Bushnell LRHS2 or Vortex Razor LHT?

[ColoRye]

I've been spending way too much time trying to decide what ~$1,000 optic to put on a new high quality 6.5 Grendel build that I am putting together to shoot steel and occasionally hunt deer with, and have narrowed the options down to two scopes.

The first contender is the Vortex Razor HD LHT 3-15x42 HSR-5i MRAD. I know this scope is well known, but the specs are:
Magnification 3-15x
Objective Lens Diameter 42 mm
Eye Relief 3.8 inches
Field of View 35.3-7.0 ft/100 yds
Tube Size 30 mm
Elevation Turret Style Locking/Zero Stop
Windage Turret Style Capped
Adjustment Graduation .25 MOA
Travel Per Rotation 15 MOA
Max Elevation Adjustment 80 MOA
Max Windage Adjustment 80 MOA
Parallax Setting 20 yards to infinity
Length 13.3 inches
Weight 19.1 oz

The other option I have narrowed it down to is the Bushnell LRHS2 4.5-18 x 44 G2H

New feautures for LRHS2

• ED Prime glass
• Magnification throw lever
• Locking windage adjustment (changed from capped on gen 1)
• EXO barrier (one of the best waterproof/fogproofing coatings in the industry)

Specs:

• First focal plane
• Magnification range: 4.5 - 18x
• 30mm Tube diameter
• Eye Relief: 3.4"
• Parallax adjustment: 50 yards to infinity
• Waterproof IPX7 compliant, fogproof
• Turret adjustment increments: 0.1 Milradian
• Total elevation adjustment: 25 Mils
• Total Windage adjustment: 25 Mils
• Turret rotation: 10 Mil per rev.
• Exobarrier coating applied to glass
• Revlimiter Zero Stop
• Non-illuminated
• Weight: 775 grams (about 1.71 lbs)
• Length: 14.4 inches

Which would you pair with this rifle?

 

[UpSideDown]

I sold my LHT and bought a handful of LRHSi/LRTSi scopes. The LHT was a scope I hated to love. It did exactly what I needed, it was light and it had a useful reticle.

I don't like SFP optics and Vortex's seem like they're waiting for their fist chance to break. The LHT's have a small record of issues holding zero after drops and the turrets don't give me confidence.

Either would do great, the LHT is a lightweight scope with nice glass. The donut reticle in the LRHS2 will do really well, but it's a bit heavy and has a somewhat narrow FOV. They'll both do well, neither one is perfect.

 

[ColoRye]

I’m still open to other opinions/options in that magnification and price range, and could be open to stretching to $1,500 if it was REALLY worth it…

 

[Ndbowhunter]

if weight/bulk isn't a concern, the 3.5-21 dmr2 is good value

5-20 swfa is still stellar now at the decade mark.

 

[Neurotic]

4.5-22 FFP LHT

 

[GreenMushroom]

The lht is much more of a hunting scope. If you're mostly shooting steel off support you'll probably want something ffp. The eyebox on max magnification is awkward for improvised positions and while mine has always tracked fine the elevation turret doesn't inspire confidence. The windage turret is capped for a reason.

It has a nice eyebox on lower powers and is actually pretty fast up close on 3x. The weight is awesome and the glass is quite good. It's a good scope and I like mine it just doesn't sound like you would make much use of it's strengths and it's shortcomings would be annoying.

 

[Basher]

LRHS2 vote here. I only run SFP on LPVOs and dedicated hunting optics 3-9x or lower that need to be light weight (small rimfires, brush rifles, etc.). Anything over 10x, and I go FFP. The Bushy is a fantastic optic!

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Between those two the Bushnell for FFP. Vortex has a LHT 4.5-22 that’s FFP though. I’m looking at one of those currently but have never put hands on one. Looks good on paper though at 21oz and a very nice tree reticle and illumination. I’m a big fan of illumination on a hunting rifle and it’s even more important with a FFP reticle but just nice to have in general in those last 15 minutes of legal light.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

The LRHS2 id you have to pick one.. I have one on a grendel as well. Its a good gas gun optic but has really small FOV and tight eyebox.

I also have the Vortex LHT 4-22 FFP. Its really a hunting optic, not much else. The turrets are shit and the eyebox is super tight.

For shootability in that price range, I would much rather have a Burris XTR3 3-18.

 

[TacticalPlinker]

I VOTE LRHS2
My Gen 1 LRHSi hasn't taken hits yet thankfully, but has been dirty and wet as hell. Hosed off a bunch of times. Now sits in the M Brace waiting for a new barreled action. The G2H is fast in diminished light without illumination. Doesn't really need it. Quite possibly the fastest F1 reticle in "any light" available. Upgraded glass will just make it better.

 

[Baron85]

I wish they would bring back the 3-12 lrhs.. I have 2 of the 4-18 my only gripe is wishing they were lighter.

