Rifle Scopes New Bushnell Elite LRHS2

#157
Adkhunter3 said:
So if the pre order is May 1 then when is @Team RCBS & Bushnell going to release the specs? Or did I miss it? Wasn’t there supposed to be a coupe others scopes as well?
Click to expand...
I don't know if it has clearly been stated that the LRHS2 will be a universal Bushnell release, it may just be something only GAP will be selling but not other Bushnell dealers. There are other Elite Tactical scopes that are coming out but we don't have any specifics on those.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chevy327
#159
Adkhunter3 said:
So if the pre order is May 1 then when is @Team RCBS & Bushnell going to release the specs? Or did I miss it? Wasn’t there supposed to be a coupe others scopes as well?
Click to expand...
It’s been very specifically stated that this is a GAP only product, made for George at his behest. It’s already been made pretty clear that this is essentially the LRHS 4-18 with updates to the glass, reticle, windage knob, and without illumination. That’s the whole deal. Don’t make it out to be more or less than it is.

As far as further Bushnell releases go, it’s already been stated by Bushnell that they will wait until these are ready for release before they announce them. I think this is a great strategy, especially considering how impatient the shooting community has shown themselves to be.

I fully expect that Bushnell will want to have their own thread and be in charge of their own announcement(s) when the time comes. Instead of them being a secondary post in a thread about a GAP only product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hollywood 6mm, Ravenworks, Team RCBS & Bushnell and 1 other person
#160
lash said:
It’s been very specifically stated that this is a GAP only product, made for George at his behest. It’s already been made pretty clear that this is essentially the LRHS 4-18 with updates to the glass, reticle, windage knob, and without illumination. That’s the whole deal. Don’t make it out to be more or less than it is.

As far as further Bushnell releases go, it’s already been stated by Bushnell that they will wait until these are ready for release before they announce them. I think this is a great strategy, especially considering how impatient the shooting community has shown themselves to be.

I fully expect that Bushnell will want to have their own thread and be in charge of their own announcement(s) when the time comes. Instead of them being a secondary post in a thread about a GAP only product.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t aware it was a GAP special only. Also Didn’t know I was making it out to be more or less than it is? I get why Bushnell is waiting but I’d rather see what they have planned so if it’s not the specs I’m looking for I can move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
#161
Adkhunter3 said:
I wasn’t aware it was a GAP special only. Also Didn’t know I was making it out to be more or less than it is? I get why Bushnell is waiting but I’d rather see what they have planned so if it’s not the specs I’m looking for I can move on.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I didn’t mean to direct that all at you, but the statements are correct and still stand.
 
#163
Adkhunter3 said:
I wasn’t aware it was a GAP special only. Also Didn’t know I was making it out to be more or less than it is? I get why Bushnell is waiting but I’d rather see what they have planned so if it’s not the specs I’m looking for I can move on.
Click to expand...
I can sympathize with your position but Bushnell are likely wanting to avoid a Burris XTR3 situation.

It's good and well knowing the specs for an upcoming product but it's not fun waiting and half years for a product that still has an unknown due date.

I guess Burris wasn't wrong to do so as here I am (stupidly) still waiting....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adkhunter3
#164
Adkhunter3 said:
So if the pre order is May 1 then when is @Team RCBS & Bushnell going to release the specs? Or did I miss it? Wasn’t there supposed to be a coupe others scopes as well?
Click to expand...
Like others have said, this is GAP/George's project and Bushnell.com is staying out of it other than giving him website page/product support, when the timing is right. We're letting him run the show on releasing specs and any other details. GA Precision will be pretty autonomous on the LRHS2 in that they're the only ones selling it - Even Bushnell.com won't be selling it. This means if you thought you were going to get it on VIP, you won't. The price/promotion of it will be at GAP's discretion. If I were trying to get one I'd think very hard about getting in on the pre-sale. It's hard to say if he'll ever put it on a sale again or not - With it being what it is and at that every day price, I doubt he'll have to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJL2, Ravenworks, Pootyng and 4 others
#172
Guys -- I work in engineering for a major manufacturer... I can attest to the fact that EVERYTHING in supply chain is taking longer than normal. It's impacting every thing from silicon to optics... expect anything like this to take a little bit longer... I have an original LRHS... it's a great scope... Honestly I would buy another one... The chance to get one that is slightly upgraded is even better... hang in there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TacticalPlinker, lash and chevy327
#174
wind gypsy said:
Anyone heard an updated timeline on these?
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard. I do know that I ordered one in May with the special advanced deal and will wait for it to show. I’m in no hurry and learned long ago not to order a brand new product if it’s not actually in stock and I have a drop dead need for it. That’s always a recipe for stress and agita.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic, Moose, chevy327 and 2 others
#176
While we're on the subject - can someone please measure the outside diameter of the objective and ocular lens on a Gen1 LRHS 4.5-18 down to the .000" --- I'm trying to order an ARD and ocular lens cap from MK Machining and they need the value for proper fitment. My digital calipers shit the bed .

