Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Is it worth having RAINGUARD!!

was wondering if its worth buying the bushnell elite scopes because they have rainguard. is it worth having it and whats the quality of the scopes compared to leupold, nikon monarch, and zeiss conquest.

The Rainguard is worth it to me on the binoculars. They stay usable when other bino's aren't. I have four different pairs.

I'm not so sure about the rifle scopes. I tend to keep scope covers on my scopes except for the last few seconds anyway.

My biggest problem with the Elite rifle scopes is how much they weigh.

In fairness, one of my nephews has a 2.5-10x42 4200 series on his a-bolt and loves it.

If you're looking at a 4200, I would say they are right on par with the Conquest and Leupold 3 series and a little better than the Monarch. Considering that there is no price penalty to pay to get Rainguard it's nice to have. They are heavier than some others, but they are very strong scopes in my experience. A 3-9x40 Elite 4200 weighs an ounce more than a Leupold 3-9x40 and is lighter than the Conquest.

I still find the Bushnell eye-relief to be compromised and as such won't run one on a hunting rifle.

I somehow managed to hunt rain forests for almost 8 years with a Leupold.

I'll gladly compromise a 1/4" of ER for durability. Everytime....

Never had a problem with a Leupold whilst hunting, riding bitch for 100's of miles strapped to an ATV or in a skiff.

Course my pards and I tend to be 'lucky' that way.

And if you think it makes a difference you can screw a Leupy Raincote filter to the front. I had one on my .257 w/ a 2.5-8x36 and it worked fine in the rain I used it in.

I really like the Rainguard, and have several 4200's-all in 2.5x10. I'm using one on a light .338wm and don't have an eye relief problem at all-just my expereince. They don't fog up nearly as easy as anything else.

Most of my hunting rifles have Elite 3200's. Well worth it to me. Just imagine seeing a nice buck and having to reach in pocket for a napkin to wipe the lenses to even be able to see the deer, then its gone. I've done it, thats why I have rainguard now, it works!

Yep. I've two Elite 4200's with the Rainguard, and while it's nice (I guess) the eye relief is nowhere in the same class as a Leupold. If the Bushnell scopes had better eye relief, I think I'd be more inclined to purchase another.

The Rainguard is nice, but it doesn't do crap if you get snow and what not on the lenses. I'm still planning on getting the Butler Creek caps for those scopes. The Rainguard isn't perfect, as I've still had them fog up pretty bad from time to time, though that was some of the funkiest weather I've hunted in. About 45-50 degrees at the base of the ridges, and there was a thermocline of warmer air (~15 degrees) only about 50-100 feet up. That led to foggy lenses for most of the day with all that moisture.

They are fine to have on rifles with minimal recoil (308 and down) but you still have to mount the things Jeff_O-ish to get a proper sight picture.

I have 2 of the 3-9 4200's. I think they are great scopes for the price. But If I had unlimited funds, they would not be on my rifles. I like a brighter scope, and they do have less eye relief, remember that if you have a hard hitting, or light rifle. I have used the 4200 for a deer hunt in a rain storm and it did seem to work, but I think a good set of lens covers would work just as well.

I prefer the Bushnell 3200/4200s over just about everything else. They are inexpensive and the optics are awesome. I wish they had more eye relief.

Lately I buy a lot of Nikon Prostaffs because of the eye relief.

On a rainy day, they're great. In the last couple years, either PA or NY had rain on opening day. I have a 3200 on a Ruger KM77 and a 4200 on my son's stainless Model 70. Both rifles are .30-06, and eye relief is adequate to avoid a bloody nose. In dry weather, I'm using a Burris Signature Select on my .270 Tikka.

Rainguard works!

i ran a 3200 then a 4200 on top of my 7mm rem mag and never had an issue with eye releif. not once mind you. as far as weight goes, if 1 oz makes or breaks my hunt i need to hit the gym more.
great glass, exelent tracking.

"Is it worth having RAINGUARD!!"

Not at the expense of inferior optics or in an inferior package.

It's nice but not an essential element.

MM

Inferior compared to what?

wow i hunted with my 3x9 4200 elite on my .375H&H and i didnt have any issues with the eye relief. it wasnt the greatest thing out there for shooting off a bench though. rainguard is awesome, i hunted in varying conditions this year, early on it was raining and cold. one day i had my 4200 the next i didnt. the second day i was really wishing i had the 4200 with me. later in the season when the temps dropped to single digits and lower i played it smart and didnt take anything but the 4200 in the field. not once did i have any fogging issues.

Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski.

Leupold, compared to most Bushnell stuff.

The Elite binos are fine, but IMO, not much else.

YMMV

MM

Well, I would certainly hope a $250 4200 would be vastly inferior to a Leica, Zeiss or Swaro. Never owned a 3200 so I can't comment. A 4200 compared to most Leupold's I've used and owned, better, although I wouldn't say vastly superior. I would agree that most of Bushnell stuff is junk however.