Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics T&E: Bushy 3-12X44 LRHS

March would be my first choice of all scopes, but their price tag is not even close to my budget.

Even more outside of my realm considering they only come with a 5yr warranty.

Cool scope.



Travis

My first hand experience is that the S&B PMII of Pat's has slightly better glass than the March Tactical 3-24...

Jordan, Could it have been the difference in objective size?

Quite possibly. That thought crossed my mind, as well. But none-the-less I saw what I saw. So it's not like March is head and shoulders above S&B, by any means...

You get what you pay for.....

Doubt it. They're the same.

Yeah, another nice scope.

One's 42mm, the other's 50mm.

My bad. I thought the March is a 42mm also.

The March is a 42mm, and they just came out with a new 2.5x25 FFP 52mm!

Pat have you had a chance to do any more testing on this scope? Thoughts?

Just a thought on comparisons. I have had Leupold, Zeiss, and Schmidt & Bender 3-12x42 Klassic. The Klassic is probably the best all round hunting scope available. From the wide open fields of Kansas to the long dark brush laden senderos of s.Texas it has no peer. Ackley fan said it best...you get what you pay for and you only have to pay once. I've seen so many guys buy and sell 3,4,10 scopes looking for that one good one. In the mean time they could have bought the Klassic and been done with it. The only problem w/owning one is that you only want to hunt with the gun it is mounted on. A lot of people complain about the different #4 reticles and their sizes. The Klassic is a FFP and lets one make the #4 any size you want. powdr

Not doubting the quality and performance of a S&B, but how is the 3-12 Classic relevant in a long range scope thread?

The SB 3-12 Classic is relevant when comparing it to the subject of this thread..

I'm trying to find one long range feature in the S&B Classic (there's not one). The entire purpose of the Bushnell is to be the best long range hunting scope. If you can't see how they are not comparable then you definitely have no need for the Bushy.

If this scope weighed 16oz instead of 22oz you would have a real winner! I would gladly accept a 40mm objective to shave the weight. I doubt a lot of long range shooting is done at dusk/dawn in low light situations. 16oz?......now you have a hunting scope that doesn't drastically affect the balance of a hunting weight rifle. At least that is my thoughts. For a dedicated long range rifle with a heavy stock/barrel it's not as big a deal. I would buy one today at 16oz or less.

Hogwild, 16oz comes at the expense of reliability. Can't image 6 oz being a deal killer on any rifle this scope should ride on. What did we do before Talley LW's? Steel rings is about the difference you're fretting.

I think don't 16 isn't too realistic without skimping on durability. 22 is still a half a pound lighter than most LR scopes.