I'm looking for a ffp scope with the horus type reticle and was wondering if anyone has any experience with the bushnell elite tactical scopes. I'm in between a vortex razor or a viper pst or the the bushnell it will be mounted on a rem 700 in 6xc in a manners t4a stock and a sr70 contoures barrel any comments would help
Rifle Scopes Are bushnell elite tactical scopes any good
- Thread starter 6.5creedmoor
- Start date
Yes, they are good.
Lowlight nearly blowed up a 3-12x, 8541 Tactical reviewed the 6-24x, and the HDMR has been well abused with documented competition success.
Lowlight nearly blowed up a 3-12x, 8541 Tactical reviewed the 6-24x, and the HDMR has been well abused with documented competition success.
For the price you can't beat them. Japanese quality and a lot of features are packed in them for a relatively low price overall.
Agreed. I'd choose it over the pst line in a half heartbeat.
PCR/XLR/TAC338 http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz53/bodywerks/IMG_20130816_111453_255_zps1b498f0d.jpg http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz53/bodywerks/IMG_20130816_111325_951_zps290ebdd0.jpg
PCR/XLR/TAC338 http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz53/bodywerks/IMG_20130816_111453_255_zps1b498f0d.jpg http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz53/bodywerks/IMG_20130816_111325_951_zps290ebdd0.jpg
Last edited:
Hows the lense clarity and how well do they track and how well made are the turrets are they mushy or anything
They have very good glass and the turrets are positive and audible with no slop. Tracking is 100% spot on as well. The only thing the I found hit or miss was the illumination. I had three illuminated models and one the illumination went very low and worked great for low light, another one worked ok on only the lowest setting and another was way too bright on all settings for low light use. In it's defense though the PST I had was also way too bright for low light use.
Good products for $$$. I have owned several and still have a few.
Whats the warranty like on them
These may very well be the best value in the riflescope market today...
My ERS 3,5 -21 X 50 with H59 reticle and Z-lock (zero stop) has been able to "shoot the square" two times in succession. Good enough for me. I'll put the target up when I figure how to download it here. Out of the country for 3 weeks right now.
Very satisfied with the turrets and Horus reticle. The glass is very good but not S&B quality of course. For that price (almost $1,800.) I got a great scope.
Very satisfied with the turrets and Horus reticle. The glass is very good but not S&B quality of course. For that price (almost $1,800.) I got a great scope.
Last edited:
I have seen a few threads like this with almost the exact same title. Yes they are very good scopes for the money. I can't speak for that reticle but the G2 is great.
Right now I have the Elite Tactical 3-12x44 w/G2DMR reticle. It is a very good scope and my only wish is that it had a zero stop. I compared it against several scopes in the same price range (Vortex, Weaver...) and this was the clear winner. Great glass for the money, very good knobs. I've been hand wringing over the choice between another NF F1 and the ERS 3.5-21x50. As stated above, there have been a number of good reviews on the ERS. As compared to the Vortex, the shop I deal with has had a few customers experience the great Vortex customer service, but I have never had to do this with my NF and don't know anyone who has had to. With the ERS we get the extra power, a wider magnification range, keep the zero stop, but lose the illuminated reticle. As I have a few NXS scopes the knobs are second nature to me. I need to decide in the next week or so.
Between the Vortex and the Bushy, go Bushy.
Between the Vortex and the Bushy, go Bushy.
Bushnell has stepped their game big time.... I have the elite 3-12x44 and the DMR in 3.5-21x50 both are pimp titties, you wont be disappointed.....
I think I would way rather have a razor?
My brother has one on his Remington SPS. The glass is clear, great resolution and excellent tracking.
If I'm not mistaken (which I could be) the 3.5-21 and new 4.5-30 are the only series using the new higher quality Japanese glass. I don't know if this glass has trickled down into the other Elite Tactical line
That being said I did some tests with the 3.5-21x50 and some other scopes last year and the Elite Tactical definitely had better glass than the PST 4-16x50 when the light was getting low. During bright daylight the both faired well. I would have preferred the Valdada 3.5-18x50mm as it had better glass but I struggled with the reticle thickness being, we'll, too thick.
If Bushnell Elite Tactical would come out with a 3.5-21x50 with an illuminated reticle for the G2DMR and lower profile turrets, well that just might be the ultimate. My only con with these scopes are that they are heavy bricks. Bushnell claims 32 oz but mine topped the scales at 35!
