Advice request: Bushnell Elite tactical 2.5-16x 42mm - Mil Dot

[gtita]

Hi,

I am considering mounting a Bushnell Elite Tactical 2.5-16x 42mm - Mil Dot on a Browning X-bolt stainless stalker (.30-06). Is there any sound advice on this scope from hunters who used it?

I use to hunt medium and large game at ranges up to 500 yds, but mostly within 200 yds.

Thanks!

 

[Danehunter]

I have an Elite series Bushnell ERS 3.5- 21 X50 scope with an H 59 reticle. It has been rated "best tactical scope buy for the money" by several tests so I'm sure your Elite hunting scope will be a great choice too.

For your purposes, if they are available, I'd recommend the Horus TMR2 reticle or the simpler G2DMR reticle. Both have Mil hash marks, not dots. The hash marks are easier to use and give a clearer view than dots. Once you learn to use these systems, especially the TMR2, you can make very fast an accurate first and second shots. The TMR2 is a great wind compensating reticle.

 

[Iron Worker]

I have an Elite series Bushnell ERS 3.5- 21 X50 scope with an H 59 reticle. It has been rated "best tactical scope buy for the money" by several tests so I'm sure your Elite hunting scope will be a great choice too.

For your purposes, if they are available, I'd recommend the Horus TMR2 reticle or the simpler G2DMR reticle. Both have Mil hash marks, not dots. The hash marks are easier to use and give a clearer view than dots. Once you learn to use these systems, especially the TMR2, you can make very fast an accurate first and second shots. The TMR2 is a great wind compensating


The Bushnell ERS 3.5- 21 X50 is set way apart from the 2.5 x16 scope your asking about. I have the 2.5x16x50MM elite 6500 and its glass is good enough. But can't hold a candle to the Bushnell ERS 3.5- 21 X50 . My 14 year old 6x24x40MM Bushnell elite 4200 has better glass than then the elite 6500 your asking about.

 

[Danehunter]

Wow Ironworker, your old Bushnell must have Bausch & Lomb glass in it if it's better than the Elite 6500.

There are three main things that make optics glass good:
1. quality of the glass
2. quality of lens design
3. quality of the glass grinding/machining

2 & 3 are usually quite good these days, even on mid price scopes, due to CAD/CAM technology almost eliminating human error.
So glass quality seems to be where it's at with the Elite 6500. Too bad.

These days Bushnell needs to have only two levels of glass quality, i.e. very good "HD" quality glass and top-of-the-line ED (Extra-low Dispertion) glass. Anything less should be left to other companies servicing the bottom end of hunting optics. Nikon knows this.

Right now I see Bushnell as having very good "HD" glass only in their very top ERS and ELR scopes. THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE! It's about time for those scopes to get ED glass.

 

[Rich Coyle]

The Bushnell ERS 3.5- 21 X50 is set way apart from the 2.5 x16 scope your asking about. I have the 2.5x16x50MM elite 6500 and its glass is good enough. But can't hold a candle to the Bushnell ERS 3.5- 21 X50 . My 14 year old 6x24x40MM Bushnell elite 4200 has better glass than then the elite 6500 your asking about.

I have a 4200 and a couple 6500 scopes. The 4200 is older and yet better in low light than the others. The 4200 has a 40mm while the others are larger.

 

[Iron Worker]

Actually my 4200 6x24x40mm is Bausch & Lomb . I just didn't feel like digging it out of my gun safe to check for spelling ,so I was lazy and said it was Bushnell.

 

[gtita]

Hi to everyone,

Thanks for your sound advices that made me reconsider the purchase of a Bushnell Elite Tactical 2.5-16x 42mm (Mil Dot). This may be a good scope, but two features let me back, i.e. the second focal plane (I would prefer a first focal) and the mil-dot reticle (as some of you suggested, TMR2, G2DMR or ERS may be better options).

