Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Bushnell 3-12 LRTSi for hunting rifle?

Background: I bought a bushnell 3-12 LRHS listed as a NIB return from amazon. It was broken and immediately sent to bushnell for repair. It could not be repaired so I will be receiving a 3-12 LRTSi in replacement. The rifle is a Barrett Fieldcraft in 6.5CM, and I was already on the fence due to the weight of the LRHS, and the LRTSi comes in heavier at a listed 28oz. I don't really have an reservations other than the weight, and can't think of anything in the same price range that offer the features I desire (zero lock with reputation for repeatable tracking, FFP, mil reticle set up to dial elevation and hold wind). The illumination, adjustable parallax, and power ring lever are all features I like on the LRTSi.

The alternative I am considering is selling the LRTSi and buying a SWFA SS HD 3-9x. I would lose illumination, 12x top end, adjustable parallax, and I think the reticle is not as nice. I also lose ~9oz and come away with some $$ in my pocket.

Hunting will primarily be cow elk, mule deer, and pronghorn in CO. I would like to be able to practice out to 600 and ideally take shots on game out to 4 or 500 if I get to that level.

Thoughts?

Keep the Bushnell, you will love it after useing it

You are looking at 9 ounces difference in the SWFA and what,4 ounces between the LRTSi and the LRHS? I think we get way too caught up in a few ounces. If anything save a little and buy the SWFA when it goes on sale on Black Friday and keep both scopes. That way you can fully test and hunt with both and then make the decision. I would probably keep the LRTSi regardless. It is a great scope and I might mount it on a heavier longer range rifle later.

The LRTSi is workable for general hunting, but is really a dedicated medium range scope. The thick outer posts are not posts. They’re .1 mil hashes and it is one reticle that can get lost in bushes/trees on low power. The LRHS was a medium range scope with a reticle that allowed it to be used effectively at close ranges.


The 3-9x SWFA really is a better package for general hunting, which is what you’re described use is. 0-600 yards is its forte, and the reticle is much better suited for timber use.

I sure like mine.

I have hunted the LRHS for a few years in multiple states and conditions on a few different rigs and love it! I’ve also used the SS, it’s great too, but a distant second for me to the LRHS.
That said, if you are thinking that 4-500 yards is something to work up to eventually (guessing 0-350 or so has been your norm), and weight is a bit of concern (certainly valid) and you ahoot a decently flat shooting chambering... Id skip the heavy scopes and the dialing and use a simple holdover reticle or MPBR for a 270/7mm-300mag etc.

Less to mess with for your usual conditions.

I still have LRHS scopes on my 6.5 SAUM and LR muzzleloader but have a flatter shooting/Lightweight rig w/ a ballistic reticle option or a MPRB setup w/ NF shv (option for rare dialing occasion) set up for situations that sound more like your norm.

But, you certainly can’t go wrong either way and you’re asking the right questions.

I’d be in SS 3-9x mode, and that’s exactly what I put on mine when choosing between that and the LRHS 3-12X, which I also love.

I prefer the LRTSi reticle over the LRHSi reticle with it’s extra circle toward the center. The “donut of death”, as George Gardner refers to it, just clutters up the image, particularly at higher magnifications. That said, I could imagine someone pass shooting driven hogs might find the donut handy.

I’ve had the 3-12 LRHS and the 3-9 SS and currently have the 4.5-18 LRTSi. I have hunted with all three and the LRTSi is my favorite. I’ve never had any problem not seeing the reticle and even though the illumination is extremely well executed, I’ve never had to use it, even in low light. The other two were very good too, but I missed the parallax adjustment with the 3-9 and the reticle on the illuminated LRTSi is a little bolder than the non illuminated on the 3-12 LRHS was for me. Were it me, I would definitely keep the LRTSi.

John

Would illumination mitigate the lack of bold posts at the edges of the G3 reticle? Also, I am considering upgrading down the road, what are your thoughts on the NX8 as a hunting scope?

Thanks everyone for your responses. Still pretty bummed I didn't end up with the LRHS, it really seemed like a great fit for what I want to do for the brief time I had it on the rifle. I think I will mount the LRTSi so I can finally shoot this rifle and start working on figuring out exact drops and learning to shoot in the wind, use the LRTSi for my pronghorn hunt, and decide if I want to change it after that. I just squeaked in on getting the 30% rebate on the LRHS so I can sell the LRTSi for a low price and still come out fine if I decide to go for something else.

Illumination definitely helps, and if you’re good with using- it than it’s a good optic. I’m not trying to say the LRTSi won’t work (it obviously will as multiple people like it), but most of the “hunters” that have seen it prefer the reticle in the LRHS, IME. Personally I like the scope, but it has been a while since I shot one heavily..... about 4 days. Shoot it. If you hate it, they’re easy to sell.



The NX8 is easily the best 1x- whatever x scope made. It ridiculous. As a general hunting optic it’s not going to be bright enough on high power to suit most. As a dangerous game optic or where 1x is most important- it tops everything else.

I loved the reticle in the LRHS, I'll keep an eye out for a used one and snap it up/sell the LRTSi if I get the chance.

That was my exact concern for the NX8. Sounds like it would make a great scope for my all around AR, not so great for a big game rifle for the type of hunting I do.

The help was much appreciated, I'm going to give it a shot and see if I like it before making any other moves.

I sent you a PM texag10.

A 2 pound scope on a 5.25 lb rifle is kinda funny, bordering on ridiculous.

Buy a rifle more suited to the scope, like maybe a Christensen Mesa LR, & rock on.

Or a scope more suited to the Barrett.

MM

Well, the scope is mounted and I've got to say I like it more than I thought I would. The rifle is still 7lbs 7 oz with 5 rounds on board, and the reticle works ok. The G2 is much better for what I need, but I can easily deal with the G3i in darker conditions due to the illumination. I'll give it a whirl and unless I notice any glaring deficiencies I'll keep it on the rifle until an equal or better package comes along.

My overnight backpacking trip turned into a short day hike due to too much snow on the trail, so I went to the range today to sight in the Fieldcraft and confirm my ballistic table from the Vortex LRBC. First 5 shot group after getting it close measured .7" at 109 yds, then I adjusted up and left using the reticle and got a first round hit on a 2" dot at 400. First round hits at 555 and finally a howling coyote silhouette at 605 followed. After that a guy at the bench next to me shooting a Browning x bolt and RPR in 6.5 told me I should try for the bowling pin at 605. I got it on the 3rd try due to a dumbass mistake on the 2nd shot where I adjusted my windage hold the wrong way.

I also shot my AR and immediately became annoyed with using a bdc with ammo it doesn't match after using the mil reticle of the bushnell on the fieldcraft, but was able to get hits out to 400 on a prairie dog with 55gr wolf gold since I could easily spot my own splash. Moved to pistol and closer range stuff with the AR after and was pretty disgusted with myself compared to when I shot 10k rounds a year.







I will be keeping the LRTSi on the rifle for the foreseeable future because it just makes shooting little things far away pretty easy. I haven't shot a bolt gun in the past decade and have never shot past 300.