 

[fdkay]

I have a 4.5-18 LRTSi scope. One of my favorites.
The reticle, to me, is just right for the task, the illumination works well.
Narrow field of view. My old eyes appreciate the illumination.
This should likely be a contender:

TORIC UHD 30mm 2.5-15X44 FFP MRAD/MRAD Hunting Rifle Scope

Hunting Rifle Scope Featuring fully multi-coated SCHOTT high-transmission (HT) glass and extra-low dispersion (ED) lens, which make up TRACT’s advanced

tractoptics.com

 

[Neurotic]

The Vortex FFP LHT and Bushy LRHS are likely optically related. They have the same FOV and should have similar eyebox. The LHT seems to have a larger apparent FOV where the LRHS has more of a black ring with image appearing further away.

I liked the LHT over the XTR3, but my Burris is being replaced under warranty so who knows what it represents.

The LHT is also crazy light, and feels better suited for low or medium weight gas guns than the 30+ oz optics.

From my recollection mine weighed in at:
LHT: 22 oz
LRTS: 28 oz
XTR3: 31 oz

 

[TacticalPlinker]

I have a 4.5-18 LRTSi scope. One of my favorites.
The reticle, to me, is just right for the task, the illumination works well.
Narrow field of view. My old eyes appreciate the illumination.
This should likely be a contender:

TORIC UHD 30mm 2.5-15X44 FFP MRAD/MRAD Hunting Rifle Scope

Hunting Rifle Scope Featuring fully multi-coated SCHOTT high-transmission (HT) glass and extra-low dispersion (ED) lens, which make up TRACT’s advanced

tractoptics.com

Is that TORIC a LOW Japan offering?

 

[fdkay]

Is that TORIC a LOW Japan offering?

I believe so. There are other optics companies in Japan.
If you call them, they'll tell you.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Well that sucks.

I also have the Vortex LHT 4-22 FFP. Its really a hunting optic, not much else. The turrets are shit and the eyebox is super tight.

 

[Baron85]

Toric is so close on a few of their optics but tall turret and the weight.

 

[JDB55]

Between the LHT 4.5-22x50 ffp and the LHRS2 4.5-18x44, I would go the LHT having looked/used both(it's close though). If it was between the 3-15 LHT and the LHRS2 I would go LHRS2 because of FFP, more magnification and bit bigger objective.

Tract has a 2.5-15 FFP and SFP plane scope but they are a bit heavier and the FFP isn't illuminated.

 

[TimK]

I have the 3-15 LHT on an extremely lightweight AR built for a match where I have to carry it a lot (like 50 miles). It ticked enough boxes for my use. It's a long range event, so I'll only ever shoot it at 15x, so SFP is irrelevant to me. The locking elevation turret and zero stop were a big deal to me as the rifle is buried in a pack and I'd had trouble in the past with turrets getting moved quite a bit during the movements.

I took it out to a local match a month or so ago. I had no trouble with 1.5 moa targets at 625. I was interested to see the commentary about the eye box being tight. I was having a little trouble getting behind it comfortably, but I'd assumed it was something about the set up of the gun which is littered with compromises to save weight. I'll have to get back on it and see if I can figure out what the problem really was.

I'm not a huge Vortex fan, but I have to admit that I was fairly impressed with it. I think others have stated they thought it felt cheap or fragile, but that was not my impression. I didn't find the elevation turret feel to be hateful, either.

If you can wait till the second week of September I'll report back on how well it handles being lugged around in heat, cold, dust and rain and also being roughly handled for 48 straight hours.

 

[Dobermann]

Vortex Razor HD LHT 4.5-22x50mm Field Eval

Ryan Avery asked if I would review this scope in the same vein as the Meopta Optika 6 and Tanget Theta evaluations and I agreed. I get queried about these scopes almost as much as any, and even though I have seen poor performance from the prior LHT’s, this is a different design and will be...

www.rokslide.com

 

[HaydenLane]

I have owned every version of the LRHS/LRTS and still have a few.

The Vortex LHT has made them obsolete.

Running side by size the glass quality, reticle, eyebox difference is stunning.

The LRHS2 id you have to pick one.. I have one on a grendel as well. Its a good gas gun optic but has really small FOV and tight eyebox.

I also have the Vortex LHT 4-22 FFP. Its really a hunting optic, not much else. The turrets are shit and the eyebox is super tight.

For shootability in that price range, I would much rather have a Burris XTR3 3-18.

What changed your opinion between then and now, is it related to Vortex price hikes or strictly performance?

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

What changed your opinion between then and now, is it related to Vortex price hikes or strictly performance?

Have shot it more. I am also comparing it to the LRHS/LRTS not the newer LRHS with better glass.

If you aren't putting any of these optics on a hunting scope, then something like the XTR3 with 34mm tube, bigger FOV, better turrets and eyebox is a much better choice.

 

[HaydenLane]

Have shot it more. I am also comparing it to the LRHS/LRTS not the newer LRHS with better glass.

If you aren't putting any of these optics on a hunting scope, then something like the XTR3 with 34mm tube, bigger FOV, better turrets and eyebox is a much better choice.

If the XTR3 had a reticle more suitable for low power use, I’d have one on a hunting rifle. Illumination probably solves that for most people, but I prefer a reticle that doesn’t require it.

