Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Petzal Reviews the Burris Eliminator Laser Scope

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Gun Nuts
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

September 29, 2010

Petzal Reviews the Burris Eliminator Laser Scope

By David E. Petzal

The inherent weakness in just about all mil-dot scopes and range-calculating systems is that in the moments before you shoot you have to either remember something or figure something out, and in those moments, the brains of most hunters turn into salt water taffy. When the metal is about to meet the meat, only the most cold-blooded and experienced of us can calculate and then squeeze the trigger.

But not if you have a Burris Eliminator.


*Note: The Eliminator is not as good-looking as Ms. Elisha Cuthbert (above), but then neither are you.

This 4X-12X laser rifle scope gets you the range and, in the same millisecond, figures out how much holdover you need and illuminates one of a series of vertical 1/3-MOA dots. You put the dot where you want the bullet to go and pull the trigger. No brain required. All you have to do is remember to turn the thing on.

The Eliminator is 13 inches long, weighs 26 ounces with its battery installed, and mounts low on Picatinny or Weaver bases. It comes with a remote control switch that straps to either the fore-end or the objective-lens bell. It ranges to 800 yards on a reflective target and to 550 on something with fur. You can program it to work with more than 600 rifle cartridge/load combinations, and Burris is working the software for black powder and handguns.

Since the Eliminator uses two batteries, you may wonder what happens in the rain? Will it short out? Nope. I left the Eliminator outdoors for 48 straight hours in wet weather that ranged from drizzle to toad-strangling downpour, and it did fine.

To get started with the Eliminator, you first need to buy one, for which you will need $850. Then you will encounter the original directions which are, to put it kindly, lacking, so Burris includes a second sheet of simplified instructions that you can actually follow. If this doesn’t help, go to YouTube and type in Burris Eliminator Setup and Programming. Or you can call Burris and speak with a human being who will walk you through the process. The Eliminator, directions notwithstanding, is extremely simple to use. Once you have it on a rifle you sight the scope in to hit dead on at either 100 or 200 yards.

Then you put the Eliminator in Set Up mode and select whether you want it to compute in yards or meters. Next, you tell it whether you sighted in at 100 or 200 yards. Then you feed it a Bullet Drop Number from the table that Burris provides. This figure is the number of inches your bullet drops at 500 yards. I put the Eliminator on my Shaw .30/06, and went with Federal Premium 165-grain Trophy Bonded Tipped bullets because of their sterling accuracy and flawless performance on game.

According to the Burris table, these slugs drop 52.95 inches at 500 yards, and so I entered my Drop Number, which was 53, and that’s all the programming you do.

In use, the Eliminator is simplicity itself. For example, my gun prints 1 inch low at 50 yards, dead on at 100, an inch low at 150, and 2 inches low at 200. For this, you don’t even need to turn the thing on; just put the crosshair center of target mass. Or you can turn the scope on and use the center light. (The little amber dots are easy to see in near dark and bright sunlight, and are small enough to allow very precise aiming.) Beyond 200, I turn the scope to 12X and use the rangefinding feature. Once you turn it on you have 80 seconds to shoot before it turns itself off.

I tested the Eliminator between 50 yards and 485 and I found that it unfailingly gets you within 3 vertical inches of where you are holding. (Usually you’ll be dead on or an inch or two high or low.) At 485 yards I could put five rounds in a group that would nail even a dik-dik.

The Eliminator is, as nearly as I can tell, foolproof. It’s extremely well thought out, very accurate and, whether you approve of this much high-tech in hunting or not, the wave of the future.

To see it in action, click here.

Comments (57)

Top Rated
All Comments
from Del in KS wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

That is one heck of a scope. A fella...a quick fella could command a whole 80 acre cow pasture on opening day of deer season with that thing on a good bolt rifle. I know just the place in Macon Co. Missouri. Deer stream across this pasture leaving public land for the safety of posted land on the other side. Need to put one on my Kimber 25-06 or that new Shaw 22-250 loaded with 60 grain Nosler Partitions at 3700 fps.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from MJC wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

It looks like the rings must be built into the body of the scope. I'd be a little worried about it loosening up over time, but given your good review I assume it held on well.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jason Hart wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

The Eliminator almost seems like the perfect long range scope. Anything that gets you within three inches at the ranges you tested it at is phenominal. Great review Mr Petzel.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntnow wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

For that money, I'd expect it to range a little further on game. Plus it's so damn ugly.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ScottM wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I understand the Eliminator takes the guesswork out of holdover and does it fast, but that's a pile of cash and lot of technology that's getting banged around the in the woods and my truck.
For the money I'd just as soon get a decent hand-held laser range finder and a good quality scope with a calibrated elevation dial like a Leupold VX-3 with a CDS or Nikon M223 (for .223 55 gr loads). I could use the rangefinder for other pursuits and with multiple guns, rather than have the Eliminator tied to one rifle (unless you like to sight-in everytime you take a rifle out of your gun safe).

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Good to see that you finally got the call from Burris to test one of their products. Hopefully they will send you more stuff in the future. As for the Eliminator, I'm glad something that big and ugly really works.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jbird wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

And my 'wish-list' grows once again! I think it sounds awesome!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

For another $400 will they provide a stabilizer to enable the shooter to hold rock steady on the 550 yard target? Something a little more portable and short of a bench rest maybe.

I love my Burris 3-12x44!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Don't even think about price whining. To buy a truly good scope and good rangefinder, you're going to be spending that or more.

"It ranges to...550 on something with fur."

Are we sure this is far enough for today's hunter?

Is that a 50mm? How is it optically?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Muleynut30.06 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

This is about the dumbest scope I've ever seen/heard of. It takes all the skill out of shooting and hunting and allows any rich idiot to go get one mount it and pull the trigger and think he is a good hunter/shooter. Not too mention it looks retarded on top of a good looking gun. If a see two guys in the field make the same impressive shot one with a computer on his gun and the other who has a traditonal scope and knows his rifle I will congradulate the latter. This takes all the satisfaction of making a good shot because you put in the time behind the gun out of the equation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from tygh98 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Not a fan of the scope, but I dont see how the shot would be any easier with or without the computer. It only removes the guess work, skill is still required.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from crm3006 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Are terrorists a reflective target, or do they have fur? I think it would look good on an M1-A.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from MLH wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Sort of like shifting a high tech race car with paddle-shifter and automatic clutch versus shifting and heel-and-toeing a manual through the gears. The former may be faster and more efficient but the latter takes more skill and provides greater satisfaction. But I like them both.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from focusfront wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

crm3006;

What you said.

