Bushnell Elite LRHS 2

[BAKPAKR]

Mine showed up today, too. Now, I have wait for my rifle to get back with its new makeover.

 

[slowelk]

Any updates from those that have them? I ordered two over the weekend for my dad and me.

@wind gypsy @BAKPAKR

 

[F0steology]

Too bad they're not offering it in a 3-12

 

[BAKPAKR]

Any updates from those that have them? I ordered two over the weekend for my dad and me.

@wind gypsy @BAKPAKR

My rifle is still at the gunsmith’s so I can’t really give much of a report on it. Based on the couple times I have looked through the scope, the glass appears to be pretty clear. Although, I wish it were lighter and a little shorter, I am glad the scope tube is long enough that I shouldn’t have difficulty mounting it on a long action.

 

[slowelk]

Update - I have just under 100 rounds on my LRHS 2 and one hunt (no success) and the scope has performed flawlessly. I haven't Form tested it with any drops and don't plan to, but I've extensively spun the turrets and it has returned and held zero through all of it.

I love the reticle at low power, and it's pretty good at max too, but I would prefer a center dot.

Eye relief and eyebox are incredibly forgiving - a nice improvement from an NX8 2.5-20.

 

[wind gypsy]

Any updates from those that have them? I ordered two over the weekend for my dad and me.

@wind gypsy @BAKPAKR

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

I haven't used mine yet. I did bring it to the range during a rushed range session to try and get a tracking test completed. The tracking test results were the worst of the 5 or 6 bushnell elite tactical line scopes i've tested but like I said it was rushed and I need to take another range session to troubleshoot and make sure there wasn't something else at play in how I conducted it. It seems to have a canted reticle and adjustments are slightly strong such that by 6 mils it is has corrected 6.1+ mils and tracks to the right at least 0.1 mil horizontally.

 

[slowelk]

Sorry, didn't see this until now.

I haven't used mine yet. I did bring it to the range during a rushed range session to try and get a tracking test completed. The tracking test results were the worst of the 5 or 6 bushnell elite tactical line scopes i've tested but like I said it was rushed and I need to take another range session to troubleshoot and make sure there wasn't something else at play in how I conducted it. It seems to have a canted reticle and adjustments are slightly strong such that by 6 mils it is has corrected 6.1+ mils and tracks to the right at least 0.1 mil horizontally.

View attachment 352701View attachment 352702

I'm not going to take any shots at your process there since you're certainly being more thorough than me, but I think your setup is potentially imperfect.

From my shooting, now at 175 rounds between 100 and 600 yards the scope has still tracked and rtz consistently. Shots at 300+ on steel, and shots at 100 on paper.

I wont' be doing any more shooting until the new year, but I will do a better job documenting my testing.

This is all good info.

 

[wind gypsy]

I'm not going to take any shots at your process there since you're certainly being more thorough than me, but I think your setup is potentially imperfect.

From my shooting, now at 175 rounds between 100 and 600 yards the scope has still tracked and rtz consistently. Shots at 300+ on steel, and shots at 100 on paper.

I wont' be doing any more shooting until the new year, but I will do a better job documenting my testing.

This is all good info.

Do you/your rifle shoot good enough to identify a 0.1 mil tracking error at over 600 yards? I own some tack drivers but that type of error probably wouldn't be identified by shooting targets at distance. Probably could see it in a tall target test with tight enough groups.

I rushed and didn't have other known scopes to compare that's why i mentioned as much. That said, this isn't a one off, i've done it with a number of scopes with appropriate equipment and had repeatable results. Here is a thread where i documented findings from a different range trip: https://www.rokslide.com/forums/threads/scope-tracking-tests.214882/

I thought of 2 possible causes of error:
1. Range not exactly 100 yards
2. Scope not perfectly static while dialing

Why i don't think the results were caused by those errors:
1. The reticle subtensions line up with the tracking target, if the error is in actual distance the reticle subtensions shouldn't line up with the calibrated target. If the distance is the error and clicks are correct, the reticle is not properly scaled.
2. When dialing up (reticle moving down) you are turning the elevation turret counter clock wise which should be twisting the reticle towards the left. When tracking, the reticle ended up to the right.

