Lrhs 3-12 vs rs1.2

[Joshuajosh]

I’m debating trying out one of these rs1.2 scopes and switching out my 3-12 lrhs, however I know these lrhs scopes are pretty much impossible to come by nowadays so if I’m not missing much I’ll just hang onto it. Those of you that have tried both, which do you prefer and why?

 

[SouthPaw]

I preferred everything about the 3-12 LRHS except the reticle and 50 spline turret. But the reticle improvement is dramatic and for big game hunting gives the edge to the rs1.2 for me. The 3-12 LRHS with an improved reticle and a few OZ lighter is the ideal scope.

 

[willfrye027]

They’re both great scopes. I did not mind the reticle in the LRHS, but agree that the maven is a better reticle overall. Unless you want/need the extra few x of magnification or the LRHS reticle bugs you, I’m not sure it’s “worth” the upgrade for a general purpose hunting scope

 

[Weldor]

I'd run a 3x12 LRHS if they were not as rare as Hen's teeth. Great scope and reliable. Sorry I sold mine.

 

[wind gypsy]

I've had a bunch of LRHS/LRTS scopes. I do prefer the RS1.2 and have been tempted to replace my last LRTS 3-12 or my LRHS2 with one but i have not yet been able to justify the extra $500 spend to do so.

The reticle and the zoom range of the RS1.2 are the two main benefits. The turret setup is nicer if you're changing ammo/zero frequently too. They are functionally pretty similar scopes.

 

[Weldor]

It would be nice if they had a apples to apples 12x. I don't mind the 15x but personal preference for hunting 12x.

 

[sndmn11]

The biggest "upgrade" in this scenario would be available warranty support. I don't think one would end up with a 3-12LRHS if they sent one in for a non-repairable issue.

 

[Weldor]

True. They can't replace what is not in production.

 

[sndmn11]

True. They can't replace what is not in production.

I think @TheCougar had that come up in the last year or two, but can't remember if it was a thread here or a text conversation.

 

[TheCougar]

I think @TheCougar had that come up in the last year or two, but can't remember if it was a thread here or a text conversation.

This is true

 

[sndmn11]

This is true

What was the outcome?

 

[willfrye027]

What was the outcome?

If I recall he sold it to me with full disclosure, I drop tested and dialed it a bunch, it was good to go. Used it awhile and ended up selling it or trading it a while later.

 

[TheCougar]

And I replaced it with a Maven and I’m perfectly happy. It wasn’t the scope, but a rifle problem. I still have my 4.5-18 LRHS. I can’t part with it. It’s the best 18 power scope I have used, and it has never lost zero. My son absolutely trashed it on his MT hunt and I did a zero check because I was sure it would have lost zero… nope.

@willfrye027
@sndmn11

 

[Wrench]

I'm in a rare group of guys who seem to be able to break scopes like it's my job. I have multiple lrhs scopes and never busted one.

 

[Wrongside]

They’re both great scopes. I did not mind the reticle in the LRHS, but agree that the maven is a better reticle overall. Unless you want/need the extra few x of magnification or the LRHS reticle bugs you, I’m not sure it’s “worth” the upgrade for a general purpose hunting scope

Pretty much where I’m at. I have a few 3-12 LRHSs- they’ve been my main hunting scope for awhile now- and have messed around with a buddy’s RS1.2. For what they cost to get up here, the Maven doesn’t move the needle for me.

The comments about warranty are certainly valid. Bushnell’s product line has gone way downhill since the LRHS and the full Elite Tactical lineup days.

 

[Wrench]

A lot of people think the reticle sucks because of the size in the center....and I don't disagree, but beyond 800 or so spin becomes a real and drifting into the target is life. When I run the lrhs scopes, I dial for elevation and hold for wind/spin. 99.9% of the time I will be off the vertical line.

If you're one of those people who can shoot into the hundredths from a 7# rifle in field conditions, this will drive you nuts, but for us average to excellent sub pro shooters, it works fine.

Where it shines is on a 300 yard shot in the woods with lots of vertical and horizontal lines that make less defined reticles hard to find.

 

[Wrongside]

I don’t mind the G2H reticle at all. Probably just use to it after all these years. But it’s worked for me in everything from running rabbits, lots of plates, to long shots on elk.

I like the thick posts. On 3x they’re easy to bracket with, even in the dark. If they brought the LRHS back, a floating center dot and less Christmas tree/equidistant posts sure wouldn’t hurt my feelings tho.