bushnell scopes input please

Discussion in 'Feedback Forum' started by cycloneman, Mar 26, 2016.

  1. jsjj388

    jsjj388 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    976
    Location:
    HICKTOWN (AKA HAMPTONVILLE), NORTH CAROLINA
    I typically look at how much the rifle costs, what will i use it for, and how precise is the rifle. Im a fan of tasco as well as BSA and Bushnell, I have a few of all of these and they are all great scopes. I dropped my old .223 out of a 20 tripod stand and killed a deer with it that night, Ive had it 6 years and never moved after I sighted it in. We have a Bushnell on our .22 farm gun, it rides the tractor, the back of the truck, the 4 wheeler, and have never had to adjust it. If i were to build a 3000 dollar gun, I would consider spending a grand on a scope, otherwise, couple hundred is about it.

    Just my thoughts on the subject.
     
    jim brady likes this.
  2. gvw3

    gvw3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011
    Messages:
    13,395
    Location:
    Chicago IL Area
    My son has that same Tasco scope on one of his bolt guns. Cheap and well worth the money.

    I have Nikon ProStaff on two of my guns. I love the one on my 308 but the one on my 22lr Ruger American is not as good. I have a cheap Simmons 22 scope on my 10-22 and like it much better than the Nikon.
     
    jim brady likes this.

  3. Hawg

    Hawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,972
    I've got a cheap Bushnell on my Marlin model 60 and it's a good, clear scope. That's my only experience with Chinese Bushnells.
     
  4. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Buy one of them then look in your wallet and you'll see a bigger difference.
     
    firefighter1635, ral357 and jsjj388 like this.
  5. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    +1
     
    jsjj388 likes this.
  6. firefighter1635

    firefighter1635 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    6,691
    Location:
    FEMA Region V
    I agree but quality costs. Not saying a bushnell won't fit the needs of the op though.
     
    crystalphoto likes this.
  7. ricochet rabbit

    ricochet rabbit Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    58
    A few years ago I bought a Savage Axis combo in 30-06. The scope was a basic Bushnell I don't remember the model. Not a robust scope, with the first shot fired from my 30-06 the cross hair reticle dropped to the bottom. I contacted Busnell and sent it to the factory for repair. They couldn't repair it so they replaced it and sent along a coupon for 10% off my next purchase. I only paid shipping one way. I like Bushnell. I put that scope on my Grandsons Cricket 22 rifle, and bore sighted it. As for training him I told him to put the cross of the lines where he wants his bullet to hit. He's been dead on with it ever since. He started using the scope when he was 4 years old. :)
     
  8. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Quality does cost but somewhere there's a limit on how much quality is necessary! I have two old Denver Redfield's I dearly love. And I have a very old K4 that I don't use.Both have really been over shadowed by the new Redfield/Leupold and a number of other scope's starting at around $150. Quality does cost but how much quality do you really need?
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2017
  9. prescut

    prescut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    19
    revival of an old thread,...

    just got a bushnell elite 3200 2-6 x 32 EER handgun scope last week. the eye relief is the best of all the ones I tested; leupold, nikon, weaver, redfield, ...
     
  10. gdmoody

    gdmoody Moderator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    25,778
    Location:
    Athens, Georgia
    This thread ain't old!:p You should see some 7-13 year old ones that are resurrected.
     
    jwdurf likes this.
  11. jwdurf

    jwdurf Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2014
    Messages:
    4,919
    Location:
    Rural Northern CA
    One should spend as much or as little as one is comfortable with spending. I agree that the major manufacturers, Bushnell included, all make very serviceable scopes.

    That said, there is a very real difference in quality, and the more you spend, the more clear the optics become, the more precise the adjustability becomes, and the more light they gather. I would not compare a Bushnell to a Leupold, or a Leupold to a Zeiss or Swarovski. Different leagues.

    Will a Bushnell do the job? Sure, but in the low light, fog, rain, snow, and at long ranges, the Zeiss or the Swarovski will literally outshine the others. But, as you say, how much quality do you need? That's up to you.

    I am a Leupold guy. I own a couple of dozen of them and I am satisfied at the Leupold level of quality. That doesn't mean I think they are the best optics on the market, or necessarily the best value for the dollar. It means that they suit my needs. I trust them; for me they have always performed the way they were intended and guaranteed to. And they are made in America, That suits me too.

    Quality does have a cost. I do absolutely believe that as the cost of optics goes up, so does the quality. Each shooter should buy the quality of optics that he or she can afford and wants. But remember, speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?
     
  12. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Problem is if you don't look through it you'll buy a $200 scope and still be satisfied.
     
  13. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Sitting here thinking this morning and think quality come in all different grades. We decide if the quality it good for our own needs. But I don't know that using cost to determine quality is a good way to go. Unless your well above middle class, spending even $500 and up on a scope could be something you just can't do. But that doesn't mean you can't have a quality scope just the same. I've got 2 Redfield/Leupold 2-7x and love them. I prefer them to my Nikons but when I got my Nikons, Redfield was still an also ran. And that is not to say the Nikons are't up to par, they are!

    I think the advice I hear most is spend more on the scope than you do on the rifle. That makes no sence to me at all! My new Mossberg cost me #299 and the scope around $150, Nikon. I don't have a problem one with the Nikon's I nave. Another thing I think is that people spreading the news that if you didn't buy a scope that cost more than the rifle, you didn't get quality. Some guy looking for his first scope will be infulenced by that so will a lot of time's end up spending more that he really can afford because the inexpensive scope's get bashed. Guy's doing that do no service to the first time buyer.

    On gathering light, just how much light do you need to gather? My 2-7 Redfield's will show me a target very well in the time before legal hours and the time before they end! Same with my 3-9x Bushnell and Nikon's. I have never understood that line of thinking. Why does a scope need to pick up more light than you really need?
     
  14. Hawg

    Hawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,972
    I've owned Swarovski scopes in the past and have a pair of Swarovski binoculars. Are they worth the money? Nope. All they're really good for is bragging rights. A Leupold or Nikon will do the job just as good and I have no problem with some of the cheaper scopes. They will put meat on the table or bullets in the X ring as long as you do your part. The only scopes I have experience with I wouldn't buy again are Tasco and BSA.
     
    ral357 likes this.
  15. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    689
    Let's say that's right about say a Nightforce being brighter. I think they start at over a $1000 and go to something like $2500. Is there really a min of $900 difference? Every body that has them talk's nothing but good. But the bottom line is most people can't afford them. So step down $900 and tell us if the scope is clear enough to hunt with during normal hunting hour's. I suspect every one here would like to be flush enough to buy our rifle's and scope's at what ever the price may be. Every body is not in that income class and are not willing to go that deep in debt just to have what everyone call's the best.

    I've recently bought two new Redfield/Leupold scope's. About $150, maybe a bit less and I'd have no trouble at all using them during all hunting hour's and conditions. I also have a couple old Denver Redfields and a couple Nikon's. And, a very old Bushnell banner. All will work at all hunting hour's.

    I don't think guy's talking about $100+ scope's really would appreciate the difference between the scope they are looking at and any $1000+ scope. I think the fact of the matter is that the much more inexpensive scope's today are way ahead of the older scope's. I have the 2 3/4x and 1-4x Denver Redfields and love them but having to be honest, my two new Redfield/Leupold's are better scope's.
     
    ral357 likes this.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
Feedback Forum Bushnell comes through, and then some Jul 25, 2013
Feedback Forum Redfield scopes Mar 8, 2010
Feedback Forum Countersniper scopes??? Sep 26, 2008