Yeah, I see the LRTS and DMR as different markets. The 18x LRTS is almost 10 ounces lighter than the DMR, and a better fit for a small frame AR.
- Thread starter supercorndogs
- Start date
That is kind of my point. The 3-12 LRTS (example because that’s what I own) retailed for about $1,300 (I think optics planet or Brownells or someone still has the 3-12 LRTS available at original retail?). I bought mine at closeout for about $650. Great value IMO.
But take any current optic in todays market and sell it at half price of current retail. Lots of people would be real excited about pretty much any optic.
But to explicitly answer your question, I don’t know that there’s much (if anything) that rivals these scopes in the $500 mark.
From what I understand, getting Bushnell to do a run of the 4.5-18x for GAP was like pulling teeth. Talked to some of the guys at the DSC convention and it seems like re-introducing these is just not something Vista is interested in right now. Truly unfortunate and I definitely think there is rapidly growing appreciation for a midweight FFP hunting scope with a useable reticle in a moderate erector range. I think too many people get caught up on high mag ranges and ultra short designs without thinking of all the drawbacks that come with that. I'd love to see something come out in that 3-12x range with something like Minox's new THLR reticle - seems perfect for dialing elevation and holding wind and is essentially a german #1 at low power.
I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...
www.brownells.com That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
I still have one of the old (pre-LRTS designation) Elite Tactical 3-12x44s with the G2DMR reticle. I paid $800 for it brand new. I have used that scope on a variety of rifles - .22 bolt rifles, 6.5 and .308 bolt rifles out to 1k, and on my 18" SPR-contoured AR where it presently resides. Other than the fact that it has 5 mil turrets, and that the turrets are somewhat mushy compared to my other (more expensive) optics, there's really not much to dislike about it. It's light and slim, tracks well and has fit a variety of roles well. Makes me wish I'd picked up a more recent LRTS 3-12 with 10mil turrets when they could be had for $650. If Bushnell made another run of these and priced it for $1k or less I might buy one. The $1350 that Brownells is asking for one seems a bit steep.
I have owned every version of the LRHS/LRTS and still have a few.
The Vortex LHT has made them obsolete.
Running side by size the glass quality, reticle, eyebox difference is stunning.
The Vortex LHT has made them obsolete.
Running side by size the glass quality, reticle, eyebox difference is stunning.
they won't hold zero for me.
I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...
That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
I would but the only illuminated one they have is a SFP
. Their words not mineTrue statement!
vortex makes a ffp mil/mil lht?
1350 is not a reasonable price considering what else is out there for 1350.I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...
That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
I’ve owner every version of the LRHS/LRTS as well, though at present I don’t own any (regretfully). I found them to be stellar performers all around, and I ran them from 25-1000y. I sold them all to upgrade or chase something else, and wish I had a few left.
The 3-12x really is the ideal hunting optic IMO, especially the LRHSi with the donut of death. And for competitions with a crossover rifle, gas gun, or just a bolt gun you didn’t want to add 4lbs+ to with a honking huge piece of glass, the 4.5-18x was amazing. I never had a complaint with any of mine.
Now, would I go buy one for $1350? Absolutely not. I’d buy a used optic, maybe something like the XTR3, that’s a better fit in that price range. But sub $1000? It would be a serious contender for the above mentioned uses. They really are excellent scopes!
The 3-12x really is the ideal hunting optic IMO, especially the LRHSi with the donut of death. And for competitions with a crossover rifle, gas gun, or just a bolt gun you didn’t want to add 4lbs+ to with a honking huge piece of glass, the 4.5-18x was amazing. I never had a complaint with any of mine.
Now, would I go buy one for $1350? Absolutely not. I’d buy a used optic, maybe something like the XTR3, that’s a better fit in that price range. But sub $1000? It would be a serious contender for the above mentioned uses. They really are excellent scopes!
Try finding a NOS LRHS 3-12, that would be a lot more tempting. I bought an LRHS2 for $1000, if paying a couple hundred more meant losing a few ounces and getting a better magnification range, I’d do it.
Not with a reticle optimized for hunting (doesn’t need illumination to be useful at all magnifications), in a magnification range useful for all hunting situations, with the same track record of reliability. It’s $500 more than an LRHS2, for a scope that isn’t as good for hunting.
@DeathBeforeDismount if you decide to upgrade from an obsolete LRHS 3-12 I’ll take it off your hands.
I will admit, being an LHT 4.5-22x50 owner, I wish the mag range was something more like 3/4-18/20x50. However, outside of that, it's a wonderful scope to get behind, the weight it awesome, the glass is great and I really dig the reticle and the way they worked in the illumination. But your point about the reticle being hard to hunt with at 4.5x without illumination is valid IMO. I equally have a 4.5-18x44 LHRSi in my immediate vicinity (my Father's I brokered, mounted and sighted in for him) and though I like it and would be completely happy with it on my rig if I wasn't using the LHT, I do believe that the LHT beats it in everyway except that g2h reticle circle for 4x shooting. Now the 3-12 of course will beat them both in that area with a lower mag and wider FOV, I remedied this with my LHT by just adding a 1x solution MRDS, but that adds considerable money.
Last edited:
Pity they've had reliability issues ...
8 ounces. I don't see that as much difference with both of them being on the large and heavy side for what I would like.
My 18x LRTS weighed 27.4 oz, with a Bushnell listed weight of 27.3 oz. The DMR2 weight is listed at 37 oz. So, that's the 10 oz. The DMR3 lost some weight and is listed at 35.5 oz, but it's a generation ahead of the LRTS. Regardless, 8 or 10 ounces is a big step up.
I have used the LRTS on small frame ARs, but the DMR is way to heavy. It may be useful for a bench rest, long & heavy barrel AR, but at that point there are many optics that'll get 25-30x on the top end at a similar weight.
