Aaaargh, how fun is this...

Riflemanse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2004
Messages
118
Location
Sweden
After waiting 17 days I got my package from USA with a Leupold VX-III Long Range 6.5-20x50 and Burris Signature rings.
I opend the package with the rings, mounted them on my rail and took the upper halfs off. And what did I see, a hole thru one of the rings and what looks like a crack...
Cant use this one thats for sure, I have contacted the company I bought them from and I hope they can send me just one ring right now, othervise I have to return the rings before they send me new ones. I had planed to do some hunting the comming weekend but those plans are gone now.

I have never used Burris before, have you seen anything like this before?

burris.jpg



Edit:

I just examined the second ring and that to shows a slight mark, not a hole but a mark/crack.
Pic can be found here: http://www.bahnhof.se/wb141264/Bilder/burris2.jpg
I have contacted Burris.
// Johan
 
Last edited:
Never seen anything like it on burris rings, they're machined from 1 piece of metal, so they must have had a bad cutter or something. Wierd.
 
I just got a reply from Burris, they have forvarded my images to their quality department. They wanted my adress so they could send me replacement rings. :)
 
The threads are fine, it´s just the hole that is the problem. :)
New rings are on it´s way from Burris.
 
I recently purchaced the same rings for an AR-15 flat-top rifle. I was not impressed with the rings. I went to mount the scope and when the rings are tightened up on the flat-top base, they seem to cant the scope off-center to the left just a bit. This is visible with the naked eye when looking at the rifle from the front. I decided to just go with it as the scope is cheap and the rings are cheap. With a bit of windage dialed in, it seems to hit what I aim at out to 150yd. I'm still not impressed with the rings though. I guess you get what you pay for. They certainly are not Badger Ordinance quality, but then neither are they that price.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top