Burris Signature rings - why are some people not using them?

[Tommie]

Having used Signature rings since their first introduction, I've become a total convert. Having the ability to add/subtract elevation offset as needed is the prime appeal, but ditching the need for ring lapping is a big plus for me. I've lapped rings in the past and honestly I always wondered how precise the process is. Am I exerting torque or deflection while moving the lapping bar?

Since Signature rings (both the original and XTR version) seem to be the ultimate easy button, there's obviously something I'm not aware of. Are they not as secure as traditional rings?

PLEASE understand this is not a loaded question. I'm genuinely curious.

 

[CJ6]

Plus the added benefit of not marring the scope.
I've marked some scopes on heavy recoiling rifles and I've never had any problems with slippage on any over the years.

 

[Straightshooter1]

Having used Signature rings since their first introduction, I've become a total convert. Having the ability to add/subtract elevation offset as needed is the prime appeal, but ditching the need for ring lapping is a big plus for me. I've lapped rings in the past and honestly I always wondered how precise the process is. Am I exerting torque or deflection while moving the lapping bar?

Since Signature rings (both the original and XTR version) seem to be the ultimate easy button, there's obviously something I'm not aware of. Are they not as secure as traditional rings?

PLEASE understand this is not a loaded question. I'm genuinely curious.

That's a good question.

I've been using the Signature rings on my 2 centerfire guns for 8 years and have not had any kind of an issue with them. I like the adjustable inserts and the inserts keep the scopes in place (no slippage over time of any kind).

 

[Rook 6]

I too am a complete convert. They absolutely work as designed. Zero issues and very versatile with the various inserts. The only negative I can think of them is that they are heavy. Might be an issue in some applications. I’ve used them in hunting and competitions for decades.

 

[Kevin1990]

Not trying to highjack this, but I I plan on getting a pair of the signature rings for a bench rifle, but can't find them in the z series for what I need. Is the XTR the same as the original

My question, albeit stupid; the inserts, could they effect poi or accuracy in anyway due to it being a softer mating surface than metal on metal or metal on bedding?

 

[DShortt]

Probably because not everyone finds them necessarily, nor convenient.

You asked.

 

[209jones]

I've never had an issue with Burris rings, except that once I wanted a lower height they didn't make, and now they do. Had them on one gun that I was constantly swapping out scope to irons and back, never a moments trouble, never moved once installed, didn't mar the scope. I don't see any advantage to the 400.00Cdn+ ring setups when I can accomplish the same thing with 150.00cdn or less, XTR rings, and get up to 40MOA out of them if I want. There again too, I had guns with the old Weaver steel rings that people hate, trouble free for 40 yrs, didn't really care if they marred the scope taking them off after 40 yrs service, and they didn't.

 

[qldreloader]

Nightforce ultralight rings for me. I can use multiple scopes on one rifle (day scope, thermal etc) with a 2 min swap and excellent zero retention. No lapping required. I run 30MOA offset rails on any gun I need extra elevation for. It's really hot here in Queensland and I would not trust plastic inserts.

 

[Tangent]

I bought a set of XTR rings to tide me over until I could afford a one piece set. However, I've found them to work so well I've just stuck with them. 10MOA inserts put me at roughly optical centre at 500yds.

 

[R.Morehouse]

When they start making things that look like these, I will give them another look....

Regards
Rick

 

[hoz53]

Having used Signature rings since their first introduction, I've become a total convert. Having the ability to add/subtract elevation offset as needed is the prime appeal, but ditching the need for ring lapping is a big plus for me. I've lapped rings in the past and honestly I always wondered how precise the process is. Am I exerting torque or deflection while moving the lapping bar?

Since Signature rings (both the original and XTR version) seem to be the ultimate easy button, there's obviously something I'm not aware of. Are they not as secure as traditional rings?