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

I agree. I have trouble seeing thin reticles as well but the truth is, most people are shooting on 8-12 power at a minimum for the types of shooting most of us do. Its less of an issue in practicality.

 

[JDB55]

My LHT 4.5-22 is sitting on an 18" .308 gas gun with an offset RDS. I have found it to be perfect for my needs being lightweight, compact with a useable reticle and good illumination. It could have used a better FOV but I shoot at 22x quite a bit so it's a trade off. I really like it as a crossover scope and for me I haven't found the eyebox to be unusable and I've put it through a couple precision classes as well as trained with it offhand in movement and various shooting positions (not just prone). Thats just my experience, mileage may vary.

Having said that I originally wanted the Burris XTRIII illuminated but it wasn't out yet at the time and it was about 7 ounces heavier so I went with the LHT and have no regrets. Both would seem to work perfectly with the respective perks over each other as a crossover scope for hunting/tactical shooting. I would advise offset BUIS or a red dot for a 1x on something like a gas gun though, for both.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Not mine but there’s a NIB LRHS2 in the classifieds for $850 shipped. That’s a $150+ savings over a new one after tax and shipping.

SOLD - NIB Bushnell LRHS2 4.5-18x44

NIB Bushnell LRHS2 4.5-18x44. SOLD

www.snipershide.com

 

[Neurotic]

Have shot it more. I am also comparing it to the LRHS/LRTS not the newer LRHS with better glass.

If you aren't putting any of these optics on a hunting scope, then something like the XTR3 with 34mm tube, bigger FOV, better turrets and eyebox is a much better choice.

The new glass changes the eyebox?

I think the glass in the LHT FFP is better than the XRS2 I had, which is supposed to be the same as in the LRHS2.

I also thought the eyebox on the LHT similar to the XTR3, but apparently my XTR3 had issues. The FOV difference was noticeable, but with the better LHT reticle I could more easily shoot at lower magnifications; this sort of nullified the FOV difference.

I'm not a huge vortex fan, but really enjoy this one.

 

[Reaper 31]

For those that have seen the LHRS-2 reticle with the "donut", what did you think? Was it an eye sore or will it be useful? Will holding for wind be easy compared to the XLR 3 reticle which has more holdover dots?
I too am debating between both of these for hunting and maybe NLR if it comes to Texas.

 

[JDB55]

For those that have seen the LHRS-2 reticle with the "donut", what did you think? Was it an eye sore or will it be useful? Will holding for wind be easy compared to the XLR 3 reticle which has more holdover dots?
I too am debating between both of these for hunting and maybe NLR if it comes to Texas.

For me, the donut is useful for quick acquisition on lower power. But for longer range the LHT reticle is more useful imo. Both can be used both ways of course, but I believe the G2H is better up close and The XLR is more adapted for higher magnification and distance. Just my quick thoughts.

 

[Reaper 31]

I think bushnell is doing a good job on their Elite line up. Wish the decision was easier lol!
Thanks for the feedback

 

[Baron85]

Used my lrhs prairie dog blasting today. Was fantastic. Made hits out to 450ish yards. No problems holding wind and making corrections. The donut is perfect for low power up close shots and gets out of the way for the longer shots you would take hunting.

 

[koshkin]

The Vortex FFP LHT and Bushy LRHS are likely optically related. They have the same FOV and should have similar eyebox. The LHT seems to have a larger apparent FOV where the LRHS has more of a black ring with image appearing further away.

I liked the LHT over the XTR3, but my Burris is being replaced under warranty so who knows what it represents.

The LHT is also crazy light, and feels better suited for low or medium weight gas guns than the 30+ oz optics.

From my recollection mine weighed in at:
LHT: 22 oz
LRTS: 28 oz
XTR3: 31 oz

They are not optically related. Nothing in common. Not a single shared component. No design commonalities.

ILya

 

[koshkin]

The two scopes in the original post are sort of an apples to oranges comparison. A direct comparison would be LRH2 vs 4.5-22x50 LHT. I prefer the latter, although both are nice scopes.

ILya

 

[TacticalPlinker]

For those that have seen the LHRS-2 reticle with the "donut", what did you think? Was it an eye sore or will it be useful? Will holding for wind be easy compared to the XLR 3 reticle which has more holdover dots?
I too am debating between both of these for hunting and maybe NLR if it comes to Texas.

Shot out to 800 on 5 gallon jugs of water last year. Holds for wind were a non issue. "Donut obstruction" was also a non issue. Fast as hell up close especially with the bold lines thrown in.

 

[Reaper 31]

The glass looks nice. I'm sure in the field, even better

 

[CSTactical]

Whoever is looking for a Vortex Razor LHT, we have new and open box models in stock

Vortex RAZOR® HD LHT 4.5-22x50 FFP

CS Tactical - High Quality Optics including Zero Compromise Optics, ZCO, Zcompoptic, MRAD, 20 MOA. See our selection and get expert advice on the perfect scope for you.

cstactical.com