I’ve always loved my 3-12 LRHS. I thought it was an under appreciated scope for a long time. I’m happy to see this thread and the love for the 3-12!
I used it on a 18” AR SPR setup for years. I’ve since “upgraded” that gun to a MK5 for more magnification at the same weight. I also have a MK5 on my 308 gas gun so both of my precision gas guns now the same optic.
I can’t bring myself to sell it. It’s going to stay in the safe for a future project for sure.
I used it on a 18” AR SPR setup for years. I’ve since “upgraded” that gun to a MK5 for more magnification at the same weight. I also have a MK5 on my 308 gas gun so both of my precision gas guns now the same optic.
I can’t bring myself to sell it. It’s going to stay in the safe for a future project for sure.
My opinion remains the same, I wouldn't produce them both if I owned the company. When you have a pig already another 8-10 ounces is not a big deal. If you are trying to save weight, neither should probably in the conversation.
Last edited:
Bullshit. So tried of chads repeating what other chads spout on the web.
Neither of you have any idea of actual failure rate. So, you are pretty much both full of shit, and posturing.
What? Half a pound on the top of a smallish rifle is a big deal...
The LRTS was a reasonable weight, the DMR is a porker. I don't understand the DMR other than to have an offering with a high erector ratio. For the price, weight, size and similar use the XRS2 was a better option at 37 oz.
You can say it how ever many different ways you want. Its not changing my opinion. The 3.5-21 design has been their bread and butter in this market for a long time. I don't see that changing, and didn't find anything I preferred about the XRS2 over the DMR3. You seem like you just want to argue about whose opinion is better which is fucking useless.
Even going back to the ERS, I highly preferred it over the higher mag XRS.
Even going back to the ERS, I highly preferred it over the higher mag XRS.
Yea, thats what I said. "Weight doesn't matter." ITs right there in plain writing. 
Would weight effect my choice between the XRS3 and DMR3. NO.
Would weight effect my choice between the XRS3 and DMR3. NO.Just chiming in to also grieve the loss of the LRTS. I have the 4.5-18 and it’s on my main hunting rifle. I do prefer having 18x over 12x, but I wouldn’t be overly upset if they just brought the 3-12 back. Overall both model LRTS’ fit my needs perfectly as a hunting scope. Agree with others though, priced around $800 they were tough to beat, but I would likely go with a SWFA 3-15 if it were between a $1300 LRTS or the $600 SWFA. I am not a huge fan of the glass in non-HD SWFA’s, but they are usually workhorses.
I’ll be in the market for a new scope in the coming year for my daughters first hunting rifle. Leaning towards a compact 12.5” LOP Tikka T3x, and unless I can find a LRTS 3-12, I’ll likely slap a SWFA 3-15 on it. The simple diamond reticle might be easier for me to coach her on wind holds anyway. She’s 10, so I’ll need to bring my patience. I never looked through an LRHS, but I don’t love the donut. Maybe in actual field use it’s great, but it doesn’t give me the warm feels when I see pictures of it online.
I’ll be in the market for a new scope in the coming year for my daughters first hunting rifle. Leaning towards a compact 12.5” LOP Tikka T3x, and unless I can find a LRTS 3-12, I’ll likely slap a SWFA 3-15 on it. The simple diamond reticle might be easier for me to coach her on wind holds anyway. She’s 10, so I’ll need to bring my patience. I never looked through an LRHS, but I don’t love the donut. Maybe in actual field use it’s great, but it doesn’t give me the warm feels when I see pictures of it online.
Well, weight does matter...
But in your cas of weight doesn't matter, what's the point of the DMR? The LRTS distinguished itself being significantly lighter. The overlap between the DMR and XRS makes the DMR pretty much pointless.
But in your cas of weight doesn't matter, what's the point of the DMR? The LRTS distinguished itself being significantly lighter. The overlap between the DMR and XRS makes the DMR pretty much pointless.
Cool story bro. are we playing if i say everything over and over, you will agree with me?
Last edited:
I was hoping you'd realize what you're saying, by using your position to demonstrate the DMR is pointless relative to the XRS. Even moreso than the LRTS & DMR combo.Cool story bro. are we playing if i say everything over and over, you will agree with me?
I have a 3-12 LRTSi, a FDE 3-12 LRTS and two of the older Elite 3-12 (one illuminated and the other with a G2 reticle, all mil but with the 5 mil turrets.) I’m a huge fan of them on my 6.5 Grendel’s or the older ones on 22’s since they focus down the 10 yards.
As some have already stated, I got them all under $650 and they are wonderful at that price. At $1300, on paper I’m picking the Vortex FFP LHT. I have one on order from Scott at Liberty and look forward to comparing them.
I would be all in on a reboot of the Elite line with a 3-15 model. For me personally a 3-15 covers 95% of the shooting I do.
As some have already stated, I got them all under $650 and they are wonderful at that price. At $1300, on paper I’m picking the Vortex FFP LHT. I have one on order from Scott at Liberty and look forward to comparing them.
I would be all in on a reboot of the Elite line with a 3-15 model. For me personally a 3-15 covers 95% of the shooting I do.
I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...
That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
They sold plenty at that price. They wouldn’t have expanded the line if it wasn’t selling. But the reality is, that’s not a $1350 dollar scope anymore. Just like Premiers aren’t even $2000 scopes anymore, let alone $3000. Packaging this discussion as a “value” debate isn’t the whole picture. The point isn’t about the appropriate market price of the LRHS anyhow, it’s about an underserved market segment, a product meant to fill the gap, and a more mature understanding among shooters.
BTW I wouldn’t give $1350 for an new LHT either.