 

[slowelk]

Do you/your rifle shoot good enough to identify a 0.1 mil tracking error at over 600 yards? I own some tack drivers but that type of error probably wouldn't be identified by shooting targets at distance. Probably could see it in a tall target test with tight enough groups.

I rushed and didn't have other known scopes to compare that's why i mentioned as much. That said, this isn't a one off, i've done it with a number of scopes with appropriate equipment and had repeatable results. Here is a thread where i documented findings from a different range trip: https://www.rokslide.com/forums/threads/scope-tracking-tests.214882/

I thought of 2 possible causes of error:
1. Range not exactly 100 yards
2. Scope not perfectly static while dialing

Why i don't think the results were caused by those errors:
1. The reticle subtensions line up with the tracking target, if the error is in actual distance the reticle subtensions shouldn't line up with the calibrated target. If the distance is the error and clicks are correct, the reticle is not properly scaled.
2. When dialing up (reticle moving down) you are turning the elevation turret counter clock wise which should be twisting the reticle towards the left. When tracking, the reticle ended up to the right.

Thanks for the additional context and the link to your other testing - thorough work.

No, I, nor the rifle are precise enough to pick up 0.1 mil of tracking error at 600+. I'm mostly concerned about rtz, and that hasn't been an issue.

Pictures/documentation to come in the new year.

 

[Sled]

Thanks for the additional context and the link to your other testing - thorough work.

No, I, nor the rifle are precise enough to pick up 0.1 mil of tracking error at 600+. I'm mostly concerned about rtz, and that hasn't been an issue.

Pictures/documentation to come in the new year.

Any updates on the scope? Still performing well for you?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

[slowelk]

Any updates on the scope? Still performing well for you?

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Ya. Time has been limited, but it’s been on three guns and will stay on the third one. It has continued to track and return to zero.

 

[Sled]

Ya. Time has been limited, but it’s been on three guns and will stay on the third one. It has continued to track and return to zero.

Thanks for the reply. I have one on the way from gap and hope to have the same luck as you.

 

[BCD]

Does anyone know if they have any plans to make this in a lighter 12X version?

 

[Schaaf]

Does anyone know if they have any plans to make this in a lighter 12X version?

I wouldn’t hold my breath.

 

[BsDada]

Interested in this vs LHT. Any new info?

 

[BAKPAKR]

Interested in this vs LHT. Any new info?

My 4.5-18 is still in the box as I found a 3-12 that I ended up using. I like the length of the 3-12 better on my sporterish rifle.

 

[pirogue]

Found it ...

"The Bushnells aren’t as solid as they were, because Bushnell got rid of the people who were responsible for bringing them to fruition."

Solid? How long did that last? Never knew Bushnell representing anything except cheap and low end.

 

[sndmn11]

My 4.5-18 is still in the box as I found a 3-12 that I ended up using. I like the length of the 3-12 better on my sporterish rifle.

View attachment 689437

List that 4.5-18 in the classifieds!

Solid? How long did that last? Never knew Bushnell representing anything except cheap and low end.

The LRTS/LRHS are very good scopes and fit into the lifetime purchase category.

 

[Balderdash]

Solid? How long did that last? Never knew Bushnell representing anything except cheap and low end.

Dont let the brand throw you off, the 8-10 LRHS/LRTS I've had/have, have all been great scopes. Precise dialers and rugged. The same can't be said for a couple of "Alpha" brand scopes that I've had.

 

[BAKPAKR]

List that 4.5-18 in the classifieds!



The LRTS/LRHS are very good scopes and fit into the lifetime purchase category.

The 4.5-18 LRHS2 and the NIB SWFA 3-9 I also have squirreled away are both going to go on something one of these days.