Burris Signature inserts (which way?).

[D-4297]

Tied them when they first came out , at the recommend of my G/S . He was right . All three of my F-Class have them . Installed , adjusted and set over five years ago . Scopes don't move . No longer even concerned about scope movement issues , or changes . Best money ever spent for any set of rings .

 

[6MMsteve]

I lovem but I still deburr the edges to keep from scarfing the tube, 20 inch lbs good to go

 

[Riflman]

Wrong.
View attachment 1372939

Is it me or this diagram just wrong? It shows a scope in rings on a base, but no reference to the muzzle end vs butt, or objective vs eyepiece, other than what looks to be the power change ring that means it's eyepiece, right? But if that's the eye piece (or rear), then isn't that can't on this diagram going in the wrong direction? IOW, that scope should be flipped horizontally, no? A 20 MOA rail is higher in the rear so....

I thought for 20 MOA, the scope objective should be can't down toward the muzzle? If so then the graphic designer screwed that up and Burris didn't notice. I've been using these since they came out, but haven't messed with my rifles since, that's like 20 years, but now I want to swap out a nigh force scope and I'm like, WTF? These directions don't make sense.

 

[Tesoro]

Keep reading the instructions until you understand how they work. When the light turns on you can toss the instructions for ever. They are much more simple than they appear.

 

[Lone Hunter]

In the diagram the front shows -20 the rear +5 for a total of 25 moa. The diagram is correct. Think about when you move your scope you think because the turret shows up it is actually moving crosshair down which results in elevation going up. Clear as mud but look through your scope and move xhairs up they go down and move them down with turrets they go up. Burris diagram is correct. I use the xtr signature rings on everything I can and love them.

 

[Florida Wally]

Is it me or this diagram just wrong? It shows a scope in rings on a base, but no reference to the muzzle end vs butt, or objective vs eyepiece, other than what looks to be the power change ring that means it's eyepiece, right? But if that's the eye piece (or rear), then isn't that can't on this diagram going in the wrong direction? IOW, that scope should be flipped horizontally, no? A 20 MOA rail is higher in the rear so....

I thought for 20 MOA, the scope objective should be can't down toward the muzzle? If so then the graphic designer screwed that up and Burris didn't notice. I've been using these since they came out, but haven't messed with my rifles since, that's like 20 years, but now I want to swap out a nigh force scope and I'm like, WTF? These directions don't make sense.

I agree, the picture in the diagram looks like the objective is on the left and the eyepiece is on the right which would be backwards. There is another picture in the instructions that labels the left side of the scope (with a different scope image) as the ocular and the right side as the objective which would make more sense. It appears that the text in the diagram is correct, but as you note, the image of the scope is flipped horizontally. In fact, if you go to post #40 and look at the first pdf of the instructions, the text to the left of that image explains that the front ring has the -20 insert.

 

[6BRA]

Anyone ever considered or seen a change of point of impact due to temperature change effecting these inserts?

 

[Eagle Six]

Is it me or this diagram just wrong? It shows a scope in rings on a base, but no reference to the muzzle end vs butt, or objective vs eyepiece, other than what looks to be the power change ring that means it's eyepiece, right? But if that's the eye piece (or rear), then isn't that can't on this diagram going in the wrong direction? IOW, that scope should be flipped horizontally, no? A 20 MOA rail is higher in the rear so....

I thought for 20 MOA, the scope objective should be can't down toward the muzzle? If so then the graphic designer screwed that up and Burris didn't notice. I've been using these since they came out, but haven't messed with my rifles since, that's like 20 years, but now I want to swap out a nigh force scope and I'm like, WTF? These directions don't make sense.

You are correct.

 

[Lone Hunter]

Is it me or this diagram just wrong? It shows a scope in rings on a base, but no reference to the muzzle end vs butt, or objective vs eyepiece, other than what looks to be the power change ring that means it's eyepiece, right? But if that's the eye piece (or rear), then isn't that can't on this diagram going in the wrong direction? IOW, that scope should be flipped horizontally, no? A 20 MOA rail is higher in the rear so....

