I got the chance to compare the new Chinese Elite Limited Edition 3-9x40 with the discontinued Japanese Elite 4200 3-9x40.

The brightness seems about the same and I wouldn't be surprised if both don't have the same glass. Internal optical engineering has to be somewhat different due to the parallax side focus feature on the Ltd. Ed. which is lacking on the 4200.

The matte finish on the Ltd. Ed. is duller than the 4200 and it's slightly longer than the 4200. The Ltd. Ed. weighs 16oz on my scales vs. 14.2oz for the 4200.

The turret caps as slightly taller on the Ltd. Ed. and the eyepiece is slightly larger. I put a #11 Butler Creek eyepiece popup on the 4200 and I think the Ltd. Ed. will require a #14. Objectives are about the same size.

The adjustment numbers are on tops of the 4200 turrets and are on the sides of the Ltd. Ed. turrets. Both are 1/4" clicks, the Ltd. Ed. turret is easier to grasp and turn.

Whether or not side focus is needed on a 3-9x40 scope remains to be seen. The Ltd. Ed. has one whether its needed or not. I guess it would be nice for long range shooting, but IMHO, most 3-9 scopes are used for hunting, not target or precision long range shooting. There'll be differing opinions on that, I'm sure.

To sum up, I was impressed with the new Ltd. Ed. Elite, although somewhat prejudiced against the "Made in China" label.

As I wrote earlier on another post, early Japanese stuff was considered junk, but look at what they're making today. I feel sure the Chinese will cycle through a similar learning curve.

Time will tell if the new Elites are as good as the old ones.

Just a few observations, comparing the two, not a comprehensive testing of either.

DF

Forgot to add, the duplex seems slightly heavier on the 4200 than the Ltd. Ed. I like the 4200 duplex better, although the Ltd. Ed. duplex is not so fine as to be a problem.

DF

Excellent report DF and I'm very happy to hear that the scope compares nicely with the older and much loved 4200.

For the price you paid you surely can't go wrong.

Thank you for posting this.

Can you possibly do some side by side pics?

I'm thinking I like the sound of the China turrets.

[img]http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f35/rush2830/BushnellElites008.jpg[/img]

Thanks DF.

I definitely like the look of the LE turrets.

Does the owners manual state that these LE scopes are covered under the Elite warranty?

I haven't read the owners manual. I'll have to check it out.

DF

Owner's manual states that this scope (Chinese Limited Edition) has a Lifetime warranty, registration not needed.

That tells me it's the same warranty as the 4200. And, I would have expected no different. They're catching flack going to China, so they've got to take the position that these scopes are just as good.

They may be as good. Time will tell.

DF

The only difference between the two warranties then is that the Elite warranty has the one year money back no questions asked provision.

I want to hear about how it works when you wring it out.

I didn't see the 1 yr. money back guarantee. I'll go re-read it.

Right after I bought it, a close friend and hunting bud called wanting a better scope for his .22WMR. I think I'm going to pass this one to him at my cost. I hunted with him in the late 60's when I was but a youngster, so we date way back.

I'll be able to keep up with it.

I'm thinking about getting another VX-6 1-6x24 for my .404J. I have one already on the Mauser 9.3x62. I'm just very impressed with that scope.

I already have more scopes than guns. I know, I know. I could get more guns for the extra scopes, but my safes are full and I'd have to start storing them under my bed...

DF

Is it just the one with the side focus thats Chinese or are all elites made in china.

Look on Bushnells website for the current Elite models. The two 3-9 models (one with a 40mm obj and one with a 50mm obj) are no longer Elite models. They are now Legend Ultra HD's.

I don't know about the whole Chinese Elite line. I know Bushnell added some weight, a side focus and some length to their 4200 Elite 3-9x40 when they moved from Japan to China for their manufacturing vendor.

DF

The only Chinese stamped Elite's are the two I mentioned above. Elites are made in Japan.

Thanks, RD.

I wasn't sure how many were Chinese. I guess they're putting a toe in the water...

DF

Roy, do you know if these are made in China like the Conquests, Meopros, and the Minox are made in the USA?

Meaning are the parts sourced from all over and the assembly takes place in China.

That was my concern too. It would be a real shame, at least as far as I'm concerned, for them to switch OEM's after the reputation they have that's been earned by Light Optical Works.

I think the fact that they renamed these scopes the Legend Ultra HD is an encouraging sign that they intend to keep the true Elites made by LOW.

