Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Bushnell Elite 3200 series any thoughts?

I am considering buying a new scope for my Ruger M-77 30-06. I am looking at the Bushnell 3200 series. Any thoughts Pro or con?
Regards
Dan

I have several of the 3200 series, both 3-9 and 4-12, and they are a fine value for the money. I highly recommend them.....

I have 2 3200s and 2 4200s. I really like them all.

My muzzleloader has the the 3x9x40 3200 with the Firefly reticle. For thick dark cover I cannot imagine a better scope. (unless Bushnell could shave off a few ounces). Charging the reticle with a flashlite is a little bit of a pain, but even if you never charge it, the crosshairs are thick enough that they are much easier to see than a standard plex reticle.

I just installed a 5x15x40 bushnell elite 3200 on my rifle and am impressed. I have a 3x9 as well and I am sold. Best value for the dollar in my opinion.

A very good scope for the price.

I am currently running a 10x40 3200 on my M77 in .223 Rem. and just put a 3x-9x40 3200 on a .257 Roberts M77 I just picked up. I feel they are a very good scope for the money.

they are my favorite scope, just wish they had a ballistic reticle for the 3x9 model

Another thumbs up for the 3200 Elites...

For the money I really don't think you can go wrong. Wally's was closing them out for $100 for the 3-9x40 so I bought one (they also VariX-II 3-9x40 on clearance for $125, got one of those too <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />) ... and I was impressed to say the least. It was every bit as clear as the VariX-II. My only beef with the scope is that the reticles aren't really black in mine, they have a metalic look to them like they weren't painted. I never compared the two at twilight so I cannot compare them in that regard.

I don't know what retail on them are, but if I needed a new scope and the pennies were tight, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one.

Good Luck .. although I don't think you'll need it with the 3200.

My buddy loves his - and when it's raining hard - it's a lot better to look through, than some of my much more expensive scopes.

Can't get better quality and performance for the price, my 3-9x 40mm is my top-dog, in winter I perfer it over my VX-II, gotta love that rainguard <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I own two, a 3x9 and a 2x7 and have absolutely no complaints. In the rain or when I get stupid and breathe on the lens I really appreciate the Rainguard. They are a bit heavier than comparitive Leupies and they don't have as much eye relief, but I don't have them on hard-kicking guns or on super lightweight ones, either, so I don't notice. I believe our very own Mule Deer has said that they are a very good scope for the money.

Anybody know what the differences are between the 3200 and 4200 line?

From what I understand, the 4200 has one more internal lens than the 3200. The 3200's are also 3x's magnification (3-9x, 4-12x, 5-15x, 7-21x), whereas the 4200's are 4x's magnification (2.5-10x, 4-16x, 6-24x, 8-32x).

I have a pair 3X9s, a 2X7s and a few 10X. All are tremendous values. I can't find fault any of them....Essex

Bushnell, IMHO, screwed up when they changed the
Bauch and Lomb name to bushnell. These are really the
continuation of the B&L scopes with the name changed.

B&L was my favorite scope until they sold to bushnell.
Raingard is good, but I find the new scopes too heavy
for my tastes. I don't like the glued on section where the
adjustments are either. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> This is a cheap bushnell change for the worse. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> Preferred are one piece scopes,
in this part of the scope at least.

Without regard to the raingard feature, the Sightron II is
a better scope. Compare the two side by side, and I think
all but the die-hard bushnell fans would agree the Sightron
is better. I also prefer Exact trac to raingard? It isn't
always raining, but keeping the scope sighted in is a constant!

My recommendation for your 30-06 would be the Sightron II
3X9X42. That's what I use on mine, and I can afford any brand scope I want. I'm cheap...so I cannot justify the extra
cost when Sightron is such a good scope. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

I've had mixed results. My 5x15x40 3200's(I have 2) are wonderful and I'm very pleased with them. Based on that experience, I got a 4x12x40 AO and could never get the fish-eye effect out of it (parallax?). Sent it back to Bushnell, they replaced it grudgingly, and it was just as bad if not worse. No matter how I adjusted it, if you moved your eye at all, fisheye big time. They told me it was normal and to be expected, but if that was true, why didn't they all show the same tendency? Got into quite a heated discussion with the customer service guy. You could take the AO and go from one extreme to the other and the view of the target would never change, always out of focus. Made no difference where the occular lens was either. The 5x15's showed none of this; they were perfect, clear and sharp focus. Traded that scope with a rifle and good riddance. I also have 2- 6x24x40's in the 4200 line, and they are great, but long and heavy. So are the guns they are on, so no big problem. I would buy either again, but if it was the 3200 series, I'd be checking them out in person rather than a catalog sale, based on the experience's I had with them.

280 ... I don't believe Bushnell had much of a choice. If I remember correctly B&L is very much anti-gun and didn't want their name associated with hunting sport optics.

Thanks for the info George. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I wasn't aware of that.

But I still don't like the glued on stuff! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

I'd prefer a Sightron II over any scope with glued on parts! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

thanks for the feedback guys. I appreciate it
Regards
Dan