Bushnell LRHS - Anyone have any experieince with these?

[TheCougar]

Does anyone have any experience with the Bushnell LRHS scopes? They are in the final cut of scopes I am looking to put on my 7mm build, specifically the 3-12x44 FFP. I have heard a couple of good things about them (solid tracking), but not enough to overcome my aversion to spending $1000 on a Bushnell scope. Does anyone have any info on their durability, build quality, tracking, optics, etc? Thanks.

 

[huntsman22]

Good, tough scope that tracks like it has eyes. I sure like mine...

 

[micus]

I own one. the mil/mil 6-24 version its on an RPR. They are made in Japan, really nice glass, tracking is dead on, reticles designed in consultation with GAP. Its built like a tank, lots of budget minded guys are running them on PRS rigs and pounding the shit out of them. Ive shot mine from 25-1200 yds.

8541 tactical has a torture test of one on youtube, check it out!

Mike.

PS. I wouldn't worry too much about spending 1k on a bushnell made in japan. Lots of guys have no problem spending much more than that on glass made in the phillipines with much less stout construction. The bushnell also carries a lifetime no questions warranty, I doubt you will use it.

 

[Jesse Jaymes]

That's not the LRHS....

 

[huntsman22]

I own one. the mil/mil 6-24 version its on an RPR.

You must have the only LRHS in the world over 18x........

 

[pyroducksx3]

These are built specifically for the prs type shooter. They dail awesome from what I hear and are rugged and tough. I hear the glass isn't great though especially in low light. Which isn't really a negative because of the purpose they were built for. The match guys shoot in good light and upper end glass sharpness isn't really hight on the light of Thierry priorities. When making a budget minded scope you have to make the cuts somewhere

 

[huntsman22]

Actually, They were built by Bushnell as a hunting scope. Design input and reticle were by George Gardner and Pat Sinclair, hunters both, who also happen to shoot PRS......

 

[huntsman22]

and if the match guys shoot only in good light, and don't care about glass quality, why do most run illumination and high end glass?

 

[pyroducksx3]

That's what you get when you spend that kind of money on optics you get all the features and the best glass. It's why they cost twice to three times as much. It can't really be argued that to the competition shooter the most important feature is repeatable dialing. If your saying that the bushnell lrs competes on all levels with nxs, atacr, Khales & S & B your kidding yourself. The budget value has to come from somewhere and that's in low light performance and the high end optical quality. As far as illuminated reticles I've never heard of anyone actually needing one for a comp. If you love the scope that's fine. I'm not saying it's a bad scope but it does have limitations.

 

[Formidilosus]

Does anyone have any experience with the Bushnell LRHS scopes? They are in the final cut of scopes I am looking to put on my 7mm build, specifically the 3-12x44 FFP. I have heard a couple of good things about them (solid tracking), but not enough to overcome my aversion to spending $1000 on a Bushnell scope. Does anyone have any info on their durability, build quality, tracking, optics, etc? Thanks.

I've several thousand rounds of experience with the Bushnell LRHS. In short- they are one of the very few scopes thy actually work correctly. The adjustments and tracking are correct. Return to zero is spot on, and zero retention is excellent. The reticle is well designed, and despite what people who have never seen one, let alone used one, have said- the "glass" is good. Leupold VX3 quality at least.

For a normal weight, longer range rifle they are one of the best scopes going.

 

[Formidilosus]

That's what you get when you spend that kind of money on optics you get all the features and the best glass. It's why they cost twice to three times as much. It can't really be argued that to the competition shooter the most important feature is repeatable dialing. If your saying that the bushnell lrs competes on all levels with nxs, atacr, Khales & S & B your kidding yourself. The budget has to costeoporosis value has to come from somewhere and that's in low light performance and the high end optical quality. As far as illuminated reticles I've never heard of anyone actually needing one for a comp. If you love the scope that's fine. I'm not saying it's a bad scope but it does have limitations.

Have you use an LRHS?

 

[pyroducksx3]

Nope, don't have one. For the reason I stated but I was very close to buying one. You seem to think I'm saying this scope is crap and I'm not. Do you have a nightforce nxs, atacr, khales, S&B.... I have a vx3 and the glass is just so so, especially when I'm used to the upper end scopes.

 

[Ryan Avery]

I have used the LRHS and ERS. While the guts seem to be money. I found the low light performance lacking in both.

But I have read several reviews where people claim the glass is acceptable. The was not my conclusion.

 

[huntsman22]

It is a frigging aiming device, not a spotter to count rings on a ram's horn. It will more than do the job as a hunting scope during legal hours.

 

[Ryan Avery]

That's your opinion, mine is different.
Glass might be the last thing I would worry about on a long range scope. But my option is the glass is marginal at best. I shoot a lot right before dark at a local range. I had trouble shooting at a shot up steel target at 640 yards with the LRHS. I had no trouble with the X5, NXS and VX6 during the same time period. Different eyes might be fine with this scope. Mine were not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[luke moffat]

I have only had my LRHS for about a month now but thus far tracked perfectly to 750 yards for beating steel and has killed two caribou the past week and it seems fine to me. Granted this is coming from a guy that's killed 90% of his critters with VX-2 glass or worse so YMMV.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Is that a custom cheekpiece?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ryan Avery]

I have only had my LRHS for about a month now but thus far tracked perfectly to 750 yards for beating steel and has killed two caribou the past week and it seems fine to me. Granted this is coming from a guy that's killed 90% of his critters with VX-2 glass or worse so YMMV.

Luke, just for shits and giggles how do you like the glass?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WRO]

I have only had my LRHS for about a month now but thus far tracked perfectly to 750 yards for beating steel and has killed two caribou the past week and it seems fine to me. Granted this is coming from a guy that's killed 90% of his critters with VX-2 glass or worse so YMMV.

I didn't think it was possible to make a Tikka less attractive..

Its like you put a fat suit on Rosie O'Donnell..

Thanks for proving me wrong.

 

[pyroducksx3]

So I was shooting my atacr this weekend and conditions were tough, with mirage and glare. It made picking out small targets like a metal bucket at 1343 yards and crows at that distance and further difficult and that's with highend glass. Point is I understand not everyone will shoot like this but there is a reason to spent the money on this level of glass. Many of you have stated that lesser scopes will do anything anyone could ask when in reality they will do you anything you ask of it but maybe not someone else. There are so many good options for scopes today and the ability to get super reliable dialing scopes at many price points is a win for all of us.