Time and testing will tell I guess.

If an Elite breaks..........it was probably made in China..........

I have four 4200 Elites and one 6500. No breakage or problems after several years of usage.

Time will tell on the Chinese version.

DF

Which reticle do you have in that 6500 ?

The standard duplex. It's a bit on the fine side, but not so fine that I don't like it. Not as fine as the Z5 duplex I sent back to Swaro with $125 for a German #4 retro fit. The duplex on the 6500 is about like the duplex on the Chinese Limited Ed., and not quite as heavy as a 4200. To me the 4200 duplex is about right, close to a standard Leupold duplex.

I also have a couple of 4200's with Fire Fly reticles. Now those are neat. To me, they're about as effective as the Leupold post and duplex, or the German #4 on the new VX-6, which looks to me like a post and duplex...

I know, it is a big confusing...

It's even more confusing after studying Leupold's catalogs and web site.

Check out Leupold's published version of their German #4 and the actual German #4 photos that Fost and I posted on the VX-6 thread.

DF

I'm asuming you have a 2.5-16x42. If yes, how does it work in lowlight with that reticle ?

It is the 2.5-16x42.

So far, I haven't had a problem with it. It's not that bad, pretty easy to see.

The glass is really bright, and that helps.

DF

I'm going to get that scope and probably that reticle also. I considered the mil dot only because it has slightly larger outer posts, but I'm concerned that I'll lose the thinner wire and dots at the center of the reticle in low light. I have several 4200's with the FireFly reticle, and that's the cat's meow for low light.

I have the mill dots in my 6500 andhave not noticed any problems in low light.

I'll ask a question. Does the reticle last as long as the glass ? Meaning is there a time when you can still see what you're aiming at through the scope, but you lose the reticle ?

I will give it a try tonight.

Thanks.

RD,

Just checked it out. The reticle is visible as long as it's not pointed at something that's so dark it looks black, like a tree. But the German #4's on the Z5 3.5-18x44 and the VX-6 1-6x24 also don't show if the scope if pointed at something that dark.

As long as there's enough faint light to make out a shape, the reticle is visible, not quite as easy to see as the heavier reticles, but visible. Of course, the VX-6 Fire Dot really "shines" in such a situation and makes all the difference.

To summarize, IMHO, the 6500 reticle could be a bit bolder, but it's bold enough to do the job. When it's too dark to see it, it's too dark to see German #4's or about anything else.

DF

Thanks. Everything about that VX6 looks interesting on paper, but after having bought two Leupold's last year brand new and both broke, I'm done screwing around with them.

I haven't had mine long enough to break.

Fost got a new VX-6 1-6x24 and it had a canted reticle. He sent it back and they fixed it. But where was QA when it was boxed up and sent out the door...?

I share your concern and hope you got all the bad ones...

I mean that kindly and without malice...

If you got the quota of bad ones, maybe the rest will be that statistical grouping without defect...

That still doesn't address breaking...

At least their CS is great.

DF

I felt the love through my keyboard.

RDFinn,

You know, probably, I can't get the scopes out without fiddlin' with the magnification settings as the dark encroaches. First I will make a long story short and then post the full story for those who want to ooo and ahh about my comparing.

It is July 4,2012 I started at 8:30PM.
I decided to lay out the Bushnell 4200 4-16X40 with thick and then crosshairs, the Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 with mill dots, and the Swarovski z5 5-25X52 with thick and thin crosshairs. The 4200 crosshairs are maybe twice as thick as the z5 and the thin section is smaller on the 4200. I think it has the best for low light.

short story:
The sun was behind the trees to my right and behind and darkness was setting in. I could see the crosshairs against the woods in the 4200 and the 6500 after I could no longer make out the deer antlers (131 yards away). The z5 crosshairs and the ability to see the deer antlers went down at the same time with the z5 a few minutes later than the other two. One interesting observation is all crosshairs turned golden for a few minutes.

More and very useful info for the scope shopper who is able to purchase most of what he might wants. And great info for the guy who can't!