That being said I did some tests with the 3.5-21x50 and some other scopes last year and the Elite Tactical definitely had better glass than the PST 4-16x50 when the light was getting low. During bright daylight the both faired well. I would have preferred the Valdada 3.5-18x50mm as it had better glass but I struggled with the reticle thickness being, we'll, too thick.
If Bushnell Elite Tactical would come out with a 3.5-21x50 with an illuminated reticle for the G2DMR and lower profile turrets, well that just might be the ultimate. My only con with these scopes are that they are heavy bricks. Bushnell claims 32 oz but mine topped the scales at 35!
Here's the video of the one Lowlight put through hell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F5KWrbuezg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F5KWrbuezg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Got rid of first Razor and got an XRS. Second Razor will be replaced in the near future with another XRS. There's no comparison.
I have had 2 different 6-24x50s, 2 DMRs, an HDMR, and an XRS, and the glass is the same in all of them to my eye.
That is to say it is good at the price/feature point at which they sell, although the ERS and XRS are getting into another price level entirely.
Joe
I'm so glad that Frank and John McQuay beat the hell out of scopes so I don't have to test mine.
I flinched a little when he tossed the rifle at the fencepost near the end of the video.
Joe
Last edited:
Does the 3-12 tunnel a little at 3x and the eye box get a little funky at 12x? That's one of the few things about the 3.5-21 I've noticed. It's doesn't bother me too bad but I really do use it more as a 4-18x because of it.
Bushnell, I wouldn't be upset with a fairly lightweight 3-15 with t lock turrets, G2 reticle and one small illuminated center dot... Just sayin
Bushnell, I wouldn't be upset with a fairly lightweight 3-15 with t lock turrets, G2 reticle and one small illuminated center dot... Just sayin
Last edited:
I have the 4200 Elite 3-12x44, the Elite Tactical 6-24x50 and the 3.5-21x50 ERS. All Japanese. I would say that the larger scopes appear better than the 3-12x44, but I'm not sure if it's the glass used, or the fact that they are bigger objectives with more magnification (and the 34mm tube on the ERS, of course). It's not really a fair comparison, in my eyes. However, for what it is, I think the 3-12x44 is an excellent buy. I know some have suggested that they improved this scope when moving it from the 4200 line to the ET line, but I can't confirm that. If so, even better.
My 4200 tunnels a little bit at 3x, but that goes away at about 3.5x. The relief is tight on 12x, no question about it. But, it's not horrible, in my opinion and I've seen worse for more money (a lot more money).
My 4200 tunnels a little bit at 3x, but that goes away at about 3.5x. The relief is tight on 12x, no question about it. But, it's not horrible, in my opinion and I've seen worse for more money (a lot more money).
I have the Elite 3200 on my sps in 7-08............love it. Best tactical scope for the money. I would like a positive zero stop, but for $200, I won't complain.
jesus christ frank. Taking your anger out on that poor rifle........
I want to see you do that to your S&B's and Khales !
How do you guys think this could compare to a 2.5-10x32 FFP Vortex. I already have a DMRG2, so the thought of keeping the same retticle is attractive. Just concerned about shooting quick with the G2 at 3X on top of a SCAR.
I want to see you do that to your S&B's and Khales !
How do you guys think this could compare to a 2.5-10x32 FFP Vortex. I already have a DMRG2, so the thought of keeping the same retticle is attractive. Just concerned about shooting quick with the G2 at 3X on top of a SCAR.
This is the stamp on the bottom of my 3-12x44
Yep, even the $200 10x is made in Japan.
No tunneling for me. The exit pupil only goes down to 3.67mm on 12x which is better than a lot of other scopes.
the elites are excellent scopes, I will leave it at that.
Just my opinion, but if I were "shooting quickly at 3x", the target isn't going to be far enough away that I would have to worry about milling/hold-over. Any hold-over that I would be doing at that range would be by estimation of a few inches by using the center of the reticle. So, for me, anyway, it wouldn't be an issue.
John
John,
I don't care about the milng/ranging at that distance as you could barley see it anyway. My concern is my eye being able to pick up the retticle and make quick shots without having to fight to find it against a backdrop.
