Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics New Bushnell Elite 3500

I think it looks great on that rifle. As I remember HS is one of the only, if not the only, who makes their action completely from SS. I'm thinking 17-4 or 15-5 (which means nothing to me) and a 416 bolt body. Apparently he is the only guy who knows how to get around the dredged "galling" issue that all the other custom makers say you can't get around it using all stainless in an action. Guess he must be a metallurgical genius. IIRC I think he uses a "guide grove" on one of the bolt lugs. I guess Dirtfarmer can tell us whether or not the action is smooth or not. I'm sure the coating helps with the galling issue too. I think at one time you used to be able to buy the actions separately, but I'm not sure if you still can.

It's very smooth, RD.

DF

Somehow, I'm still sitting I my seat and wasn't blown away. I can't say I'm thrilled with the HS stocks as my personal favorites are McMillan's, especially the Mountain Rifle pattern that I had McMillan custom fit to my Hart barreled 30/06 back when McMillan had the time to do unusual requests instead of what they do today do to their workload.

NICE!

Trim and slick.

The HS SPL (stands for sporter/light) wasn't that light. The HS stock, while bull stout was a heavy club at 42 oz, thick thru the grip. The 26 oz McM Hunters Edge really transformed that rifle. I got it unpainted, did the glass bedding, even filled in the bolt handle slot. They had it bigger than I desired, so I glassed it in and cut a new bolt handle slot. I then sent it back to McM to be painted brown with black specks. I'm pleased with the finished product.

DF

I don't buy scopes often enough to have thought about eye-relief differences between brands and so when I bought my .300 Magnum 3 years ago, I put an Elite 3-9x40 on it. I've dinged my forehead maybe a dozen times since, although I've just about got myself trained not to do it anymore.

When it comes to scopes, I'm a "price point" shopper. Bushnell occupies a sweet spot between the Tasco, Simmons, and Burris lines on the low side and Nikon on the high side that is just right for me.

In spite of what I said above about not buying scopes often, I did buy an Elite 4-16x40 about 2 months ago, and liked it well enough to buy another just last week.

Getting head whacked by a scope a dozen times could become a scenario for developing a flinch.

Your brain reacts in anticipation of a very possible painful stimulus.

I'd put that scope on a light recoiling rifle and mount a longer ER scope on the .300 mag.

DF

It hasn't though. I concentrate 100% on sight picture until the rifle fires. About half of those were on game shots even though most of my rounds are fired on the range -- usually when I am too excited to remember to pull the buttstock firmly into my shoulder.

But, what would be a 3x9 with good eye-relief that doesn't cost more than $350?

A used Leupold would have a longer ER.

The new VX-2 is a great scope, isn't that far behind the VX-3. A 3-9 should be pretty close to your budget. For me, I'd add the CDS.

DF

So, I guess what you are saying is that are no NEW 3-9x40 scopes of at least Bushnell quality with greater eye-relief for $350 or less.

Yes, the VX-2 3-9x40 is being sold at Cabelas as we speak for $299. I'd shop around if I was looking for one.

I mounted one on a light, hard kicking .300 WM for a friend and he's tickled pink, loves it.

To me, the VX-2 glass in in the same class with 4200 Bushnells. I haven't handled the 4500 series. I never liked 3200's.

DF

Back to Bushnells, I thought the numeric designations had to do with the power. So a 3200 was the same quality as a 4200, just available in different power ranges. Is that not correct?

I will check out the VX-2s, thanks for the tip on that.

For example, if you look at the Bushnell website, it lists:

3500 - 2-6x32, 2-7x32, 3-9x40, 3-9x50, 4-12x40

4500 - 2.5-10x40, 2.5-10x50, 4-16x40, 6-24x40, 3-32x40

6500 - 2.5-16x42, 2.5-16x50, 4.5-30x50

But they all appear to have the same quality-related features.

Consider this:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...opta_MeoPro_3.5-10x44_Rifles#Post9746802

That's a good deal.

One of the best deals I've seen was $350 3-9x40 Conquests when they were closing them out. My bud and I bought two and got free shipping, as the order was over $500. And no sales tax.

DF

Well basically yes. The 3200/3500 have a 3x zoom range (3-9, 4-12 etc), the 4200/4500 have a 4x zoom range (2.5-10, 4-16 etc) and the 6500 have a 6.5 times zoom range. There is a difference in the glass quality even though they list all of them as having FMC (Fully Multi Coated), UWB coatings (ultra wide band coatings) which in this case Bushnell claims to have improved or widened the "visible color spectrum" the human eye can see, all lines are now Argon gas charged vs nitrogen charged and they all have the improved version of Rainguard HD that is more durable and repells water and fog better too. So where is the improvement then ? Light transmission. The 3500 claims to have a 91% level of light transmission and the 4500 and 6500 have, I believe, 95% light transmission. You have to remember that there are tons of grades of glass used today, the amount of polishing each lens gets varies greatly and the number of coatings each lens gets after all the grinding and polishing is done also varies quite a bit. Some of the high end euro glass, for example, can get as much as 60 layers of coatings and all this translates into time and final performance of the scope, bino or spotter. Obviously all this translates into final cost as well.

All right, RDFinn! Thanks for all that information.

Note the absence of the 6500 1.25-8x32 previously discussed.

DF

I've had two Bushies, a 3200 3-9 and a 4200 1.5-6.

The 3200 was okay, but the eyebox seemed a little tight, making it a bit harder to use in the woods. I liked the 4200 very much, even though it was pretty big. Wish I still had it.

One problem for me with Bushnell has been the styling. They just don't quite look as simple and classic as the Leupold. That applies to a lot of Euro-glass as well. At least it appears that they've dumped the little gold stars.

I've never had a problem with a Bushnell scope, so I can't comment on their service department in that respect, but I had major trouble with them with a red dot. Turn-around time was pretty slow, considering all they did was replace the POS with another POS that was DOA (twice). Finally, they sent me a scope in exchange, which has been fine.

Regarding the 6500 2.5-16x40, it tends to run out of light on higher power at twilight. The solution is to crank the power down a bit and then it's OK. The eyebox can get a bit tight at max power.

I don't like 50mm objectives in general, but with the 2.5-16, 50mm may be preferable to 40mm. I haven't compared the two, just thinking 50mm may perform better in dim light.

DF

I've got a 3200 on my Steyr 300 WM and never had the slightest problem with ER. Killed lots of game and carried it on rugged elk hunts etc. The 3200 has held up well and I've never started a new season having to shoot more than one shot to sight it in. It has always held its zero. Matter of fact, I wish I had more of them.