Thread: Bushnell elites?

Are they any good. A few models at the mid higher magnification end that interest me.
Just want to hear first hand experience. Thoughts on glass quality, scalability etc.
Cheers

I have a ffp 2-12*44 w g2 reticle. Excellent but quite heavy. A good mate swears by the old 6500 models.

I have two 3200's and a 4200 and find them very good value for money. They hold zero well and have good glass. I think they changed to the Elite range which covers the older 3200 and 4200. As far as I know they are good value also.

I have a Elite 4200 2-10x and it is a great scope. Excellent value for money.

I have a 6-24x 4500 and don't particularly like it. Seems to hold zero ok but the parallax is finicky and the fact it has virtually no adjustment and a 20 moa rail is needed to dial makes it a bit of a pain.
Had a couple of mates with the 6500 and they both failed really quick as did a mates 4200. All were sorted without hassle under warranty though but still.

The Elite scopes are good for the money (particularly the 4000, 4200 and 6500 glass) but the after sales service from Bushnell is abysmal. So, better to pay a bit more and get superlative service from Leupold.

I've got a 6500 2.5 - 16 it's good but what puts me off Bushnell is how they keep discontinuing models.

Originally Posted by Remmodel7

Are they any good. A few models at the mid higher magnification end that interest me.
Just want to hear first hand experience. Thoughts on glass quality, scalability etc.
Cheers

Not sure what grade Elite you want to go up to - but have a look at this compare review Delta Titanium/Bushnell Elite 6500
I am in the process of getting a special wholesale price on both the Delta Titanium scopes in the clip
The reviewer seems balanced and shows very positive points over the Elite comparison


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87s4XLC-rSo

Had an XRS and a mate has a DMR and they are fantastic for the price and have a good reticle.
Compared the XRS to my ATACR and for something that was less than half the price, could barely tell the difference.
[Comparison was in good light on a bright day]
New models have the G3 over the G2, both still good.

Either looking at a 6500 or one of the tactical models

Good quality reliable scopes.

I have a 6500 2.5-16 goes pretty good. Hasn't let me down and I like the image through it so can't fault it. I would call it top of the low end of scopes assuming you aren't gonna spend many 1000s.
Pretty good at shedding water too with the coating

Have a DMR ii with the g3 reticle. Love it and it sits on my competition rifle

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Have both the 2-12 x 44 and a 4.5-18 illuminated LRHS g2 & g3. They are good scopes built tough, dial correctly and have capped windage and low profile turrets, not too bulky with 44mm objectives.
Would also call them more a medium to longrange precision type scope as ffp reticle. Not so ideal for closer range shooting in Bush. I quite like them and they are good value but more for open shooting.

Originally Posted by Remmodel7

Either looking at a 6500 or one of the tactical models

Have a 6-24 Elite Tactical on my Bergara 6.5CM and rate it highly. Holds zero perfectly and tracks reliable. When I first got it, I tested if 100 clicks are actually 1m @ 100m and came out at 97 which is very good if you do a bit of googling and compare it to scopes that cost double and triple the money. So correction factor for shooting app is 0.97 in my case. But more important is that it tracks well as mentioned. Easy to set zero and plenty of room for custom turret labels.

Can't compete in last light with the Zeiss scope my mate has though and have to stop 5 min before him. It's too heavy for a hunting rifle to drag up the mountains and the big, exposed turrets are bad in tight stuff but brilliant for sitting on a hill and shooting goats all day long at always changing distances.

If you ever come to the Waikato you can have a play with it.