New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Nikon Team Primos/Buckmasters vs. Burris Fulfield
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Nikon Team Primos/Buckmasters vs. Burris Fulfield

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/10/2010 at 23:16
utbrowningman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: April/17/2009
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 23
Just bought a Savage American Classic 114 .30-06 and now I need a decent scope.  Used for deer and elk hunting in Utah.  Looking at the Nikon and the Burris.  Last time I checked the Nikon was very clear and sharp (when compared side by side with a Leupold).  I've always liked Nikon cameras and heard Burris has excellent customer service.  What is your opinion?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 00:08
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
You might have trouble getting the Team Primos to fit on that action without some extended rings.  I have a similar rifle, and that scope couldn't be mounted far enough back.  I still don't have a scope on that rifle, but I think a Bushnell Elite 3-9x40 would work, and I'm almost 100% sure the Buckmasters would work.  Problem is, I hardly ever shoot anyway and I can't make up my mind either...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 08:24
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
here is what the 4200 elite looked like on my .375H&H




i had a team primos on my .264win mag for a bit here is what it looks like.





Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 08:25
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
the buckmaster has a longer tube than the primos and the 4200 elite.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 13:42
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
That's what I'm talking about- see how much further forward the back of the Primos is?  I would have to creep way up on the stock to shoot that.  How did it work for you?

Oh, and that .264 is still one beautiful rifle with a great piece of walnut.  I'm jealous.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 13:44
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
its the factory stock too believe it or not.

the eye relief on the primos is good enough that you really dont need to creep. the 4200 is another story. thats the only thing about the 4200 i dont like, is the short eye relief. but i managed to shot 100 rounds of .375H&H rounds and not get smacked.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 13:49
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
Yeah, I've thought of that too.  The Burris FFII can be mounted almost as far back as a 4200, which is one of the scoped the original poster mentioned, although the eye relief at higher power is once again pretty low. 

As far as the Buckmaster, it's definitely long enough, and is listed as having good eye relief, but it's kind of heavy and I don't know if I'd want to trust it on a .338 mag.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:08
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
.338?? who said anything about a .338??
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:08
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
Sorry, that's what my long action Savage is...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:10
SVT_Tactical View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
Chief Sackscratch

Joined: December/17/2009
Location: NorthCackalacky
Status: Offline
Points: 28768

I would get the 3200 or 4200 elite being those are recoil tested for that kind of recoil.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:11
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
Also, to the original poster, someone has mentioned on here that the Pentax Pioneer is the same scope as a Burris Fullfield II, except it's considerably cheaper.  I can't personally confirm that the internals/lenses/coatings are the same, but the listed specs on here are the same for both scopes and they visually appear to be the same.  I've thought of going that route myself also...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:12
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
oh, 10-4 on that. yeah im not sure how much i would trust that scope on a .338 either. i had an old school buckmaster on my 30-06 for a while it worked fine. ive had the fullfield on a .300wsm it was fine. for my hard kickers i use the 4200 elite. and now ive added a vortex viper to try on my H&H.

the ffII is certainly tough, i dont know that is better optically than the others certainly not better than the 4200 in that aspect.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:18
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
Well, thanks to Koshkin's "inexpensive scope test", we shall soon find out just how the FFII compares to some scopes.  Also, his picture of the scopes standing on their objective bells has been helpful in comparing length. 

That older Buckmaster used a different tube, correct?  Like more in line with the Prostaff/Primos tubes?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:20
pyro6999 View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
OT TITAN

Joined: December/22/2006
Location: North Dakota
Status: Offline
Points: 22024
right, but it had the Leupold style fast focus if you wanna call it that. i will tell you one that i was fairly impressed with for cheap was the 3x9 vortex diamondback, its only drawback was short eye relief also.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 14:25
jason miller View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: February/05/2007
Location: W Laf, IN
Status: Offline
Points: 229
Yeah, Koshkin mentioned in his preliminary testing that the Diamondback has good glass, but it's also a tad shorter than a 3200/4200 or FFII.

I hope this isn't too much of a threadjack...
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 18:53
ckk1106 View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: December/14/2007
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 1435
I have both the team primos and the ff II.  The primos is brighter and clearer to my eyes.  I like the primos better than the FFII, although I did have to use offset bases with the primos.  Even with that I'd still take the primos over the FFII.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 20:10
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13882
6x42  Leupold FX3 with long range duplex or when it comes out the new 6x42 Super Sniper with tactical knobs to dial in correction for distance.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 22:30
biggreen747 View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: October/16/2009
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 470
I'm a Burris fan and have owned a number of FFII as well as an original Monarch. Either one should be ok with a .338 but the Monarch (Team Primos) glass is better. I just can't stand Nikon's BDC circles.. If you can deal with the circles go with the Nikon.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/11/2010 at 23:56
utbrowningman View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: April/17/2009
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 23
Bought the FFII today at Cabela's and compared it with the Buckmaster.  The Buckmaster was brighter and I did like the BDC reticle in the Nikon over the Burris.  I went the Buriss since they threw in the binoculars which should be perfect for my 8 year old on his first hunt.
 
To the poster about offset bases - why are/were they needed?  What would cause that?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/12/2010 at 10:32
Randall45 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: June/25/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 284
Originally posted by utbrowningman utbrowningman wrote:

Bought the FFII today at Cabela's and compared it with the Buckmaster.  The Buckmaster was brighter and I did like the BDC reticle in the Nikon over the Burris.  I went the Buriss since they threw in the binoculars which should be perfect for my 8 year old on his first hunt.
 
To the poster about offset bases - why are/were they needed?  What would cause that?
 Cabelas and Gander Mountain sell many scopes because of the binoculars.I think the Buckmaster is better but I know the price is cheaper now with the FFII and with the binoculars included it steers you away from a better scope in my opinion.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Nikon Team Primos/Buckmasters vs. Burris Fulfield"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon Buckmasters vs. Team Primos utbrowningman Rifle Scopes 5
Buckmaster or Team Primos?? Ex Nola Rifle Scopes 7
4.5x14 buckmaster vs. fulfield II mikep Rifle Scopes 5 7/12/2006 10:20:41 PM
My luck again! Team Primos MIKE24 Rifle Scopes 2
4200 Elite 3-9x40 or Nikon Team Primos 3-9x40 dunagan15 Rifle Scopes 20
4200 vs Team Primos Cbissell07 Rifle Scopes 14
Nikon Team Primos? txgolfer52 Varmint Scopes 11
New Monarch vs. Team Primos MikeStaten Rifle Scopes 5
Team Primos Flip-Up Cover Sizes? donlipa Rifle Scopes 3
Team Primos: KNOB type/pictures? c5_nc Rifle Scopes 1


This page was generated in 0.500 seconds.