just too much uncertainty around it on my part. So I decided to go with the owl reliable. Clarity is great on the Zeiss. So I'm happy.

Wonder which model of 6-24x56 you get. The older model isnt FL but that nothing to worry about. If theres no ASV the values are 5mm per click at 100 meters. All ASV models are 1cm values. Is it mildot reticle 43? I've same scope in 6-24x72 FL with ASVs. I like it. Has 34mm tube. To be honest I love it. Its the brightest 24 power scope to date. Image quality is 3D with the FL glass. You will love yours. Good resale value too

international shooter

4200fps wrote: »

Wonder which model of 6-24x56 you get. The older model isnt FL but that nothing to worry about. If theres no ASV the values are 5mm per click at 100 meters. All ASV models are 1cm values. Is it mildot reticle 43? I've same scope in 6-24x72 FL with ASVs. I like it. Has 34mm tube. To be honest I love it. Its the brightest 24 power scope to date. Image quality is 3D with the FL glass. You will love yours. Good resale value too

Mine is an FL and it does have ASV. No its reticle 60 (illuminated). And its actually for sale now. I started a for sale thread on this website.

Larry60

I love it!!! ..............all this talk of 1000 yard shots at deer......... too much time at video games I would speculate... Where as I have shot deer at long range (400 yards) I for one would not reccomend it particuraly. The sport is called STALKING which by befinition is "sneeking up on the deer" to take a shot from a range that you can't miss!... hopefully.
I have deer stalking buddies who will spend 40 minutes crawling through scrub and mud just to get that 100 Meter or less range shot and see their "skill" as one of getting up as close as they can get away with. By the way my last deer of this season was about 25 meters range.
Regarding Scopes, I like and use Zeiss simply because of the high quality lenses which makes all the difference in low light conditions.
Also
Having hunted in mainland Europe I can tell you that they have rules like not taking shots at game of more than 200 Meters distant.

Ps. Red deer would be scarce in Wexford I reckon.