If Burris sells something like this to us, I wonder what the military is using. From what I am told, those 2000 yard kills by our snipers are NOT just someone's imagination working overtime.

Let's see, what do I mount that scope on... my Marlin .35 Rem, or my Winchester .30-30... decisions, decisions-

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from woodsmanj35 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

great, one more electronic device to C$@% out in the bush. Sorry, nothin against the scope just against electronics in general. I'm sure it's very dependable, but you sure as hell won't see one on my guns.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I'm alwasy leary of anything requiring batteries. Obviously, some equipment like flashlights are required but where it is not required I don't like to take the chance of ruining a hunt because of dead batteries.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Themasterdan wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I've got an even easier solution:
1. Buy a quality rifle.
2. Start reloading.
3 Shoot 3 days a week all year.
4. Shoot from Field Positions out to 500 yds.
5. Laugh at the guy who thought that he could buy experience.

I don't care how many gizmos and dinglehoppers a guy has, become a competent rifle man and you will hit your targets. Know you shooting system and be comfortable with it.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Walt Smith wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Great another product that takes hunting in the non-ethical direction. Leave the computerized scope and the 800 yard shots to the military, there is no need for it in traditional ethical hunting. A simple 3X9X40 gives you all the advantage you should ever need to to take a game animal.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Amflyer wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Wow. All this talk of space-age “this” and computerized “that” reminds of this one rifle I built that stretched the boundaries of science as we all know it.

I like flat shooting wildcats. Give me a 22-250, and I’ll show you a custom rifle in a 204-250. What good is a 30-06 when you can have a 204-’06 Ackley Improved 40 degree-shouldered laser beam? Who hasn’t necked down a .378 Weatherby to .204 caliber?

Anyway, it all started when I missed a shot at a far-away prairie dog. I mean really far away. In order to calculate how far away it was, I had to rangefind a friend, who was rangefinding a rock that looked like it was about 500 yards from where the dog was sitting in his hole. It perturbed me so, and I vowed right then and there that this was going to be remedied come hell or high water.

I got to thinking…what reason was there that no one has managed to neck down a 50 BMG (Ackley improved 40 degree shoulder) to a nice, ballistically efficient, .204 caliber? Sure, it’s a bit overbore, but no more that the Ultra Magnum family of .404 Jeffrey cartridges, right?

Everyone knows I like Remington rifles, so naturally I called the head of the company himself, Mr. Jerry-Jeff Remington, son of the late Fredrick Remington, and described my project. After a very short conversation, I decided that I would need to fabricate and put the rifle together myself, mostly because I get obstinate and bull-headed when people laugh at me, and I’m still not sure how he managed to slam a cell-phone, but that’s neither here nor there.

I found a nice company in China that would hand-manufacture some actions for me, and placed my order on the internet. Innovative was their middle name! Really. Soon I received my rough, but workable actions from the Shanghai Innovative Rifle works and Cast Iron Fence company, or at least that’s what the translation worked out to on Babelfish.

I would like to had a nice custom barrel made form the likes of Shaw, Lilja, Shilen or Green Mountain, but it turns out that you can get some mighty fine WW 2 era, slightly used half-track pushrods, that once straightened, polished, bored, rifled, chambered and crowned, actually work pretty dang well. I had my usual custom gunsmith, Barney “One eye” Wilson do the work for me. He usually hangs out down under the overpass, and if you keep him lubricated with Miller High-Life and slim Jims, will tell you some of the durndest stories about the Korean War that you’ve ever heard. And the work he turns out with only 6 fingers and no thumbs… just plain incredible.

Incidentally, he works up most of the load data for my projects too.

Once we had a workable action and barrel, I whittled out a nice stock from an old piece of 4 X 4 I found down by the river, affixed an old trigger from a 10-22 file I had laying around, mounted a Revelation 3 X 9 X 32 scope, and headed out to the range.

“One Eye” Wilson had bore sighted the rifle for me, so I figured I would start with a few sighters at about 500 yards. We were using self-fabricated custom brass, which had an innovative system which utilized twin Large Rifle Primers to set off the 248 grains of IMR-4831 we finally settled on as the most reasonable load that would probably have the least chance of not working. I loaded one of the impressive-looking cartridges and closed the bolt, flipped of the safety (which was really just a paper clip and a rubber band, but worked perfectly) and squeezed off the first round of what I planned on calling the 204 Awesome, once I had the bugs worked out and it was ready for SAAMI standardization.

Now, up to this point, I’m sure you’ve all been wondering what this innovative, yet mostly conventional, rifle has going for it that puts it in the nebulous category of “Space-age” or “Computerized.” To be completely honest, and in the interest of full disclosure, I will be the first to admit that I’m not really sure of what happened when the trigger was pulled, but here is the best likelihood of the most probable non-ficticious story I could figure out:

As we all know from watching “Star Trek: The Next Generation” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” the time-space continuum is a delicately balanced phenomenon and as fussy as a dentist at a Kid Rock concert . When the first round of the 204 Awesome finally went off on the third try, the bullet was travelling at such a velocity that this balance was upset, the continuum was ripped in twain, and time-travel was achieved.

By my best calculations, the 20 grain projectile exited the barrel at approximately Mach 33, and due to the RH twist of the tube, threw me bodily back in time, presumably to a point in my life before I had in fact invented the rifle. Therefore, and to wit, I found myself with no rifle in my hands and only the ubiquitous flash burns common to time-travelers when the smoke cleared. As the ringing in my ears subsided, I could hear bystanders asking if I was OK, although one of them seemed perturbed about something and kept yelling something that sounded like “forking tie-rod!” this, and “ruined truck!” that, and “I’ll kill you with my bare hands!,” etc, etc.

Anyway, when I realized the ramifications of my time travel, I must have passed out. When I awoke in the emergency room of the county hospital, the doctors confided that had the rifle been rifled with a LH twist, I may have been projected into the future, which due to the full moon and tidal patterns of the area may have resulted in much worse injuries, although presumably I would have been finished with the probation and community service the judge gave me for the damage t o the range and surrounding property.

Did I hit my target, you ask? I surely did. Presumably right where I was aiming, because scarcely 12 miles away, at the location of a high-fence hunting outfit that happened to be directly in the line of sight from my target, my bullet hit and instantly killed a large whitetail buck that was being groomed for a trophy hunt for none other than Mayor Richard M. Daley of nearby Chicago. (Who knew he was such an avid hunter?) I had to pay the trophy fees, but I did get to keep the buck.