Thanks in advance

~ TP
 
#177
@TacticalPlinker
Obj: 2.050
Ocular: 1.605
There’s a slight gap between the ocular ring and the body there so maybe go 1.6145.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    353.1 KB · Views: 102
  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    371.4 KB · Views: 99
  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    366.3 KB · Views: 105
  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    433.8 KB · Views: 105
  • Like
Reactions: TacticalPlinker, lash and Secant
#183
Moose said:
Im really looking forward for the hands on reviews of this scope.
Click to expand...
I’ll admit to not following theses scopes very close but other than “better” glass, what are you expecting to be different from the previous versions?

I still have a LRHSi which in my opinion is a superb scope with excellent glass. The glass is so good I wouldn’t pay anymore for “better” glass. And definitely wouldn’t trade it for a non-illuminated version with even better glass.


Is the hype surrounding these scopes simply due to folks with sellers remorse of the LRHS and LRST scopes?
 
#184
Hickswr said:
I’ll admit to not following theses scopes very close but other than “better” glass, what are you expecting to be different from the previous versions?
Click to expand...
At first we thought they were going to introduce a G3H reticle, but appears to just be the G2H reticle, so I think it is only a glass upgrade.
Hickswr said:
I still have a LRHSi which in my opinion is a superb scope with excellent glass. The glass is so good I wouldn’t pay anymore for “better” glass. And definitely wouldn’t trade it for a non-illuminated version with even better glass.
Click to expand...
I agree on everything except for the CA, the LRHS/LRTS line does show a bit more CA than I like, but for the price it doesn't bother me at all. ED Prime will help correct CA and may provide slightly better pop, but like you said, the LRHS is already pretty amazing.
Hickswr said:
Is the hype surrounding these scopes simply due to folks with sellers remorse of the LRHS and LRST scopes?
Click to expand...
Yes, I think this is the biggest reason right there. Both sellers remorse and folks who never bought one but can't find one now... I keep thinking of selling my LRHSi but for the price would rather keep it around for the kids or another build I may do down the road. There is a scope I like "better" but can't talk about right now, but the G2H reticle is so unique I'll keep it around for just that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
#187
I had one of these in my cart about to push order at least 4 or 5 times. I would be interested to see one with my LRHS and LRTSi and XTRIII's. Hopefully they come up used more than a 3-12 LRHS does. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 
#190
beetroot said:
The XTR II line isn't exactly world class when it comes to FOV, the Mark 5hd is also rubbish.
The LRTS/LRHS lags noticeably in FOV vs a lot of newer gen scopes, and as Will said the DMR line is even worse.
I have a spread sheet I made at work that I'll share (had a lot of free time over Covid) that shows the LRTS being pretty poor.
Compared to the likes of Vortex offerings, the 4.5-18 is more like a 5-18 PST/Razor offering the worst of both models.

Admittedly the LRHS2 scope will be a offering that has no direct competition so still has appeal, but for my uses the combination of FOV and mag ranges makes it unappealing for me.
Click to expand...
That is not true of the LRTS line. The 3-12 and 4.5-18 both have about the same FOV of other scopes in the same power range. The 3-12 is right in line with others like the Burris or Weaver 3-15, and the 4.5-18 FOV is right between the XTRII 4-20 and 5-25, and SWFA 5-20.

LRTS 4.5-18 23.5
SWFA 5-20 20.1
XTRII 5-25 18
XTRii 4-20 28.5
MK5 3.6-18 28.3 but 5.8 at 18 vs 6 at 18 for the Bushnell
Click to expand...
@supercorndogs

So last year as Covid was raging I had A LOT of spare time at work so made a spread sheet of scope data, which I've attached.
It's a random array of all the scopes I was interested in one way or another and found it a good way to compare optics, which I had plenty of time to do. Basically I calculated the effective FOV of all scopes at 10x based on the max and minimum specs, there is most definitely some errors but it's still the best way to compare to FOV across different scopes and mag ranges.
I arranged it by FOV @10x based on the maximum mag spec as to avoid errors from tunneling but both sets of data are there.
Other than the XRS II other Bushnell scopes definitely have a narrower FOV than average.

