^Awesome! So it seems the FOV calculation from the last page was incorrect. Can you check the FOV in mils at 30X on the Bushnell? Calculation had it at 6 mils per side, while the XTR3 has 7.
- Thread starter Team RCBS & Bushnell
- Start date
I'm seeing 6.25 to each side of center on mine, but I'm having to estimate where 30x is.
I’d say Hollywood has it pretty close there. I just checked my Burris and at 30 it’s 7 on the nose. So the XRS3 is not giving up much at all in FOV at all.
The DMR3 was incredible out to 250 yd yesterday evening. Foggy and some misting rain all evening. 68F. Did well going into dusk until mirage from the can blurred things a bit. I could still make out the lines on the target at 100 yd but not see .223 holes. I swapped the can over to my bolt gun that had an 8” longer, cold barrel and ZCO on it. On the same 20x mag and it was blurred too but not quite as bad. Not really a scientific comparison but figured I’d give it a go.
Looking forward to spending more time behind it this weekend.
Looking forward to spending more time behind it this weekend.
If the XRS3 uses the same optical formula as the XRS2, which was the same as the basic LOW design then about 6.1mil at 30x is about right (that's what in my Delta Stryker).
The difference between that and the XTR3 puts the Burris at 15% wider which is quite a considerable difference.
The difference between that and the XTR3 puts the Burris at 15% wider which is quite a considerable difference.
The XRS3 was a clean sheet design internally.
Is an extra 1.5 ft on each side of the FOV at low power really “quite a considerable difference”?
Not trying to be a smart ass, just doesn’t seem like it. Now 15% on 3.3x is a decent amount more.
1.5ft is full size IPSC in the field of view or not
Ah, I see. Makes sense.
I never thought of FOV as being important until I started shooting longer range - acquisition is much faster / less frustrating, especially if in positions where changing magnification without coming off the rifle is difficult. Soda cans placed from 600-1000 yds can be tough to find... especially when your friend placed them and your task is to find and whack!
15% is definitely a noticable difference at all mag ranges, I have scopes that have less than 10% difference between them and can notice it instantly.
Some people don't seem to phased by FOV but it's something I've grown to be very fond of.
There is a little more to FOV than just specs on paper as explained in Ilyas video here.
Usually a scope with super wide FOV will also have a very small black ring/cardboard tube type effect.
Either way FOV is something I look for as having been used to super wide (Vortex PST Gen2) and having bought a Delta Stryker (fairly middle of the road) I am continually annoyed by the image I am presented at the eyepiece.
Thanks. I respect ILya’s opinion and education a lot.
I haven't had a chance to compare a 3 with a 7-35 yet, but the XRS2 was *very* close to my eyeballs, and the 3 is a noticeable improvement.
If anyone wants to see an XRS3 in person, I will be RO'ing the Kestrel Fall Classic at Altus this weekend, but my match rifle (with XRS3) will be with me.
@Team RCBS & Bushnell AND @Hollywood 6mm
do you have an estimate of when the DMR 3 will be available with t3? Or if it will have the t3 in the future may be a better question
Pretty sure @Team RCBS & Bushnell addressed this earlier in the thread, might want to dig back and check. Beyond that, I am not an employee of the company, so....
So I took several looks though both scopes throught the Grind. Pretty much everytike I had the chance. And I have to say I REALLY like them. I am shooting Schmidt and Bender and ATACRs currently, but I don't see myself giving up much to run one of these newer Bushys
Compared to a NX8, there is no comparison the new Bushnells are better everywhere I can think of, eyebrow, turrets, parallax.. the glass is way better to my eyes.
The only thing hard about buying a Bushnell to me is that I have always looked down on the idea ? Of using a scope at this price point... but that just seems foolish after handling these new products. I will own one myself soon...
Compared to a NX8, there is no comparison the new Bushnells are better everywhere I can think of, eyebrow, turrets, parallax.. the glass is way better to my eyes.
The only thing hard about buying a Bushnell to me is that I have always looked down on the idea ? Of using a scope at this price point... but that just seems foolish after handling these new products. I will own one myself soon...
Last edited:
I bought the DMR3 to see for myself in varying conditions. I love it. It’s performed well. I won’t be selling my ZCOs or SB but for 1/4 the price it’s excellent. It’s a perfect fit for rifles that don’t need $4K glass.
On the same account, the Arken 4-16 EP4 is great for my 14 yr old daughter’s .243 she only shoots a few times a year.
Eyebrow? Unibrow?
Mine came in today and all I have to say is wow!
- the glass is excellent-better than the Nightforce ATACR and on par with my S&B PMII
- the click spacing is perfect
- the clicks are nice and crisp
- there is no tunneling
- the eye box is super forgiving
- the reticle is very well thought out and easy to use
- the parallax is perfect for a rimfire if needed
- The zero stop is super easy to use
- the price is stupidly low
Last edited:
Been on the fence but those words are really encouraging. I have a monox lr which I love great glass but might be trading or selling to get one of these to try out.