The buck green-scored an impressive 567 23/24 nontypical, and dried to a slightly larger 589 6/9 total.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from countitandone wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

"Just Range, Aim, Fire" My question is, how much fun is easy?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Aw c'mon guys, let's leave that stuff for the military.

If you can't get your game with a scope-mounted high-powered rifle what kind of a "hunter" are you?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Besides that it's heavy and looks like crap on a decent rifle.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from keithjoyner wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I just used one on an Arizona pronghorn hunt. Ten years of applications to finally get drawn, but Arizona has some big pronghorn, and I wanted the best chance at one.

Ten shots at nice bucks, all ranged with the scope and shot from a solid brace. Score? No hits. The scope shot great on targets but somehow missed the proper range on pronghorns. I could have cried!

On one braggin' sized buck it ranged 205 yards with him lying down. Easy shot. At the rifle report, he and the does got up and milled around, then ran straight at me and stopped again. This time it ranged 365 yards! How could he go from 205 toward me and be at 365? At all ten shots, the bucks acted like I hadn't even come close.

I sent it back to Burris hoping for some sort of refund consideration. Haven't heard a word from them. From now on I'll leave the high tech to others, I'm back to the old tried and true. Maybe I'll get drawn in another ten years.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Maybe it would be better to develop some skill as a rifleman and depend on that. 10 shots and no trophy is pretty sad, although you do get some credit for fessing up to the debacle.

To date none of this technology is much help in figuring the effect of wind...which is often greater than the effect of gravity.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from nc30-06 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Wow! All the bad-mouthing of the Eliminator. It is not that bad looking on a rifle. And just how many of you actually follow your own recommendations for all the practice? $850 too much? Once you buy your other scope, rangefinder, and all, you would probabley have that much invested anyway. And what if you are on a hunt of a lifetime with the shot at a trophy of a lifetime, and you miss or don't even get the shot off because you are fiddling with said range-finder, then having to re-aquire with the scope? I don't disagree with you guys, just pointing out the other side. High-tech is always advancing. Otherwise, we would still be using spears. To each his own.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

The snipers in the sandbox are equipped with scopes by Triijicon. (SP)? I have a friend who used one on a Barrett and made a kill just under a mile.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from davidpetzal wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To MJC: The Eliminator uses a form of rail mount, as on European scopes. The grooves and slots are integral with the scope tube and connect to the bases via two figure-8 clamps. If you Loc-Tite everything and torque down the clamp nuts to spec, you will have no problems. It's a strong system.

To HuntNow: It is not as good-looking as Ms. Elisha Cuthbert, but then neither are you nor I. As for reaching "only" to 500 yards, go take a look at a real 500 yards some time.

To MuleyNut.30/06. Flush out your headgear. The Eliminator solves half the equation. You still have to judge the wind, which is a lot tougher than compensating for bullet drop.

To Walt Smith: In principle I agree with you, but in real life people are going to take long shots whether they're qualified or not, so they might as well have something that will give them a chance of hitting.

To Amflyer: You have too much time on your hands.

To KuduKid: Amen.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steve in Virginia wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I think new technology certainly has a place in the woods, but I wonder if this type of thing will -- in the minds of some -- simply replace the need to develop the skill and judgement needed to be a competent shooter. Love the post -- keep 'em coming -- but let's talk about the stuff we really need in the woods, like disposble biodegradable wet wipes.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bernie wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I'll take Elisha; you can have the Eliminator.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from sgaredneck wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Did Burris really decide to make something that fugly? Now if that Burris scope was as easy on the eyes Elisha....

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from damo450 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Hey DEL in Kansas! Are you talking about my farm???? Gotta keep an eye on you, tell my fellow Maconites you are plotting on our pests!! haha!

Who the hell would put this on a handgun??? Just a thought.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zermoid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Looks aside, I wonder how durable it is? A good Scope can pretty much last a lifetime, anything with circuitry will eventually fail.
I assume it can at least be used like a regular scope if batteries, and or electronics, fail?

EHHH, looked at the home page and immediately noted a problem:
Operating Temperature 14°F - 122°F

Since I have seen -12°F during deer season here in PA I'm not to sure it would work all the time, besides the places I hunt you can seldom see past 150 yds!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To davidpetzal:

I agree with your last except regarding Walt Smith.

If someone is just going to make a hit at 500 yards and over (and 500 yards is a heck-of-a-long-shot on a living animal), I'd rather they miss completely. The broadside vital area on a pronghorn is smaller than a pie plate. Even if you know how much your bullet drifts in a given wind, if you're guess of a side wind, for instance, is off by 2 MPH, say 12 MPH instead of 10, at 500 yards you'll be too far left or right something like 5 inches...enough to miss the vital area completely irrespective of bullet drop.

I have seen and personally made poor hits on game and it isn't pretty. I hope we can all AIM never to put an animal in unnecessary pain. Don't shoot until certain of a quick-killing shot. Let's discourage uncertain shooting wherever we can. This website is a good place to start.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Duckman1984 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Look, I'm in the Marine Corps and I shoot 500yds with open iron sights with the M-16A2. When you get to that level, let me know. Out of 10 shots at the 500yd line, with open iron sights, I get no less than nine rounds in the black. Yep, I'm bragging a little...I'm no sniper, by no means am I one, I just apply all the fundementals of marksmanship. But when I go out hunting, I love my 3-9X40 on my black powder. I might not drive nails at 500yds with open Iron sights, but at 200yds with my blackpowder and scope, I might as well be a construction worker...Technology is awesome, it truly is and this scope would be awesome to be looking through when pulling a trigger, however, if I'm taking a 500yd shot on big game, I would be afraid of only wounding the animal. The margin of error at that range is huge, a simple flinch, a gust of wind can make a big difference. Technology can do many things but it can't fix all the factors/problems associated with pulling a trigger.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Since I often utilize the same technology that is represented as one package in the Eliminator I suppose I can only critique it from the standpoint of esthetics. My stuff is certainly prettier and ranges farther if need be. I never liked having all my eggs in one basket as Murph's Law will surely slam me in the back of the head. Since I use some huge scopes on rifles like Nightforce and a Huskemaw I can tell you that I don't care for the bulk and am looking into smaller but suitably effective scopes for long shots. I am certain I would feel the same way regarding this Burris given its physical specifications. I paused while channel surfing the other day to watch Elisha in "House of Wax" which turned out to be a piece of crap movie but with excellent scenery. I wonder if she would consider staring in a Canadian TV hunting show.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bellringer wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

