Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Anyone Try the Bushy LRHS?

RDFINN, the SS 3-9 is around $599. How is the LRHS $900 better? Twelve power is kind of in no man's land anyway. If you are going past 9x, might as well jump to 15+.

$600 vs $1000 = $400 difference, not $900.

12X is no man's land. Thats interesting.

Differences:
Zero stop (critical difference for me)
Parallax adjustment (big deal)
10 mils per rev vs. 5 mils (big deal)
low profile capped windage knob (big deal)
Great glass vs good glass


How would you compare the Bushy at $1000 to the nonilluminated NF 2.5-10x42 at $1600?

We could go round and round on this topic and we would both (well at least me) being speaking out of ignorance. I don't believe that power should define cost rather than construction and cost of components. From the thread started by George Gardner about this scope, he felt (or maybe it was Pat Sinclair) that the optics were very close to any high end Zeiss IIRC he'd used. Glass is a very big part of scope cost as I'm sure you know. I have no idea why they chose that power range and I can't speak intelligently about it either. There is, however, already talk about expanding that LRHS line with different reticles and power ranges from what a little birdy told me.

doggie if you can't see how this is better than a super sniper scope I don't know what to tell you. at 1k I think the scope occupies a very good niche a niche no one else is really in. 12x isn't no mans land its actually all the power a big game hunter can reasonably use. the scope is a long range hunting scope. is there scopes better for other purposes heck yeah. I personally would like a little more power because with a little more you can also use the scope for long range load development instead of having to put a specific load development scope on the gun. but in an actual hunting application 12x will get the job done to at least 1000 yards on a big game target.

the other thing you get is lots of movement in one revolution of the turret, you also get a zero stop. when you add it all up YES its worth that much more than a super sniper.

Some of us have actually used and like the scope. Others are just guessing�

John

Name a single scope that has the features this scope has for $500, or even $1k which is about the LRHS's current street price.

Let's see�

Accurate tracking
Reliable return to zero
Rugged construction
FFP reticle
Zero Stop
10 mils per rev
Low Profile turrets
Reticle suitable for close range low light situations
Glass rivaling Zeiss and other scopes known for their superb optics

One year satisfaction guarantee and lifetime repair or replace after that. That's right. If you don't like the scope for any reason for up to one year of purchase, Bushnell will refund your money.

Who else makes a scope for the same $ that has these features?

John

That never happens around here, does it?

Has anyone heard if the MOA version that will be coming out next year will be limited to the 4.5-18, or will the 3-12 be getting it, too?

I used to feel the same way until I started researching their Elite Tactical series. Their lower lines are not even in the same ballpark. I learned enough about the performance of the Elite Tacticals in combat and tactical competitions to make me want to give one a try. Based on how mine has performed for me, it was a great decision.

Bushnell is certainly not only ones that build to multiple price points. Let's see� VX1, VX2, Hog, VXR, VX3, VX6� You get the idea.

The Bushnell Elite Tactical series are not the Bushnells of old�

Quit guessing. Try one. If you don't like it, Bushnell will refund your money.

John

I have wondered the same thing but don't know. Might post that question over on the hide. I'm sure George would know.

I resisted mils for a long time, but it's a pretty easy transition, actually VERY intuitive.

John

I resisted switching from moa based systems to mil based systems for a long time. I didn't feel the 0.36 click (0.1 mil) was precise enough. Silly really for two reasons; (1) The 1/4 moa is 1/4 of 1.047" at 100 yds...functionally 1/4 of an inch vs. a little over 1/3 of an inch for the 0.1 mil click.

Hardly a difference; < 0.11".

(2) The second reason is I don't shoot well enough for that tiny difference to make any real world difference.

It's not so much transitioning from MOA to mils that bothers me, it's that I already have a lot invested in MOA-based scopes (USO, NF, etc) and would rather keep all of my optics in one format.

don't let them make you feel inferior over that. its simply a unit of measure nothing more nothing less. if one works better for YOU keep doing it.

I like everything about the scope, the only thing I would have done differently is offer MOA and SFP.
That being said...I don't see another hunting scope in this price range that is done as correctly as this one. I will be converting to MIL's because of this scope, just wish I grew up with the metric system because my brain wants to convert everything to inches which complicates things unnecessarily.
Enjoy your new scope, Gary

I don't understand the "conversions". Why are you converting anything? Mil/mil eliminates the need for conversions, FFP keeps that true for all magnifications, not just one. No need to convert anything, print your drop/windage in mils, make your POI calls in mils - why is there a need for conversion?

David

The only thing you have to "re-learn" is doping wind, but if you were raised on an MOA scope with mil-dots, you already got DOPE for that anyway. The military has jumped on mil/mil with both feet because it minimizes math errors, and that is what washes, or used to, more guys out of sniper school than anything else.

The same holds true for MOA FFP scopes - especially if you already own a spotting scope with an MOA reticle.