I don't mind 3x being at the bottom end, but I need to be able to pick it up for close shots otherwise its 1-6/6.5/8.5 time for me .
Of course, I can't speak for your eyes. However, I just grabbed my .243 that has the 3-12 on it and the 6.5x55 with the 3.5-21 ERS and did a quick comparison. The 3-12 I have is a mildot, but I don't see any real difference between it and the G2DMR set at 3.5. Using the woods around my house at about 100 yards and various points in the adjacent field out to about 300, then a tree line on the edge of that field which is about 450 yards, I did a "quick draw" to various trees, bushes, etc. I would have no problem with either at picking out a target in a hurry out to at least 300. From 300 to 450, I can see where a very dark backdrop could be an issue. However, 300 is probably the max range I would use 3-3.5x and even that range is unlikely to happen without me having time to turn up the power, but that's just my opinion. Low light could/would probably present a problem at the longer ranges, but by that point, one would probably be making a case for an illuminated reticle, anyway, for most power settings on the lower half of the scope's range.
John
Thanks John.
My concern is 5-100 foot shooting. I Can shoot CQB distances with a Acog or just point shooting but need to be able to get on target at the low end for short engagements. Just trying to decide if the 3-12 will work for what I want it to. Starting to learn towards the 1-6.5 SFP BTR-2.
My concern is 5-100 foot shooting. I Can shoot CQB distances with a Acog or just point shooting but need to be able to get on target at the low end for short engagements. Just trying to decide if the 3-12 will work for what I want it to. Starting to learn towards the 1-6.5 SFP BTR-2.
For me, with my eyes finally feeling the effects of aging, FFP is undesirable in a variable power scope below 12 (max) power.
Also, it would be tough to decide whether FFP would work in any 12x scope without trying it first.
At any distance at which I would be using subtensions for ranging or holdovers, I'd have the scope at max power.
Lowest power is used for target acquisition and movers, and rarely am I in between.
At CQB distances, FOV and rapid acquisition of the reticle/target are more important to me than proper reticle subtension at varying power.
My USO SR-8S has an ungainly thick reticle at 8x in order to be easy to pickup at 1x.
Vortex figured this out when they were designing their Razor 1-6.
The Bushy 1-6.5 in SFP looks like a useful, versatile scope, too.
I wish the Throw Down PCL 1-4 was SFP, I'd buy one for my cheap "beater" AR in a heartbeat.
Joe
Also, it would be tough to decide whether FFP would work in any 12x scope without trying it first.
At any distance at which I would be using subtensions for ranging or holdovers, I'd have the scope at max power.
Lowest power is used for target acquisition and movers, and rarely am I in between.
At CQB distances, FOV and rapid acquisition of the reticle/target are more important to me than proper reticle subtension at varying power.
My USO SR-8S has an ungainly thick reticle at 8x in order to be easy to pickup at 1x.
Vortex figured this out when they were designing their Razor 1-6.
The Bushy 1-6.5 in SFP looks like a useful, versatile scope, too.
I wish the Throw Down PCL 1-4 was SFP, I'd buy one for my cheap "beater" AR in a heartbeat.
Joe
Ah, I see. If that's what you're looking for, then the smaller scope would probably work better. But, I think you should really look into bayonets, too.
How easy is it to see the reticle with it not being illuminated sometimes I have a hard time seeing the non illuminated ones would I run into problems with h59 on hdmr scope
6.5, this is so dependent on conditions, zoom level, background and so forth. When I tested mine in low light against dark backgrounds the reticle got "lost" in the background, this is where an illuminated reticle would have really helped. If Bushnell were to come out with some illuminated models I think they would sell like hotcakes; however, given that Bushnell is now charging $600 more for simply adding 10 mil turrets and zero stop, well I fear adding illumination would put the 3.5-21 into the high $2800 price category which no longer gives the Bushnell the "value". I simply don't think there is a better scope for the price than the original Elite Tactical 3.5-21x50 at < $1200 new (yes, this is less than advertised price but call around to the hide dealers selling this scope and you'll be pleasantly surprised).
They are very impressive scopes for the COIN you cannot and will not go wrong. I have used a few over the past few years and have been very happy.
GOOD GLASS, Positive Turrets, Great Power Range, and Compact.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
GOOD GLASS, Positive Turrets, Great Power Range, and Compact.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
thanks for all the input looks like ill be getting the hdmr in the h59 reticle and get some practice with it till I can afford to get my s&b in and put the bushy on my back up gun when the s&b comes
Does anybody know of a good place to buy from for a good price? I know that LaRue has it for sell for about 1600 and it comes with there qd mounts
We sale them so if we can be of help just let me know.
Here is a photo of my Bushnell Tactical 3.5-21x50mm on a DPMS LR-308, with HTG CAN, MagPul stock, and Badger rail and rings.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
Here is a photo of my Bushnell Tactical 3.5-21x50mm on a DPMS LR-308, with HTG CAN, MagPul stock, and Badger rail and rings.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
So is it safe to say all the Elite Tactical's have the upgraded glass? When I was looking at the 3.5-21 last year Bushnell was claiming they where using a new/upgraded glass for the 3.5-21 and 1-8.5x scopes but I don't recall them saying anything about any other scopes (until the new ERS and XRS were announced).
All this talk of the 3-12x44 LRS scope has got me really curious about it for my LMT LM8, this might just be the scope I've been looking for. I suppose since it now bears the LRS title it is of the news glass breed.
All this talk of the 3-12x44 LRS scope has got me really curious about it for my LMT LM8, this might just be the scope I've been looking for. I suppose since it now bears the LRS title it is of the news glass breed.
One thing that bugs me about some of these manufacturers is their improper specs. Bushnell and Valdada seem to be some of the worst violators with improper FOV information, wrong reticle diagrams, incorrect information on color of illumination and the most egregious of all.. the weight of the scope. These are multi-million dollar companies and to get this information "wrong" on their own websites is close to false advertising or bait and switch techniques. If you can't go to the manufacturer to get accurate information who can you go to? For instance, Bushnell lists their Elite Tactical 3.5-21x50 at 32oz; however, when I got mine I threw it on my postal scale (pretty accurate) and it came up at 35 oz!?! What gives Bushnell, that's a 3oz difference and they still haven't corrected their website!
So, when you can't trust manufacturer specs, what do you do? You go to Snipers Hide Seriously, I am interested in the LRS 3.5-12x44 with the illum. BTR-MIL reticle, Bushnell lists this scope at 24.4 oz but that is the weight they list for all their LRS models; however, only the BTR-MIL has illumination and I'm thinking that has to add some weight to the scope above the other models, right? Because of this and my experience with the 3.5-21 I don't trust their numbers, can anyone who owns this scope verify how much it actually weighs? Thank you.
So, when you can't trust manufacturer specs, what do you do? You go to Snipers Hide
Seriously, I am interested in the LRS 3.5-12x44 with the illum. BTR-MIL reticle, Bushnell lists this scope at 24.4 oz but that is the weight they list for all their LRS models; however, only the BTR-MIL has illumination and I'm thinking that has to add some weight to the scope above the other models, right? Because of this and my experience with the 3.5-21 I don't trust their numbers, can anyone who owns this scope verify how much it actually weighs? Thank you.I have 2 of them. Bushnell 3.5-21x50 Elite Tactical 34mm Rifle Scope
One on my POF 308 and the other on my GAP 260. I enjoy their compactness!
One on my POF 308 and the other on my GAP 260. I enjoy their compactness!
wjm308,
I have been very happy with the glass in these scopes it is not the best on the market but it good for the price point they are in.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
I have been very happy with the glass in these scopes it is not the best on the market but it good for the price point they are in.
Mike @ CSTACTICAL
I purchased an HDMR 3.5-21 w/ H59 for my .308 based on the recommendation of Ben at JP. I was so happy with it, when did my .223 build, I went a bit over my budget and got a SDMR 1-8.5 for it. I'm extremely happy with both and from all my initial built testing they are clear, accurate, track well, etc. The only thing I could possibly complain about is the fact they are built like tanks and thus a bit heavy... but that could be looked at as a good thing. I figure if I have any nagging complaints that come up over the next several months, I can send them back. They've got a good thing going and appear to be standing behind making a good name.
I am glad to hear good things about the line of Bushnell scopes. Some 40 years again, Bushnell was the brand I put on my .22 rifle. I still remember the feeling of being able to reach out and really see the target. I bought their scopes recently and liked them, and am now in the market for a good scope. I will look at Bushnell.