What ever happened to actually hunting the animal. Long shots by most hunters are really just SHOTS IN THE DARK.
I am more impressed by a really good stalk and close shot than one over in the next zip code.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Walt Smith wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Kudu Kid-- I concurr! Mr. Petzal-- the problem with providing a scope with this to to general public is that it makes one believe that 500+ yard shots are not only possible but almost guarenteed with this scope. So what happens?? You wind up with brainwashed hunters who are launching bullets as far as they can see, likley only watching the deer and possibly (Because of the trance they're in) not paying attention to the fellow hunter in a blind 350 yards out who is watching the same deer! I have had plenty of bullets wiz overhead by such over sights and I've always seen it as my god given right to send one back in the general vicinety from which it came! What say you sir?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I sometimes believe we should be disallowed to hunt with anything but an open sighted .30-30 and a compass. No GPS, no wind meter, no scope, no large case cartridge, no, no, no nothing. Pull on your orange vest and start hunting. The whole deal today is moving away from how we hunted back in the seventies and into a modern era that is a bit frightening. The problem is everyone would have to be in compliance of the ".30-30" law or the outlaws would have an unfair advantage over those who obeyed the regulations. I suppose we could go a step even farther back to only using original type muzzleloaders (my neighbor's muzzleloader has more bells and whistles than my newest magnum centerfire and he is working on a 400 yard gun that is believable, no shxt), or perhaps to longbows, or maybe just sitting in a tree and dropping a boulder on the deer passig underneath. I truthfully don't know the answer so continue to move along into this century of technology like most everyone else. I don't think I like it as much as in those distant days of yesteryear.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Plotner wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

toad strangling down pour that sounds good. i got touse that some time...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Ish, no way. Populations would be out of control.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CJ wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I think Bushnell sells a copy of that scope now. Ain't no copying Elisha!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from davidpetzal wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To Walt Smith: You may see it as your God-given right, but the law might see it differently. I don't think I would do that. As for brainwashed hunters launching lead at many hundreds of yards, they're doing it now, and they're going to do it regardless.

To Ishawooa: I agree about The House of Wax. The first one (in 3-D) in 1954 with Vincent Price and Phyllis Kirk was a terrific movie, and genuinely scary, but the second...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To David Petzal: As a kid I saw the original "House of Wax" at the Lyric in Tupelo, MS. For years afterward I refused to reenter that movie house due to the lingering thoughts of that picture show. I didn't even want to see Vincent on TV. The second version on the other hand does tempt a review to verify my original impression of the scenery.
Off topic but related to my previous entry, today I visited a local gunshop. On the used rack was a like new Rem M-700 SS, fluted, factory brake, Leupold rings, synthetic, camo stock all from the Rem Custom Gun Shop. It was marked $1298.00. Must have been to loud for somebody. Anyway next to it was a Win. M-94 in .30-30, made in 1938, nothing special except the blueing was gone leaving a satin silver receiver, barrel, magazine tube, and butt plate. The wood was fair at best with no cracks or chips but also no finish. The price $1,000.00 firm. I have owned and sold several of the latter for $100.00 to $300.00 some years ago. Once again I guess this is a sign of the times but damn I should have hung onto some of those old thuty-thuties.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dale freeman wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

If I buy one, at that price, do I get a date with Ms. Elisha ?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from William Larsen wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I just got one, but they are cheaper than $800 on Gunbroker.com. I will either put it on my Alexander Arms 6.5 Grendel(AR15), or my new M1A super match. It is easy to set up, I have read the instructions , and have it ready to put on a rifle and zero it. As for mounts it comes with 2 clamps that allow you to mount on weaver style bases, or picatinny rail. Can't wait to try it. Good bless and watch over our troops where ever they may be. MMC USN(RET)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 1uglymutha wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

scope looks great. cuthbert looks better. think i'll hold off on the scope for now. in about three days or so someone will come along with something better. (especially if this one sells)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Muleynut30.06 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To david peztal you are correct compensating for wind you still have to do. What really soured me on this scope was when I was watching a hunting show and the host said that if the guy he was hunting with would have had this scope he could have easily shot a mule deer at 400 yrds. This is the kinda thinking that when on the fence hunters see that are gunna go get that because a hunting host said it makes shooting easy

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Thanks, Dr. Petzal. Great review and ever better review of the previously posted image of Ms Cuthbert. I think pumpkin orange is my new favorite color!

I looked at that outfit (the Eliminator) at the show last year. Pretty neat concept. Just like rangefinding binoculars, it is heavier than its counterparts without those features. But the weight of a range finder + scope is probably about the same. My Burris Signature Select 3-12x44 scope weighs 18 ounces and Nikon rangefinder weighs about 9 ounces w/battery, so the weight is a wash. I know where my holdovers are out to 400 yards with all my rifles and am reluctant to shoot at anything beyond that range that isn't shooting back. The price is about what a decent scope and middlin' rangefinder go for.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from duff wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Wow, great posts, and a great product. I've seen it used, but not used it. Dave, call your friend(s) at Barrett and ask what they're using in the field on the 50 cal, and you'll find the same as the Brits with the Accuracy Int'l. It isn't the Burris. At 2500 meters, I don't care what kind of electronic help the boys have, that chalks up to better'n 800-1000 with an old Unertl 10X like I've used. In the mountains of Afghan and Pakistan, that thing is moving through 2-3 different micro-climate zones at those ranges.
Thanks!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

As cute a Ms.Cuthbert is I just can't pull the trigger on this one. To big and unnecessary. Not Ms. Cuthbert of course.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Platt wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

That scope would be completely useless in my world of 20-80 yard shots. Miss Cuthbert on the other hand, would come in handy several times a day, regardless of season.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jerry A. wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

That would be a nice scope to have on a varmit rifle, but I can't see that I would have any use for it on a big game rifle, at least anytime soon. The farm where I hunt deer doesn't offer any 300 yard shots, much less 500.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

@ Dr Ralph

LOL! In your dreams you old codger! She could fetch your Metamucil and such stuff!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Platt wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

Maybe she could help change the new granddaughters diapers... http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs405.snc4/46774_47180696544...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from elmer f. wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

I needawantagottahave one, both the scope, and Elisha. actually though, i will want more than one of the scopes, more than one woman, is simply nothing but a lot of trouble. the one thing i will have to check on first however, is if this will be legal in our state. the idiots that are supposed to represent us for some reason hate a lot of things, and electronic anything is one of their things. to be honest, i dont think that even lighted crosshairs are legal.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from mbrosch wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

