Bushnell lrhs reticle vs bushnell lrhs 2 reticle

[Datslab]

Anyone have firsthand experience with these two reticles for 4.5-18. The lrhs is the g2h and the lrhs 2 is the g3 reticle. Mainly wondering if the lrhs 2 reticle is superior by being half the thickness of the lrhs illuminated. I am a fan of illumination but don’t have the choice of seeing these scopes firsthand before I buy.

 

[Dreeko]

I believe the two reticles are identical. GAP lists the reticle in the LRHS 2 as the G2H. From my research, the only changes made to the LRHS2 vs the original is that they went to an exposed/locking windage knob, added a zoom ring throw lever, and HD glass. The LRHS 2 has slightly more elevation travel and weighs about 1oz more than the original as well.

I have owned the original LRHS previously and I have decent pictures looking through the scope saved on my computer. When my LRHS 2 arrives later this week, I will take some pictures through the scope with the Gen 2 and post them up for a comparison.

 

[Datslab]

Yeah I don’t know how I missed that the LRHS 2 is also the g2 reticle. What’s your opinion on the LRHS?

 

[Datslab]

I’m really wanting to try it for a hunting rig

 

[Dreeko]

Yeah I don’t know how I missed that the LRHS 2 is also the g2 reticle. What’s your opinion on the LRHS?

For my uses, I really liked it given it's cost. I'm sure that a MK5 3.6-18 is a better scope but its also over double the price. For under $1,000, these Bushnells are hard to beat as a crossover scope. They all have had very reliable tracking and are durable as heck. There are some compromises I will have to live with but what may be a compromise to me may be a requirement to the next guy.

Personally, I wish the crosshairs were slightly thinner for use at higher magnifications and that the scope had Illumination. But, to get Illumination, you have to look for a Gen 1 on the used market and then you will be missing out on the improvements made to the Gen 2 model. Just comes down to personal preference.

The comforting thing is that these scopes seem to hold their value quite well so if I determine the scope to not be adequate for my uses, I should be able to recover most of my investment and move on to try something else.

 

[chicoredneck]

I have a gen1 LRHS on a 28 Nosler. It’s been a very durable scope and the tracking is dead on. I’ve abused the heck out of it with out any issues.

 

[Balderdash]

I own a few of these scopes. They've been very reliable dialers and overall tough scopes. I don't have direct experience with the Leupold MK5 in reference, but I'd be surprised if they're more rugged and a more reliable dialing scope than the LRHS/LRTS.

I prefer the 3-12 models. Really like the G2H for all around hunting use. Unlike some FFP's, they're usable throughout the X range.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

I believe the two reticles are identical. GAP lists the reticle in the LRHS 2 as the G2H. From my research, the only changes made to the LRHS2 vs the original is that they went to an exposed/locking windage knob, added a zoom ring throw lever, and HD glass. The LRHS 2 has slightly more elevation travel and weighs about 1oz more than the original as well.

I have owned the original LRHS previously and I have decent pictures looking through the scope saved on my computer. When my LRHS 2 arrives later this week, I will take some pictures through the scope with the Gen 2 and post them up for a comparison.

Did you get that LRHS2?
I'd love some feedback, mainly I'm concerned about the eye box and reticle visibility on low power

 

[BAKPAKR]

Did you get that LRHS2?
I'd love some feedback, mainly I'm concerned about the eye box and reticle visibility on low power

I should be able to give you some feedback within the next month. I have a NIB LRHS2 and a used 3-12 LRHS just waiting for a 30 Nosler to get back from the gunsmith. I am not sure which will end up on it.

 

[slowelk]

Did you get that LRHS2?
I'd love some feedback, mainly I'm concerned about the eye box and reticle visibility on low power

Eye box and relief are very comfortable and forgiving. The donut makes the reticle very useable on low power.

I haven’t spend much time on 18x, but 15x and under is easy and comfortable.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Eye box and relief are very comfortable and forgiving. The donut makes the reticle very useable on low power.

I haven’t spend much time on 18x, but 15x and under is easy and comfortable.

Awesome
Hows the glass?

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

I should be able to give you some feedback within the next month. I have a NIB LRHS2 and a used 3-12 LRHS just waiting for a 30 Nosler to get back from the gunsmith. I am not sure which will end up on it.

Have you had a chance to compare the glass on those two scopes?

 

[slowelk]

Awesome
Hows the glass?

More than adequate. I'm not a glass connoisseur, but I felt it was on-par with the NX8 I was replacing.

 

[BAKPAKR]

Have you had a chance to compare the glass on those two scopes?

I haven’t compared the glass side by side yet but I am going to before I mount one on my rifle. The LRHS2 is relatively long. I have posted the photo below on another thread, but here it is again.

Left to right: 3-9 SWFA, 3-12 LRHS, 4.5-18 LRHS2

 

[Novahunter]

I'vr had an original LRHS on my 308 for a few years. Great scope, been very durable.

I just had a friend buy an LRHS 2. For the price, seems hard to beat, imo.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

I haven’t compared the glass side by side yet but I am going to before I mount one on my rifle. The LRHS2 is relatively long. I have posted the photo below on another thread, but here it is again.

Left to right: 3-9 SWFA, 3-12 LRHS, 4.5-18 LRHS2

View attachment 378168

Right on
After playing with short scopes I actually appreciate a longer tube, I've found them to have a better eye box and less distortion.
Not to mention better mounting options on a LA

 

[slowelk]

Right on
After playing with short scopes I actually appreciate a longer tube, I've found them to have a better eye box and less distortion.
Not to mention better mounting options on a LA

Agreed. Short scopes are hip, but a PIA. This scope is easy to mount and get good eye relief.

 

[Datslab]

So far I am loving my LRHs 4.5-18x. The reticle is sweet and I am a big fan of illuminated reticles. Even at low power this scope works very well for me. Between these and SWFA I don’t think I need any other scopes.