I thought for 20 MOA, the scope objective should be can't down toward the muzzle? If so then the graphic designer screwed that up and Burris didn't notice. I've been using these since they came out, but haven't messed with my rifles since, that's like 20 years, but now I want to swap out a nigh force scope and I'm like, WTF? These directions don't make sense.

If you would have shown the picture as the instructions came from Burris you will see in my crude highlighted area that they tell you which is the front and which is the rear by the -20 bottom and +20 top is the front, +5 bottom and -5 top is the rear. It tells you that combination gives you 25 moa of downward travel. Sorry for the crude drawing but hopefully it might help.Edited to add: The spacing on your rings also determines how much moa the inserts produce. It sounds complicated but is really not. Refer to the chart Burris provides for the spacing.

 

[Eagle Six]

The instructions are correct, it's the diagram that is incorrect.

 

[Lone Hunter]

The instructions are correct, it's the diagram that is incorrect.

Just looked at it closer. I Feel, ( wife says I am a D/A ) like one. The diagram is backward. The ocular and objective are reversed. Didn’t look too close. Lack of observation skills not too good.

 

[Eagle Six]

Just looked at it closer. I Feel, ( wife says I am a D/A ) like one. The diagram is backward. The ocular and objective are reversed. Didn’t look too close. Lack of observation skills not too good.

Sometimes we get confused or glance and miss the details. During sight-in day at the range I've seen more than one rifle with the scope backwards, I bet you have too. Talking with other shooters it's more common than even I thought.

 

[Florida Wally]

Sometimes we get confused or glance and miss the details. During sight-in day at the range I've seen more than one rifle with the scope backwards, I bet you have too. Talking with other shooters it's more common than even I thought.

Apparently, they have Burris rings

 

[DRK]

Anyone ever considered or seen a change of point of impact due to temperature change effecting these inserts?

No. I run these rings on all the rifles I hunt with from varmints in the spring to deer in the fall. Temperature swings from teens to 80.

 

[Riflman]

I agree, the picture in the diagram looks like the objective is on the left and the eyepiece is on the right which would be backwards. There is another picture in the instructions that labels the left side of the scope (with a different scope image) as the ocular and the right side as the objective which would make more sense. It appears that the text in the diagram is correct, but as you note, the image of the scope is flipped horizontally. In fact, if you go to post #40 and look at the first pdf of the instructions, the text to the left of that image explains that the front ring has the -20 insert.

Yeah I have and use a bunch of these rings including the inserts, and that scope in the diagram is definitely backwards. The eyepiece should be on the other end and they could also include a label or arrow for muzzle end.

 

[Riflman]

If you would have shown the picture as the instructions came from Burris you will see in my crude highlighted area that they tell you which is the front and which is the rear by the -20 bottom and +20 top is the front, +5 bottom and -5 top is the rear. It tells you that combination gives you 25 moa of downward travel. Sorry for the crude drawing but hopefully it might help.View attachment 1519908Edited to add: The spacing on your rings also determines how much moa the inserts produce. It sounds complicated but is really not. Refer to the chart Burris provides for the spacing.

Agree your FRONT and BACK Labels for insert configuration is correct, but the scope ocular in your diagram is over the label "FRONT" and the Objective is Labeled "REAR" which makes the original diagram totally wrong. The graphic designer is obviously not a hunter and does not know know which end is which. Lol. I own an ad/marketing agency in the shooting sports and I deal with this often. Just surprised Burris marketing didn't catch it.

 

[Lone Hunter]

Agree your FRONT and BACK Labels for insert configuration is correct, but the scope ocular in your diagram is over the label "FRONT" and the Objective is Labeled "REAR" which makes the original diagram totally wrong. The graphic designer is obviously not a hunter and does not know know which end is which. Lol. I own an ad/marketing agency in the shooting sports and I deal with this often. Just surprised Burris marketing didn't catch it.

See my reply on reading comprehension, or my lack of…lol.. post #51