Rifles have been around a very long time and their evolution is measured by incremental innovation in their components. From match-locks to flint to percussion caps each innovation produced others. We currently manufacture rifles and ammo that could easily take big game at 1000 yards except that we don't have sighting devices to point with. This Burris scope is a step toward the day when nearly anyone can take a humane shot a ranges not even conceived of yesterday. Is it good or bad? I don't have an opinion on that, but I can tell you that we will need to adjust our thinking about these things, and along the way some well intentioned but misguided people will make mistakes. One big mistake would be for us (sportsmen) to become yet another elitist club, snubbing this or that group for some reason. We need to embrace this technology
and understand it so we can have a positive influence on it. And we need to clone Elisha.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from thebidsnyper wrote 3 years 20 weeks ago

I feel bad for everyone bad-mouthing this piece of technology. Talk about hypocrites! Why not just use iron sites if you're so concerned about being a competent shooter? I'm a hunter, and I hunt everything with everything (handgun, rifle, shotgun, and archery). Hunting is about a lot more than making the shot. If you think you're a good hunter because you can shoot 500 yards with your traditional scope on a bolt-action rifle, go buy yourself a bow and see how you do.

I just shot a pronghorn in WY at 168 yards with my .454 Casull revolver, and I shot a whitetail in MI at 20 yards with my bow 2 weekends ago. I'm getting a 300 Weatherby Mag for Christmas, and if I'm lucky, I'll get this Burris Eliminator to put on it for my birthday in May. I'll take it next fall to shoot elk on public land in CO. Hopefully, I won't need to take a shot over 200 yards, and I won't need the Eliminator's technology, but if I'm going to take something as high-tech as a rifle on my hunt, I'm gonna put something as high-tech as the Eliminator on top of it!

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from Amflyer wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Wow. All this talk of space-age “this” and computerized “that” reminds of this one rifle I built that stretched the boundaries of science as we all know it.

I like flat shooting wildcats. Give me a 22-250, and I’ll show you a custom rifle in a 204-250. What good is a 30-06 when you can have a 204-’06 Ackley Improved 40 degree-shouldered laser beam? Who hasn’t necked down a .378 Weatherby to .204 caliber?

Anyway, it all started when I missed a shot at a far-away prairie dog. I mean really far away. In order to calculate how far away it was, I had to rangefind a friend, who was rangefinding a rock that looked like it was about 500 yards from where the dog was sitting in his hole. It perturbed me so, and I vowed right then and there that this was going to be remedied come hell or high water.

I got to thinking…what reason was there that no one has managed to neck down a 50 BMG (Ackley improved 40 degree shoulder) to a nice, ballistically efficient, .204 caliber? Sure, it’s a bit overbore, but no more that the Ultra Magnum family of .404 Jeffrey cartridges, right?

Everyone knows I like Remington rifles, so naturally I called the head of the company himself, Mr. Jerry-Jeff Remington, son of the late Fredrick Remington, and described my project. After a very short conversation, I decided that I would need to fabricate and put the rifle together myself, mostly because I get obstinate and bull-headed when people laugh at me, and I’m still not sure how he managed to slam a cell-phone, but that’s neither here nor there.

I found a nice company in China that would hand-manufacture some actions for me, and placed my order on the internet. Innovative was their middle name! Really. Soon I received my rough, but workable actions from the Shanghai Innovative Rifle works and Cast Iron Fence company, or at least that’s what the translation worked out to on Babelfish.

I would like to had a nice custom barrel made form the likes of Shaw, Lilja, Shilen or Green Mountain, but it turns out that you can get some mighty fine WW 2 era, slightly used half-track pushrods, that once straightened, polished, bored, rifled, chambered and crowned, actually work pretty dang well. I had my usual custom gunsmith, Barney “One eye” Wilson do the work for me. He usually hangs out down under the overpass, and if you keep him lubricated with Miller High-Life and slim Jims, will tell you some of the durndest stories about the Korean War that you’ve ever heard. And the work he turns out with only 6 fingers and no thumbs… just plain incredible.

Incidentally, he works up most of the load data for my projects too.

Once we had a workable action and barrel, I whittled out a nice stock from an old piece of 4 X 4 I found down by the river, affixed an old trigger from a 10-22 file I had laying around, mounted a Revelation 3 X 9 X 32 scope, and headed out to the range.

“One Eye” Wilson had bore sighted the rifle for me, so I figured I would start with a few sighters at about 500 yards. We were using self-fabricated custom brass, which had an innovative system which utilized twin Large Rifle Primers to set off the 248 grains of IMR-4831 we finally settled on as the most reasonable load that would probably have the least chance of not working. I loaded one of the impressive-looking cartridges and closed the bolt, flipped of the safety (which was really just a paper clip and a rubber band, but worked perfectly) and squeezed off the first round of what I planned on calling the 204 Awesome, once I had the bugs worked out and it was ready for SAAMI standardization.

Now, up to this point, I’m sure you’ve all been wondering what this innovative, yet mostly conventional, rifle has going for it that puts it in the nebulous category of “Space-age” or “Computerized.” To be completely honest, and in the interest of full disclosure, I will be the first to admit that I’m not really sure of what happened when the trigger was pulled, but here is the best likelihood of the most probable non-ficticious story I could figure out:

As we all know from watching “Star Trek: The Next Generation” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” the time-space continuum is a delicately balanced phenomenon and as fussy as a dentist at a Kid Rock concert . When the first round of the 204 Awesome finally went off on the third try, the bullet was travelling at such a velocity that this balance was upset, the continuum was ripped in twain, and time-travel was achieved.

By my best calculations, the 20 grain projectile exited the barrel at approximately Mach 33, and due to the RH twist of the tube, threw me bodily back in time, presumably to a point in my life before I had in fact invented the rifle. Therefore, and to wit, I found myself with no rifle in my hands and only the ubiquitous flash burns common to time-travelers when the smoke cleared. As the ringing in my ears subsided, I could hear bystanders asking if I was OK, although one of them seemed perturbed about something and kept yelling something that sounded like “forking tie-rod!” this, and “ruined truck!” that, and “I’ll kill you with my bare hands!,” etc, etc.

Anyway, when I realized the ramifications of my time travel, I must have passed out. When I awoke in the emergency room of the county hospital, the doctors confided that had the rifle been rifled with a LH twist, I may have been projected into the future, which due to the full moon and tidal patterns of the area may have resulted in much worse injuries, although presumably I would have been finished with the probation and community service the judge gave me for the damage t o the range and surrounding property.