PLEASE understand this is not a loaded question. I'm genuinely curious.

lots of reasons someone wouldnt use them that have nothing to do with how well they work. i use sigzee for about all my scopes. have never had a scope move with them.
and no more mars on the scope. i like the adjustment. i have some older scopes with lots of dings on the tube. (pre zee) i reserve my “other old” rings for them. the one thing id like to see is the inserts be more available in a wider range of sizes for 30 mm. the time i called burris and asked about getting some they wernt very nice. somebody with a 3D printer probably could sell a few of the inserts

 

[Leeman]

Not trying to highjack this, but I I plan on getting a pair of the signature rings for a bench rifle, but can't find them in the z series for what I need. Is the XTR the same as the original

My question, albeit stupid; the inserts, could they effect poi or accuracy in anyway due to it being a softer mating surface than metal on metal or metal on bedding?

The XTR are just a heavier duty version of the standard signature Zee rings available in 30 & 34mm. The Zee designation being a Weaver/picatinny mounting system, the 'standard' Signatures are also available in other mounting systems. As another poster said they are heavy so unlikely to be an option for a short range BR rifle if that was your intention.

The standard Signatures in Zee format are all I have used for the past 25 years on numerous rifles and never had any zero issues, the scopes always return to the same elevation and windage setting, ambient conditions notwithstanding.

I spent 30mins yesterday setting up a long range rifle, 1" left at 100 yards using the offset rings to centre up the scopes windage adjustment and give equal full movement left and right.

 

[Fuj]

In some cases, they are too heavy. I had em' on a favorite chuck rifle.
i was looking to remove 2 lbs, and those were the first things gone
in the project. I tried weighing them with a March scope for a 17 lb
VBR rifle build. Again, just too heavy for the combination I wanted
to use and still keep a heavy barrel.

 

[Nvcnvc]

Just too heavy for competition guns ( f class and benchrest). I use them in all my hunting guns though.

 

[Nvcnvc]

Nightforce ultralight rings for me. I can use multiple scopes on one rifle (day scope, thermal etc) with a 2 min swap and excellent zero retention. No lapping required. I run 30MOA offset rails on any gun I need extra elevation for. It's really hot here in Queensland and I would not trust plastic inserts.

I have three sets of those also. They are amazing!

 

[hogpatrol]

Why not use them? Because the Barska ones at Walmart are a lot cheaper (14.99 plus tax) and they work just as good on the Nightfarces I got off of ebay. Seriously, considering the scope being mounted, there could be a cost factor. Except for 34mm Seekins, the Burris are all I use on 1" and 30mm.

 

[JEFFPPC]

Not trying to highjack this, but I I plan on getting a pair of the signature rings for a bench rifle, but can't find them in the z series for what I need. Is the XTR the same as the original

My question, albeit stupid; the inserts, could they effect poi or accuracy in anyway due to it being a softer mating surface than metal on metal or metal on bedding?

You need the Signature Rings with Inserts. I have won lots of matches using them. But in answer to the OPs question I can only equate it to normal stupidity. As in, Why to people smoke, Why do people drink and drive. DUH!

 

[Tesoro]

Many of my scopes come close to the value of the rifles they are mounted on. I often upgrade or swap either for another and the biggest de-valuer of a used scope is visible mounting marks. For this reason alone I try to use Burris, even if I don't need vertical or horizontal adjustments to keep the reticle on center.

 

[Gary in MD]

Why aren't some people using them? Hmmmm....
They aren't fancy/expensive enough. Surely something that costs 4 times as much must be better?
They aren't complicated enough. Surely something that you have to put in a bunch of effort and time lapping and bedding must be better?
They use some synthetic "plastic" material. So, they can't be as strong?
I have used them for quite some years and they haven't allowed any scope to slip and also have never left even a faint mark even though I play "musical scopes" at times.
YMMV

 

[Shooter13]

When they start making things that look like these, I will give them another look....

Regards
Rick

We'll miss Harrells!! I have 3 or 4 sets (not for sale) and they are just convenient, not having to lean as far over the rifle to look through the glass and less possibility of bumping gun. I like 'em!