This being said, I actually have another question concerning the turret click value. I noticed that some Bushnell Elite Tactical models have a .25" click, while others have a .34" (1 Mil). I am used to the .25" and feel that the 1-Mil click might be less sensitive for fine adjustments at long range shooting (400-600 yds, for me). Do you have any advice on this issue?


Thanks again!

 

[Danehunter]

Mils & MOA:

gtita,

Like you I prefer 1st focal plane reticles so that any hash mark holds can be made at any power, not just the highest magnification. But I also prefer mil radian reticles due to the fact that very few MOA reticles come with 1/4 and smaller 1/8 minute hash marks.

Mil hash reticles have 1 mil and 0.5 mil marks (unless you find an older style mil "dot" reticle).

Personally I prefer the new hash mark reticles and in particular the TRMOR and H59 reticles for fast second shots or EXACT holds recommended in the readout of my Bushnell ARC 1 Mile range finding binocular, which I set for mil display.

 

[krummarine]

I have this same scope; I also have one with the 50mm objective. I bought them both used but in near new condition. For the money, not sure how you would do better with an entry level, 30mm tube high magnification hunting optic; unless you went with a SWFA SS 3-15. The only real drawback the Bushnell is the knobs are MOA and reticle is a mil dot but unless you plan to do a lot of knob twisting, this is not a show stopper. To my 54 year old eyes, the glass is quite good and the side focus works from 10m to infinity. Not sure of your experience with mid to higher end optics but to learn on, this scope would fill the bill...

 

[Wedgy]

I think the glass on the elite 6500 2.5-16x is ok in low light but not quite where it should be for the price. Similar scopes in Weaver and Nikon showed better detail in low light at the same power when I compared them. Last week I passed a shot on a small buck because I couldn't see if he was a spike or a fork at 16x, it looked dark with plenty of shooting time left. It does track and dial very well out to 600 yards, on a .243 Win. This is the 50mm by the way

 

[krummarine]

Wedgy: glad you weighed in. I haven't used either of mine much on max power, and then only for paper. I'm a little biased towards Bushnell as the other 3200's I've hunted with for years have been excellent in low light; I shot a buck two years ago with about 10 minutes of legal light left with a Bushy 3200 mounted on my 30-06. Could only make out his rack when I looked at him in the corner of the field with my scope on 4X.

I bought both 6500's with the intent of using them for paper/steel. People seem to be selling them off saying the same thing you posted: they track great; glass is just ok. I might end up sending my 50mm down the road as I like the way the 42 mounts low to my action and I don't really need both of them but want and need are two different things, aren't they?

 

[gtita]

Hi guys,

Thanks so much for your inputs. They clarified some issues in my mind and pushed me to further explore the features I look for.

Krummarine, my experience with optics is relatively little by steadily increasing through good readings. First focal, clarity at low light, Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA system (reticle/turret), good mechanical performance and ergonomics, G2 or similar reticle, and relatively extended magnification range for short to long range shooting are all features I look for.

Two Bushnell's options seem to fit in:

Elite Long Range Hunter, LRHS 3-12x 40mm (~1,000 $)
Elite Tactical, ERS 3.5-21x 50mm (~1,600 $)

Some other brands offer similar configurations, although they are much more pricy.

BTW, to reply to your question, Krummarine, I'm a somehow a "freshman" in scope optics. I owned and used only one scope until now, i.e. Nikon's Monarch 3, 2.5-10x42mm (BDC), mounted on a Tikka T3 in .30-06. This scope provides excellent clarity at dusk together with the interesting BDC feature (although in the second focal). However, I wish upgrading my scope option for a new rifle that I'm considering to purchase, which may possibly be in a .300 WSM cartridge (e.g. Browning X-bolt).

Cheers!

 

[Danehunter]

Browning X-Bolt - excellent choice for a high quality rifle with a fast cycling 3 lug bolt and a handy magazine system.

 

[Wedgy]

Here is the deer in question. This is a blown up picture so it's pretty obvious now but it wasn't then. The clear one with the antlers is the Gold Ring spotting scope and the darker on is the Elite 6500 2.5-16x50