Did I hit my target, you ask? I surely did. Presumably right where I was aiming, because scarcely 12 miles away, at the location of a high-fence hunting outfit that happened to be directly in the line of sight from my target, my bullet hit and instantly killed a large whitetail buck that was being groomed for a trophy hunt for none other than Mayor Richard M. Daley of nearby Chicago. (Who knew he was such an avid hunter?) I had to pay the trophy fees, but I did get to keep the buck.

The buck green-scored an impressive 567 23/24 nontypical, and dried to a slightly larger 589 6/9 total.

+9 Good Comment? | | Report
from crm3006 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Are terrorists a reflective target, or do they have fur? I think it would look good on an M1-A.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from Themasterdan wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I've got an even easier solution:
1. Buy a quality rifle.
2. Start reloading.
3 Shoot 3 days a week all year.
4. Shoot from Field Positions out to 500 yds.
5. Laugh at the guy who thought that he could buy experience.

I don't care how many gizmos and dinglehoppers a guy has, become a competent rifle man and you will hit your targets. Know you shooting system and be comfortable with it.

+6 Good Comment? | | Report
from focusfront wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

crm3006;

What you said.

If Burris sells something like this to us, I wonder what the military is using. From what I am told, those 2000 yard kills by our snipers are NOT just someone's imagination working overtime.

Let's see, what do I mount that scope on... my Marlin .35 Rem, or my Winchester .30-30... decisions, decisions-

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from woodsmanj35 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

great, one more electronic device to C$@% out in the bush. Sorry, nothin against the scope just against electronics in general. I'm sure it's very dependable, but you sure as hell won't see one on my guns.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Duckman1984 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Look, I'm in the Marine Corps and I shoot 500yds with open iron sights with the M-16A2. When you get to that level, let me know. Out of 10 shots at the 500yd line, with open iron sights, I get no less than nine rounds in the black. Yep, I'm bragging a little...I'm no sniper, by no means am I one, I just apply all the fundementals of marksmanship. But when I go out hunting, I love my 3-9X40 on my black powder. I might not drive nails at 500yds with open Iron sights, but at 200yds with my blackpowder and scope, I might as well be a construction worker...Technology is awesome, it truly is and this scope would be awesome to be looking through when pulling a trigger, however, if I'm taking a 500yd shot on big game, I would be afraid of only wounding the animal. The margin of error at that range is huge, a simple flinch, a gust of wind can make a big difference. Technology can do many things but it can't fix all the factors/problems associated with pulling a trigger.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Walt Smith wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Great another product that takes hunting in the non-ethical direction. Leave the computerized scope and the 800 yard shots to the military, there is no need for it in traditional ethical hunting. A simple 3X9X40 gives you all the advantage you should ever need to to take a game animal.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

For another $400 will they provide a stabilizer to enable the shooter to hold rock steady on the 550 yard target? Something a little more portable and short of a bench rest maybe.

I love my Burris 3-12x44!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I'm alwasy leary of anything requiring batteries. Obviously, some equipment like flashlights are required but where it is not required I don't like to take the chance of ruining a hunt because of dead batteries.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from davidpetzal wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To MJC: The Eliminator uses a form of rail mount, as on European scopes. The grooves and slots are integral with the scope tube and connect to the bases via two figure-8 clamps. If you Loc-Tite everything and torque down the clamp nuts to spec, you will have no problems. It's a strong system.

To HuntNow: It is not as good-looking as Ms. Elisha Cuthbert, but then neither are you nor I. As for reaching "only" to 500 yards, go take a look at a real 500 yards some time.

To MuleyNut.30/06. Flush out your headgear. The Eliminator solves half the equation. You still have to judge the wind, which is a lot tougher than compensating for bullet drop.

To Walt Smith: In principle I agree with you, but in real life people are going to take long shots whether they're qualified or not, so they might as well have something that will give them a chance of hitting.

To Amflyer: You have too much time on your hands.

To KuduKid: Amen.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Walt Smith wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Kudu Kid-- I concurr! Mr. Petzal-- the problem with providing a scope with this to to general public is that it makes one believe that 500+ yard shots are not only possible but almost guarenteed with this scope. So what happens?? You wind up with brainwashed hunters who are launching bullets as far as they can see, likley only watching the deer and possibly (Because of the trance they're in) not paying attention to the fellow hunter in a blind 350 yards out who is watching the same deer! I have had plenty of bullets wiz overhead by such over sights and I've always seen it as my god given right to send one back in the general vicinety from which it came! What say you sir?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Since I often utilize the same technology that is represented as one package in the Eliminator I suppose I can only critique it from the standpoint of esthetics. My stuff is certainly prettier and ranges farther if need be. I never liked having all my eggs in one basket as Murph's Law will surely slam me in the back of the head. Since I use some huge scopes on rifles like Nightforce and a Huskemaw I can tell you that I don't care for the bulk and am looking into smaller but suitably effective scopes for long shots. I am certain I would feel the same way regarding this Burris given its physical specifications. I paused while channel surfing the other day to watch Elisha in "House of Wax" which turned out to be a piece of crap movie but with excellent scenery. I wonder if she would consider staring in a Canadian TV hunting show.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zermoid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Looks aside, I wonder how durable it is? A good Scope can pretty much last a lifetime, anything with circuitry will eventually fail.
I assume it can at least be used like a regular scope if batteries, and or electronics, fail?

EHHH, looked at the home page and immediately noted a problem:
Operating Temperature 14°F - 122°F

Since I have seen -12°F during deer season here in PA I'm not to sure it would work all the time, besides the places I hunt you can seldom see past 150 yds!

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Steve in Virginia wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I think new technology certainly has a place in the woods, but I wonder if this type of thing will -- in the minds of some -- simply replace the need to develop the skill and judgement needed to be a competent shooter. Love the post -- keep 'em coming -- but let's talk about the stuff we really need in the woods, like disposble biodegradable wet wipes.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from countitandone wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

"Just Range, Aim, Fire" My question is, how much fun is easy?

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jere Smith wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

The snipers in the sandbox are equipped with scopes by Triijicon. (SP)? I have a friend who used one on a Barrett and made a kill just under a mile.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Maybe it would be better to develop some skill as a rifleman and depend on that. 10 shots and no trophy is pretty sad, although you do get some credit for fessing up to the debacle.

To date none of this technology is much help in figuring the effect of wind...which is often greater than the effect of gravity.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from huntnow wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

For that money, I'd expect it to range a little further on game. Plus it's so damn ugly.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bellringer wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

What ever happened to actually hunting the animal. Long shots by most hunters are really just SHOTS IN THE DARK.
I am more impressed by a really good stalk and close shot than one over in the next zip code.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from MLH wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Sort of like shifting a high tech race car with paddle-shifter and automatic clutch versus shifting and heel-and-toeing a manual through the gears. The former may be faster and more efficient but the latter takes more skill and provides greater satisfaction. But I like them both.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Good to see that you finally got the call from Burris to test one of their products. Hopefully they will send you more stuff in the future. As for the Eliminator, I'm glad something that big and ugly really works.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

As cute a Ms.Cuthbert is I just can't pull the trigger on this one. To big and unnecessary. Not Ms. Cuthbert of course.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I sometimes believe we should be disallowed to hunt with anything but an open sighted .30-30 and a compass. No GPS, no wind meter, no scope, no large case cartridge, no, no, no nothing. Pull on your orange vest and start hunting. The whole deal today is moving away from how we hunted back in the seventies and into a modern era that is a bit frightening. The problem is everyone would have to be in compliance of the ".30-30" law or the outlaws would have an unfair advantage over those who obeyed the regulations. I suppose we could go a step even farther back to only using original type muzzleloaders (my neighbor's muzzleloader has more bells and whistles than my newest magnum centerfire and he is working on a 400 yard gun that is believable, no shxt), or perhaps to longbows, or maybe just sitting in a tree and dropping a boulder on the deer passig underneath. I truthfully don't know the answer so continue to move along into this century of technology like most everyone else. I don't think I like it as much as in those distant days of yesteryear.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ishawooa wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To David Petzal: As a kid I saw the original "House of Wax" at the Lyric in Tupelo, MS. For years afterward I refused to reenter that movie house due to the lingering thoughts of that picture show. I didn't even want to see Vincent on TV. The second version on the other hand does tempt a review to verify my original impression of the scenery.
Off topic but related to my previous entry, today I visited a local gunshop. On the used rack was a like new Rem M-700 SS, fluted, factory brake, Leupold rings, synthetic, camo stock all from the Rem Custom Gun Shop. It was marked $1298.00. Must have been to loud for somebody. Anyway next to it was a Win. M-94 in .30-30, made in 1938, nothing special except the blueing was gone leaving a satin silver receiver, barrel, magazine tube, and butt plate. The wood was fair at best with no cracks or chips but also no finish. The price $1,000.00 firm. I have owned and sold several of the latter for $100.00 to $300.00 some years ago. Once again I guess this is a sign of the times but damn I should have hung onto some of those old thuty-thuties.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from nc30-06 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Wow! All the bad-mouthing of the Eliminator. It is not that bad looking on a rifle. And just how many of you actually follow your own recommendations for all the practice? $850 too much? Once you buy your other scope, rangefinder, and all, you would probabley have that much invested anyway. And what if you are on a hunt of a lifetime with the shot at a trophy of a lifetime, and you miss or don't even get the shot off because you are fiddling with said range-finder, then having to re-aquire with the scope? I don't disagree with you guys, just pointing out the other side. High-tech is always advancing. Otherwise, we would still be using spears. To each his own.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Bernie wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I'll take Elisha; you can have the Eliminator.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from damo450 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Hey DEL in Kansas! Are you talking about my farm???? Gotta keep an eye on you, tell my fellow Maconites you are plotting on our pests!! haha!

Who the hell would put this on a handgun??? Just a thought.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from duff wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Wow, great posts, and a great product. I've seen it used, but not used it. Dave, call your friend(s) at Barrett and ask what they're using in the field on the 50 cal, and you'll find the same as the Brits with the Accuracy Int'l. It isn't the Burris. At 2500 meters, I don't care what kind of electronic help the boys have, that chalks up to better'n 800-1000 with an old Unertl 10X like I've used. In the mountains of Afghan and Pakistan, that thing is moving through 2-3 different micro-climate zones at those ranges.
Thanks!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from tygh98 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Not a fan of the scope, but I dont see how the shot would be any easier with or without the computer. It only removes the guess work, skill is still required.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Aw c'mon guys, let's leave that stuff for the military.

If you can't get your game with a scope-mounted high-powered rifle what kind of a "hunter" are you?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Besides that it's heavy and looks like crap on a decent rifle.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from kudukid wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To davidpetzal:

I agree with your last except regarding Walt Smith.

If someone is just going to make a hit at 500 yards and over (and 500 yards is a heck-of-a-long-shot on a living animal), I'd rather they miss completely. The broadside vital area on a pronghorn is smaller than a pie plate. Even if you know how much your bullet drifts in a given wind, if you're guess of a side wind, for instance, is off by 2 MPH, say 12 MPH instead of 10, at 500 yards you'll be too far left or right something like 5 inches...enough to miss the vital area completely irrespective of bullet drop.

I have seen and personally made poor hits on game and it isn't pretty. I hope we can all AIM never to put an animal in unnecessary pain. Don't shoot until certain of a quick-killing shot. Let's discourage uncertain shooting wherever we can. This website is a good place to start.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from MJC wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

It looks like the rings must be built into the body of the scope. I'd be a little worried about it loosening up over time, but given your good review I assume it held on well.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jason Hart wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

The Eliminator almost seems like the perfect long range scope. Anything that gets you within three inches at the ranges you tested it at is phenominal. Great review Mr Petzel.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Muleynut30.06 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To david peztal you are correct compensating for wind you still have to do. What really soured me on this scope was when I was watching a hunting show and the host said that if the guy he was hunting with would have had this scope he could have easily shot a mule deer at 400 yrds. This is the kinda thinking that when on the fence hunters see that are gunna go get that because a hunting host said it makes shooting easy

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from keithjoyner wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I just used one on an Arizona pronghorn hunt. Ten years of applications to finally get drawn, but Arizona has some big pronghorn, and I wanted the best chance at one.

Ten shots at nice bucks, all ranged with the scope and shot from a solid brace. Score? No hits. The scope shot great on targets but somehow missed the proper range on pronghorns. I could have cried!

On one braggin' sized buck it ranged 205 yards with him lying down. Easy shot. At the rifle report, he and the does got up and milled around, then ran straight at me and stopped again. This time it ranged 365 yards! How could he go from 205 toward me and be at 365? At all ten shots, the bucks acted like I hadn't even come close.

