Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/9/2004 6:47:15 AM EST
Ok guys, I just started poking around in hear because I outfitted my new AR with a Eotech 551 and though I love it, I want to be able to make some precision shots at distance. I have narrowed my choices to the IOR M2 or the Burris Fullfield II, 3x9x40 rifle scope (*with the free spotter). Now I don't plan on shooting out further then 300m-400m with precision so I don't know which scope would be the "***BEST" at this. I know the Burris is adjustable but it seems as if the IOR is a better scope (Glass, durabilty) but I want you guys to share your thoughts. Any help is greatly appeciated. A good list of the pro and cons would be good since I really don't know jack about optics.......except that I like my EO
Link Posted: 5/9/2004 8:30:50 AM EST
Though I love Burris scopes, the 3-9 and 4.5-14 Fullfields are now made in the Phllipines, I've always felt that the Burris Signatures are as good as any scope out there, be it Leupold or any Europeon scope, testing(informal)has proven this to me time and time again, that being said, I'd opt for a Burris 3x-10x Signature Select w/ballistic Plex, furthermore, Burris scopes have "constant" eyerelief, though they don't advertise it, in my testing I can tell you they do, I'll take anyone of my scopes and put the power knob on the lowest power and while not moving my head dial up the power and have the same basic ER, though they're specs are a bit generous, you'll get 3.5" out of an average Burris scope, 3-10 1.5-6 etc. Jay
Link Posted: 5/9/2004 8:47:32 AM EST
Here's why I like the IOR M2:

The scope is built like a tank.
The glass is very clear.
It has an etched reticle so no worries about breakage.
The reticle is illuminated and has a range finder.
The eye relief is short which bodes well with the AR.
The scope is cammed for the 62 gr 5.56 round.
The scope has finger adjustable turrets.
The scope is short which also bodes well for the AR.

The only thing I don't like about the M2 is the fact that it is a tad heavy.
Link Posted: 5/9/2004 8:52:37 AM EST
If 300-400meters is going to be your max, I'd go with the IOR. Well I'd go with the IOR anyway, I own (4-14x50AO Ill reticle)and love the thing.

At 300/400 4x will be enough to put rounds on target accuretly. Hell the germans used a lot of 4x and 6x scopes in WWII. If you want something that will give you the best of both worlds look at the IOR 1.1-4x26 or a leupoldVX II 1-4x20(what I gots on my AR) up close and personal or reach out and touch it will do it all. The 1.1-4x26 IOR is a bit more costly but would be well worth it. I wanted one(and plan on getting one) for my AR but at the time I was ready to glass the gun I didn't have the money for the IOR so I settled on the leupold(don't mean that in a bad way).

I don't think there is anything wrong with burris scopes. I haven't used enough of them to really form an opinion on them. Sorry I can't say to much else.
Link Posted: 5/9/2004 9:07:42 AM EST
Mrrogers,

Take a look at this thread....

IOR M2



Good Luck,

Steve

I do have the Fullfield II 3x9x40 you are talking about and I use it on my hunting rifle. The bullet drop indicating lines are very small, but still a very nice scope. This is the retical:

Link Posted: 5/9/2004 10:31:05 AM EST
I first want to say thanks for the replies so far, I am already getting closer to what I want. So the M2 is adjustable from 1 to 4 (ocular adjustment -4+4), but the Burris is 3-9x. So with the 9x magnification technically the sight picture should be more then 2X that of the IOR? (*remember I am a optic rookie here) Now I can uderstand why if someone needed a cqb scope the IOR would be the hands down winner but I don't need that since I have my Eotech. I don't really need the Illumination and I have read that it has to be pretty damn dark for it to even be usable. I am leaning towards the IOR right now but I will continue to search around. I did read the IOR thread and it is why I even got interested in the optics so I'm going to keep my eyes out for more info. Does the IOR come with scope rings or should I be expecting to spend another $100 on a set? Thanks again guys for the replys
Link Posted: 5/9/2004 10:34:00 AM EST
I forgot, is there a "Optics Oracle" out there?
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:46:15 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2004 9:54:09 AM EST by Fenian]
Mrrogers, the M2 is fixed at 4x...the DIOPTER adjustment (rear eye focus) is +4 to -4.
IOR does make a 1.1-4x scope, but it's double the price of the M2.

BTW, just to pass it along, I like my Nikon Buckmaster better than my Fullfield II. I got them both in the 4.5x14 magnification. Both made in the Philippines, from Japanese glass iirc. I find the Nikon just a hair clearer.

For myself, I like a little more magnification, so I like the 4.5x14 scopes. They're a little more, but you can still get the Buckmaster for around $250 if you check the internet. Midway has 'em for $237 dealer. Also, moving up to this magnification gets you an adjustable objective, which I much prefer.

I just got a chance to shoot my 10/22 with this scope on it, it was a treat. I also used it as my spotting scope when I was shooting my .308. I could read stuff on the target I've never been able to make out at that distance before.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 11:55:02 AM EST
Thanks Fanian, I just got back from the gun shop and I think I am actually going to buy that very Nikon scope from them. I had a chance to look through it and all though it is quite a bit bigger then the IOR, I like the adjustability and the sight picture is super clear. The mil dots are cool too I am going to do some searching around for prices, but I think I might spend the money here locally since the guys are always helping me out. Or I might get the scope online for cheaper and have them order my rings.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 12:00:03 PM EST
They actually have a mildot reticle model of that, if you need it, for the same price, which is nice...a lot of manufacturers charge $100 more for that than a regular reticle.
Top Top