I had one of these scopes and loved it, but they aren't lefty friendly with the throw lever. I am going to try one of the Tract toric 4-20's to see if it compares, because that Bushnell is about perfect with mag range, reticle, weight, etc.
A "Nearly Ideal" LRH scope on my 6.5 PRC Hunting Rifle
- Thread starter Litehiker
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Well ok then. Have a nice day.
Litehiker
Well-Known Member
I compete with a Bushnell 3.5 - 21 x 50 ERS scope with an H59 reticle in mils so I'm used to that unit of measurement and want to use it in my hunting scope. My range finding binoculars are also set to mils so I can just use them to know my hold over with my G3 reticle.
If I get a new competition scope it will be a Bushnell XRS II 4.5 - 30 x 50 B/C it has ED glass. I dunno if I can learn to use the windage setup on a Horus Tremor 3 reticle but I'll make an effort to learn it. Wind hold guessing is my nemesis! That and at extreme ranges I often forget about right hand spin drift. Lots of things to remember, hold over, bubble level, wind, spin drift, all with a brain of a geezer.
If I get a new competition scope it will be a Bushnell XRS II 4.5 - 30 x 50 B/C it has ED glass. I dunno if I can learn to use the windage setup on a Horus Tremor 3 reticle but I'll make an effort to learn it. Wind hold guessing is my nemesis! That and at extreme ranges I often forget about right hand spin drift. Lots of things to remember, hold over, bubble level, wind, spin drift, all with a brain of a geezer.
Jon Bischof
Well-Known Member
I'm a big fan of the upper end Bushnell scopes. The Deploy MIL reticle on the new line of Bushnell Forge and Nitro scopes are very similar to the G3 reticle--pretty much work the same. But Forge and Nitro are much cheaper. I have both and I have to say that the glass is better than the price might make you think.
I have a bunch of the old 4500 and 6500 Elites too. They too perform a bit above their price level. Still like their plain old Mil-Dot reticle. But they don't make them anymore either.
I have a bunch of the old 4500 and 6500 Elites too. They too perform a bit above their price level. Still like their plain old Mil-Dot reticle. But they don't make them anymore either.
D
Deleted member 48126
Guest
Tagging in. I love upper tier bushnells.
Jackson3081
Member
What a pompous ***.... seems to me moving in .25" adjustments is more precise as compared to moving in .36" at 100 yards.
COBrad
Well-Known Member
I prefer moa and sfp scopes. I've always used moa and prefer the finer adjustments when shooting at prairie dogs and marmots at 1K and beyond. I prefer sfp for the same reason.
1 day in and already name calling? Welcome to LRH!
huntsman22
Well-Known Member
hey, jackson, you pompous know-it-all...... Why not use Mueller or other scopes with those oh-so-precise 1/8 moa adjustments, if finer adjustments are so great?
huntsman22
Well-Known Member
is the key word,'AT' ?.....grin
COBrad
Well-Known Member
not sure how the capital AT got in there but I'll admit many more misses than hits at those ranges.
- Joined
- May 2, 2001
- Messages
- 7,486
Jackson3081 is banned
Randy Strom
Well-Known Member
To bad, some of these guys that have strong opinions, and like to bully others for their opinions seem to be able to get away with it because they are being politically correct.
Ckleeves
Well-Known Member
I hope to someday be good enough to need the finer adjustments of moa vs mil at 1000 yards lol. The most you can be off by landing directly in the middle of a "click" is 1.8" with mils and 1.3" with moa. You guys have better eyesite then me to see be able to see that 1/2" at 1k!