I sent it back to Burris hoping for some sort of refund consideration. Haven't heard a word from them. From now on I'll leave the high tech to others, I'm back to the old tried and true. Maybe I'll get drawn in another ten years.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ScottM wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I understand the Eliminator takes the guesswork out of holdover and does it fast, but that's a pile of cash and lot of technology that's getting banged around the in the woods and my truck.
For the money I'd just as soon get a decent hand-held laser range finder and a good quality scope with a calibrated elevation dial like a Leupold VX-3 with a CDS or Nikon M223 (for .223 55 gr loads). I could use the rangefinder for other pursuits and with multiple guns, rather than have the Eliminator tied to one rifle (unless you like to sight-in everytime you take a rifle out of your gun safe).

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from William Larsen wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I just got one, but they are cheaper than $800 on Gunbroker.com. I will either put it on my Alexander Arms 6.5 Grendel(AR15), or my new M1A super match. It is easy to set up, I have read the instructions , and have it ready to put on a rifle and zero it. As for mounts it comes with 2 clamps that allow you to mount on weaver style bases, or picatinny rail. Can't wait to try it. Good bless and watch over our troops where ever they may be. MMC USN(RET)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from davidpetzal wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

To Walt Smith: You may see it as your God-given right, but the law might see it differently. I don't think I would do that. As for brainwashed hunters launching lead at many hundreds of yards, they're doing it now, and they're going to do it regardless.

To Ishawooa: I agree about The House of Wax. The first one (in 3-D) in 1954 with Vincent Price and Phyllis Kirk was a terrific movie, and genuinely scary, but the second...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Thanks, Dr. Petzal. Great review and ever better review of the previously posted image of Ms Cuthbert. I think pumpkin orange is my new favorite color!

I looked at that outfit (the Eliminator) at the show last year. Pretty neat concept. Just like rangefinding binoculars, it is heavier than its counterparts without those features. But the weight of a range finder + scope is probably about the same. My Burris Signature Select 3-12x44 scope weighs 18 ounces and Nikon rangefinder weighs about 9 ounces w/battery, so the weight is a wash. I know where my holdovers are out to 400 yards with all my rifles and am reluctant to shoot at anything beyond that range that isn't shooting back. The price is about what a decent scope and middlin' rangefinder go for.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

@ Dr Ralph

LOL! In your dreams you old codger! She could fetch your Metamucil and such stuff!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Del in KS wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

That is one heck of a scope. A fella...a quick fella could command a whole 80 acre cow pasture on opening day of deer season with that thing on a good bolt rifle. I know just the place in Macon Co. Missouri. Deer stream across this pasture leaving public land for the safety of posted land on the other side. Need to put one on my Kimber 25-06 or that new Shaw 22-250 loaded with 60 grain Nosler Partitions at 3700 fps.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Platt wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

That scope would be completely useless in my world of 20-80 yard shots. Miss Cuthbert on the other hand, would come in handy several times a day, regardless of season.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Platt wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

Maybe she could help change the new granddaughters diapers... http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs405.snc4/46774_47180696544...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jerry A. wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

That would be a nice scope to have on a varmit rifle, but I can't see that I would have any use for it on a big game rifle, at least anytime soon. The farm where I hunt deer doesn't offer any 300 yard shots, much less 500.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Don't even think about price whining. To buy a truly good scope and good rangefinder, you're going to be spending that or more.

"It ranges to...550 on something with fur."

Are we sure this is far enough for today's hunter?

Is that a 50mm? How is it optically?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Ish, no way. Populations would be out of control.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from elmer f. wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

I needawantagottahave one, both the scope, and Elisha. actually though, i will want more than one of the scopes, more than one woman, is simply nothing but a lot of trouble. the one thing i will have to check on first however, is if this will be legal in our state. the idiots that are supposed to represent us for some reason hate a lot of things, and electronic anything is one of their things. to be honest, i dont think that even lighted crosshairs are legal.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jbird wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

And my 'wish-list' grows once again! I think it sounds awesome!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CJ wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

I think Bushnell sells a copy of that scope now. Ain't no copying Elisha!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from dale freeman wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

If I buy one, at that price, do I get a date with Ms. Elisha ?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from sgaredneck wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

Did Burris really decide to make something that fugly? Now if that Burris scope was as easy on the eyes Elisha....

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 1uglymutha wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

scope looks great. cuthbert looks better. think i'll hold off on the scope for now. in about three days or so someone will come along with something better. (especially if this one sells)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Muleynut30.06 wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

This is about the dumbest scope I've ever seen/heard of. It takes all the skill out of shooting and hunting and allows any rich idiot to go get one mount it and pull the trigger and think he is a good hunter/shooter. Not too mention it looks retarded on top of a good looking gun. If a see two guys in the field make the same impressive shot one with a computer on his gun and the other who has a traditonal scope and knows his rifle I will congradulate the latter. This takes all the satisfaction of making a good shot because you put in the time behind the gun out of the equation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mike Plotner wrote 3 years 28 weeks ago

toad strangling down pour that sounds good. i got touse that some time...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from mbrosch wrote 3 years 27 weeks ago

Rifles have been around a very long time and their evolution is measured by incremental innovation in their components. From match-locks to flint to percussion caps each innovation produced others. We currently manufacture rifles and ammo that could easily take big game at 1000 yards except that we don't have sighting devices to point with. This Burris scope is a step toward the day when nearly anyone can take a humane shot a ranges not even conceived of yesterday. Is it good or bad? I don't have an opinion on that, but I can tell you that we will need to adjust our thinking about these things, and along the way some well intentioned but misguided people will make mistakes. One big mistake would be for us (sportsmen) to become yet another elitist club, snubbing this or that group for some reason. We need to embrace this technology
and understand it so we can have a positive influence on it. And we need to clone Elisha.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from thebidsnyper wrote 3 years 20 weeks ago

I feel bad for everyone bad-mouthing this piece of technology. Talk about hypocrites! Why not just use iron sites if you're so concerned about being a competent shooter? I'm a hunter, and I hunt everything with everything (handgun, rifle, shotgun, and archery). Hunting is about a lot more than making the shot. If you think you're a good hunter because you can shoot 500 yards with your traditional scope on a bolt-action rifle, go buy yourself a bow and see how you do.

I just shot a pronghorn in WY at 168 yards with my .454 Casull revolver, and I shot a whitetail in MI at 20 yards with my bow 2 weekends ago. I'm getting a 300 Weatherby Mag for Christmas, and if I'm lucky, I'll get this Burris Eliminator to put on it for my birthday in May. I'll take it next fall to shoot elk on public land in CO. Hopefully, I won't need to take a shot over 200 yards, and I won't need the Eliminator's technology, but if I'm going to take something as high-tech as a rifle on my hunt, I'm gonna put something as high-tech as the Eliminator on top of it!

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

bmxbiz-fs