Trust me I have owned every scope out there and I am really shocked as to how nice these are. I am taking it to the range Saturday and going to put it through the paces and if it tracks and pans out I am going to switch over to them.
XRS3 G4P Reticle. I noticed 0.25 mil subtensions up to 1 mil in all directions. Then windage subtensions at 1.2 mils? WTF, why not keep it all 0.25 mil increments or 1/10th's?
Adam
You referring to XRS3 or DMR3?
You referring to XRS3 or DMR3?
I would assume he was taking about the xrs3 since the dmr3 tunnels from 3 to about 4.5-5
I want to try one, but the more I look at the ret, the more I have to justify it. Let's see what other ret's they license - maybe an MSR2?
Same. I'm really thinking hard about throwing an XRS3 on the PMR rather than Kahles 624 but I wish they would have done .2 spacing on wind holds like the rest of my reticles (ZCO, Kahles, NF, Vortex, etc). At least there's more there than g3 I guess.
XRS3
mover?
Yep, the 1.2 is a mover hold, same as it was on the G3. If you can consistently shoot that .05 difference, then I dunno what to tell you.
Mine tunnels noticeably at 3.5 and then tapers quickly to 4.25-4.5 I’m guessing. Definitely nowhere near 5.
Educate me on this 1.2 mover hold. What scenario would it require 1.2? I've only shot 5 mover stages and the longest was 800yds with a 3mph mover which required 2 mil lead (wind was at my back).
It all depends on distance and mover speed, but I've used it quite a bit on 300 and 500 yard movers, either from lead edge or center. It still works as a wind reference as well, obviously.
Not the scope I am talking about
I am actually heading there today with my 22 since I don't have any dasher ammo loaded right now, I will post pics and my thoughts. I am going to run a ton of tracking tests and shoot out to 400 and back.
XRS3 has a very noticeable improvement in glass clarity, with far less darkening at max power (My XRS3 is brighter at 36 than my 2s at 30x) and far brighter overall. The bigger turret markings are also a nice addition for a lot of folks.
Sweet man. If you can get some decent through the scope pics that would be awesome. Concerned about the ret size on 8x to 15x..........(most of my shooting takes place on those power ranges), even out past 1,000yds
If Adam forgets, I can snag some tonight for you.
I ran 200 rounds through it out to 215 yards and back in with my RimX. It tracked flawlessly and the scope really impressed me. I ran several box tests. I made 5 dots 1 mil apart all the way round the box and shot it 5 times in a row, every time it was 100% on. I tracked it up and down dialing up 10 mils and back down again taking shots every 1 mil increment and every time it was spot on. the clicks are great and the spacing is perfect. I like the numbering on the turrets and the only thing I wish they would have done was added a locking turret for the elevation. It isn't that big of a deal but would have been nice.
I brought out my S&B 5-25 just for comparison. Is it as good as the S&B, no, is it close, yes (something I never thought I would say). The glass in the Bushnell is damn near as good as the S&B. Will I be selling all of my S&B scopes, probably not but I do plan to off a few. Now take that with a grain of salt. I am 44 and have had lasik so my eyes may not pick up things younger eyes pick up. In all honestly, I could care less.
I do plan to run these on my match rifles next year and will be shooting them all fall and winter in our local 22 matches so I will report back on overall reliability.
50 yards 6 power
50 yards 15 power
36 power
Impressive thanks for the report
Thanks for report Adam, much appreciated. Reticle looks very usable on 15x...........good to see. I'm sure I'll end up with one of these in the near future.
I am not an expert.
My XRS2 is nicer than my S&B PM2 and Steiner M5Xi and it is also more FDE. Obviously, it cost a lot less too. It is the nicest scope I've ever used. I've been disappointed by the recent lack of availability of the XRS2s and ended up picking up a Vortex when I wanted another XRS.
I'm excited for these to be in the pipe.
My XRS2 is nicer than my S&B PM2 and Steiner M5Xi and it is also more FDE. Obviously, it cost a lot less too. It is the nicest scope I've ever used. I've been disappointed by the recent lack of availability of the XRS2s and ended up picking up a Vortex when I wanted another XRS.
I'm excited for these to be in the pipe.
One thing I forgot to add is the the eye box is amazingly forgiving.
There’s been several XRSIIs in the PX. One has T3 reticle for $1150.
Keep in mind, glass is always subjective to they eyeball behind it and the exact conditions they're compared in. That said, the Bushnell glass has always looked great to my eyes, and just gets better with every revision. It's a big part of why I have stuck with them.
That was something I was worried about before I got to run the prototype, and even a little before I got the production model. The engineer really knocked it out of the park on eyebox, though.
Glass is certainly objective but I ran the XRS II and everything before it, the PM II and MX5I looked better than any Bushnell.
The XRS III looks promising though. If it has the color pop of a ATACR then I’m sold. Who cares about selling off scopes, NF guys better burn those hats and shirts
The XRS III looks promising though. If it has the color pop of a ATACR then I’m sold. Who cares about selling off scopes, NF guys better burn those hats and shirts