I'll be the first person to admit I spend too much time looking at this crap but I have had plenty of free time.
Like some people are sensitive to CA it seems I'm sensitive to FOV, I've had a few scopes that have very good FOVs and grown very fond of it.
Ultimately it doesn't really matter, if you are happy with your Bushnell scopes then that's great, but if a new line of scopes is coming out it's very hard to argue a wide FOV is a bad thing and that is not a desirable feature/spec to have in a brand new offering.

I don't want to come across like I'm shitting on Bushnell scopes but as I value as wide FOV as possible I personally am not looking at any of the current Bushnell offerings.
 

Attachments

  • Scope FOV Data.pdf
    412.6 KB · Views: 147
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ldunnmobile, Neurotic and lennyo3034
#191
How are you getting 3 different values for FOV at 10x? Some scopes have a top end of 10x you listed a greater value for their 10x FOV then their max FOV spec listed. I am not sure your spread sheet is reliable for 10x FOV, but its nice reference FOV specs. Its funny what people do when they are board at work. I look at public land on the colorado hunting atlas maps.

The 4.5-18 comes to mind also when having this conversation. People say it has a narrow field of view, or "tight eye box." It does not, it has a somewhat small apparent FOV. The smaller eye piece also has some advantages when mounting. My bolt lift hit the eye piece on my Tango 6 and had to be removed. With the PSTII, I could barley get the eye relief I wanted because the eye piece would hit my base.

Someone had a spread sheet here once that also had AFOV specs listed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash
#193
Glassaholic said:
That might have been @spife7980, I think I saved it somewhere.
Click to expand...
Can’t find the original post but here’s another post of it
www.snipershide.com

JP Tank Brake (Recoil Eliminator) for PRS Tactical .308

Muzzle Brakes: Ability To Stay On Target I have the JP on the LR-308, Tubb on the 37XC and the new Gen 3 APA on the 6XC. No complaints. I recall back when PRS was in diapers that people didn't call the JP a Recoil Eliminator but a Competitor Eliminator as many stages where run with two...
www.snipershide.com www.snipershide.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: supercorndogs, lash and Glassaholic
#194
supercorndogs said:
How are you getting 3 different values for FOV at 10x? Some scopes have a top end of 10x you listed a greater value for their 10x FOV then their max FOV spec listed. I am not sure your spread sheet is reliable for 10x FOV, but its nice reference FOV specs. Its funny what people do when they are board at work. I look at public land on the colorado hunting atlas maps.
Click to expand...
The different values are, FOV@ 10x:
Based on minimum specs (this is dramatically effected by tunneling as indicated by scopes knowing to tunnel)
Based on maximum specs (prone to rounding errors)
Average of both (will reduce rounding error but unreliable if scope tunnels)

The 4.5-18 comes to mind also when having this conversation. People say it has a narrow field of view, or "tight eye box." It does not, it has a somewhat small apparent FOV. The smaller eye piece also has some advantages when mounting. My bolt lift hit the eye piece on my Tango 6 and had to be removed. With the PSTII, I could barley get the eye relief I wanted because the eye piece would hit my base.
Click to expand...
I also agree than the wide eyepiece can cause issues in some mounting situations, I've not had any issues other than on my CZ rimfire rifles when trying to mount super low but I've since overcome that issue.

You are right about apparent FOV, the video Ilya did on the subject is very good but unfortunately there is no way to know what the image will look like based on specs alone. I agree that the way the image presents itself has an effect of whether or not the image looks like looking through a cardboard tube vs a Heads Up Display but an actual wide FOV still offers a significant advantage over a narrow one.

I do think there is a fair bit on nuance involved when comparing rifle scopes but when all else is equal I'm taking the widest FOV possible.
So far that means I'm stuck finding a replacement for my 3-15x44 PST until something that's better in every way comes along.

I've been waiting since November 2018 for an illuminated Burris XTR3 3.3-18 due to the super wide FOV, if Bushnell comes out with an offering equal to the XTR3 with a reticle I like then I'll be jumping on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
SOLD $800 Bushnell LRHS2 4.5-18 with Hawkins Rings
Replies
5
Views
772
Will J
Will J
BulletScientist
Optics Bushnell XRS3 EQL - New in Sealed Box
Replies
3
Views
248
Southern Custom
Southern Custom
C
  • Poll
Bushnell LRHS2 or Vortex Razor LHT?
Replies
35
Views
3K
CSTactical
CSTactical
B
Swampfox Kentucky Long 2-12x44 review
Replies
10
Views
2K
koshkin
koshkin
valsport
SOLD SOLD Bushnell Elite Tactical 4200 6-24x50 426245F GREEN Illuminated FFP Mil-Dot Optic, ARC M-10 Rings, Flatline Ops Sniper Level
Replies
1
Views
506
valsport
valsport
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts