Rifle Scopes Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

Snakum

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Feb 21, 2010
629
0
61
Sandhills
Will be needing a scope soon and have narrowed it down to Bushy Elite 3200 5-15x40 mildot or the 4200. Can someone articulate what the extra $$$ for the 4200 might provide, other than the increased magnification? For 50% more magnification there is a 100% price increase. But maybe it's worth it?

It all starts to run together after a while.
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

I can't say whether it is worth it for you, but some of the differences are:

3200 Front focus AO
4200 Side Focus down to 20 yds

Light transmission advertised:
3200 90%
4200 95%

Tube size:
3200 1"
4200 30mm

Glass quality is way better on the 4200 v 3200. So yes, you do get what you pay for.

But if your considering a Bushnell 4200, this is the scope they now make that you should take a hard look at:

4200 3-12x44mm FFP MIL/MIL

It is only $59 more than the 4200 6-24x50mm SFP MIL/MOA Tactical, and it has FFP, MIL/MIL, Illumination, and 80 MOA of adjustment.

Bob
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

I have the 4200 6-24x50 SF. Its a great scope for the money. The new FFP models are tempting me to upgrade... I say if your going to go variable its worth the price difference due to the side focus and better glass. The fixed 10X 3200 always gets great reviews also.
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PadronAniversary</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm curious to get more reviews of the 3-12 Seems like it will fit the bill and come in a little less expensive than the Viper PST.

the key has always been time to market

</div></div>

I agree this scope would be perfect for a .308 AR or 20" light weight boltgun. There are so many scope with large objectives. Nice to see a lower profile with good specs and a reasonable price.
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

I looked at the fixed 10x before I bought the Redfield 4-12x. It seemed to me the glass wasn't quite as clear at distance as the Redfield, Elite 3200s, or my Pentax. Might have just been the one I looked at.

Yeah ... the FFP is nice. Not having to set to a specific power to range via mildots. Don't they get pretty small, though, at 16x or greater? Anyone checked it out in person yet?

Thanks for the info, all.
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Snakum</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I looked at the fixed 10x before I bought the Redfield 4-12x. It seemed to me the glass wasn't quite as clear at distance as the Redfield, Elite 3200s, or my Pentax. Might have just been the one I looked at.

Yeah ... the FFP is nice. Not having to set to a specific power to range via mildots. Don't they get pretty small, though, at 16x or greater? Anyone checked it out in person yet?

Thanks for the info, all. </div></div>

Somebody on the board has one, don't remember who. And with FFP the Mildots get smaller as the power goes DOWN, not up. The Mildots are larger @ the higher powers.

If all else fails call Scott @ Liberty Optics, he has the 3-12x44mm in stock, I sure he can provide you with a first hand opinion.

Bob
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

Ahhh ... had it backwards, then. Cool.

Thanks for the info. My rifle purchase just became delayed so I have a few more days to choose and order a scope now.
 
Re: Tracking/glass ... Elite 3200 vs. 4200?

I dont have a 4200, but i do have an elite 3200 7-21. I also had a leupold vx2 3-9 and I thought the picture was crisper with the leupold scope.