Time.............Scope...........Magnification
8:30 PM..........4200................6 1/2
"..............6500................7
"...............z5.................7

8:40.............4200................9 1/2
"...............6500................11
"...............z5.................9 1/2

8:50.............4200................10
"...............6500................11
"................z5.................10 1/2

9:00.............4200................10
"...............6500................11
"................z5.................11

9:05.............4200................10 1/2
"...............6500................15
"................z5.................11 1/2

9:10.............4200................12
"...............6500................16
"................z5.................11 1/2

9:15.............4200................13 1/2
"...............6500................20
"................z5.................12

9:19.............4200................too dark to see antlers
"...............6500................" " " " "
"................z5.................19

9:22..............z5.................25

9:23..............z5.................too dark to see antlers

Here's what's great info for the limited budget guy. The Bushnell 4200 (purchased used for $275) stayed with the Swarovski z5 (new for $1500) almost to the end. For the guy who can afford the Swarovski z5 he can know it will certainly take him later than lots of other scopes and not weigh anymore than a Bushnell 4200.

Yesterday the gunsmith threw the Weatherby Mark V Ultralight .257 SLR up to his shoulder. It is the one with the z5 mounted on it. He commented, "This thing sure is light. And it still balances so well. It very nice."

I agree that the 4200's are a sleeper and a great value. Those higher priced scopes are great, but the 4200 isn't embarrassed by much out there.

Some just can't get over the Bushnell name. It's their loss.

Bushnell, like Tasco was never a manufacturer, just a repackaging house, middle man, so to speak. I have a couple of the old Tasco Titans made in Japan. Tasco was trying to go head to head with the Euro's and made a pretty good run at it.

Those scopes can sometimes be picked up in the $200+ range on Ebay. They're a LOT of glass for the buck, just like the 4200's. The last 4200 I bought was a 3-9x40 for $199 at Cabelas.

DF

Thanks Ringman for all that info.

I agree completely. Losing the Bausch & Lomb name probably hurt their welcome by many hunters/shooters. Alot of folks, understandably, look at Bushnell as a blister pack product.

I think it was you that mentioned something about reticle thickness on the 6500's, wishing they would/could be bolder. I thought the same thing, and I think the reason they aren't is because the scopes are also aimmed at some long range type shooting where the reticle would block/cover to much target if they were thicker. When I was trying to find some opinions on the net about these scopes, it seemed as if alot were using them for long range pursuits whether that be targets or varmint type targets. Quite a few complained that even the mil dot reticle was "to thick" and covered up to much target at longer ranges. Guess that makes sense given that the scope tops out at 16X. I have a friend that has the 4.5-30x50 with the duplex reticle and I'm going to try and locate a 6500 with the mil dot and compare them side by side.

Let us know how that plays out.

I never fooled with Mil Dots, because I'm not trained to use them. Not sure I want to know all that. I have enough trouble keeping up with the little bit that I DO know...

DF

I'm reading this thread with interest as I just got a used,in excellent shape,Bushnell 4200 2.5-10 made in Japan.

I bought a Win M70 on Saturday.The deal was without scope and the rifle had the 4200 on it.I offered to take it off for him,but he said it was a POS and gave it to me !!! Except for the bases being installed incorrectly,there is nothing wrong with it.

Will the Japanese Elite 4200 hold up to the 300 and 338 RUM cartridges ?

Quite easily.

His ignorance is your gain...

Another one, caught up in the name without knowledge of the product.

I'd be more than happy to have that happen to me...

DF

you guys keep buying bushnells and leupolds. leaves more meopta meopros for me:)

We will.

For half the price you get 99% of the optical performance and the reliability track record of the 4200's is something the Meopro hasn't established yet.

Plus in the wet or cold woods the Rainguard HD is something you want to have.
The Meopro doesn't have anything like it.

After putting the 4200 on a Murphy base and some Seekins rings I'm beginning to like it a lot.Doing a solo fly-in hunt across the Cook inlet in late September and this may be what my M70 is wearing.50+ rds of hot 300 RUM and no change of zero will be the test before I make the final decision.Kinda hard to call the pilot on the sat phone and ask him to bring me some new glass..........

their 30mm tube big brother has been around for a long time and its track record and reputation is stellar with folks that use them. no eeason to believe their 1" offerings will be any different

I would take two scopes, both in Talley QD rings and both sighted in.

By the time you spend all that and take that much time, why not. Even an expensive scope is chicken feed compared to the overall picture.

DF

4200's are really pretty good scopes. Have three of them the oldest is getting close to ten years old now. All have worked flawlessly. If I have one complaint about them their reticles are a little heavier than I care for but still a real value for the money.

Weight limit on gear was a consideration,but at under 2lbs in rings,an extra Sightron SIII works.Also found a pilot that will allow me 125lbs of gear,most are 100lbs or less.