Yeah, I see the LRTS and DMR as different markets. The 18x LRTS is almost 10 ounces lighter than the DMR, and a better fit for a small frame AR.Smaller and lighter for the 4.5-18 makes for a better field option, I reckon.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below! Subscribers get more entries, check out the plans below for a better chance of winning!
Join the contest SubscribeYeah, I see the LRTS and DMR as different markets. The 18x LRTS is almost 10 ounces lighter than the DMR, and a better fit for a small frame AR.Smaller and lighter for the 4.5-18 makes for a better field option, I reckon.
That is kind of my point. The 3-12 LRTS (example because that’s what I own) retailed for about $1,300 (I think optics planet or Brownells or someone still has the 3-12 LRTS available at original retail?). I bought mine at closeout for about $650. Great value IMO.What would you say offers the same quality for 500 dollars?
I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.There’s really no one-to-one replacement at any price point, so I don’t buy the “good at close-out prices” argument.
No shame in the Sportsmatch game - they work, and work well. The arrestor pin is the schizzle for Tikkas.
I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
![]()
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...www.brownells.com
That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
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.
vortex makes a ffp mil/mil lht?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.
1350 is not a reasonable price considering what else is out there for 1350.I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
![]()
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...www.brownells.com
That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
Thats awesome. I thought they were all moa.
Try finding a NOS LRHS 3-12, that would be a lot more tempting. I bought an LRHS2 for $1000, if paying a couple hundred more meant losing a few ounces and getting a better magnification range, I’d do it.That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?
Not with a reticle optimized for hunting (doesn’t need illumination to be useful at all magnifications), in a magnification range useful for all hunting situations, with the same track record of reliability. It’s $500 more than an LRHS2, for a scope that isn’t as good for hunting.vortex makes a ffp mil/mil lht?
I will admit, being an LHT 4.5-22x50 owner, I wish the mag range was something more like 3/4-18/20x50. However, outside of that, it's a wonderful scope to get behind, the weight it awesome, the glass is great and I really dig the reticle and the way they worked in the illumination. But your point about the reticle being hard to hunt with at 4.5x without illumination is valid IMO. I equally have a 4.5-18x44 LHRSi in my immediate vicinity (my Father's I brokered, mounted and sighted in for him) and though I like it and would be completely happy with it on my rig if I wasn't using the LHT, I do believe that the LHT beats it in everyway except that g2h reticle circle for 4x shooting. Now the 3-12 of course will beat them both in that area with a lower mag and wider FOV, I remedied this with my LHT by just adding a 1x solution MRDS, but that adds considerable money.Try finding a NOS LRHS 3-12, that would be a lot more tempting. I bought an LRHS2 for $1000, if paying a couple hundred more meant losing a few ounces and getting a better magnification range, I’d do it.
Not with a reticle optimized for hunting (doesn’t need illumination to be useful at all magnifications), in a magnification range useful for all hunting situations, with the same track record of reliability. It’s $500 more than an LRHS2, for a scope that isn’t as good for hunting.
@DeathBeforeDismount if you decide to upgrade from an obsolete LRHS 3-12 I’ll take it off your hands.
Pity they've had reliability issues ...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.
8 ounces. I don't see that as much difference with both of them being on the large and heavy side for what I would like.Yeah, I see the LRTS and DMR as different markets. The 18x LRTS is almost 10 ounces lighter than the DMR, and a better fit for a small frame AR.
My 18x LRTS weighed 27.4 oz, with a Bushnell listed weight of 27.3 oz. The DMR2 weight is listed at 37 oz. So, that's the 10 oz. The DMR3 lost some weight and is listed at 35.5 oz, but it's a generation ahead of the LRTS. Regardless, 8 or 10 ounces is a big step up.8 ounces. I don't see that as much difference with both of them being on the large and heavy side for what I would like.
My opinion remains the same, I wouldn't produce them both if I owned the company. When you have a pig already another 8-10 ounces is not a big deal. If you are trying to save weight, neither should probably in the conversation.My 18x LRTS weighed 27.4 oz, with a Bushnell listed weight of 27.3 oz. The DMR2 weight is listed at 37 oz. So, that's the 10 oz. The DMR3 lost some weight and is listed at 35.5 oz, but it's a generation ahead of the LRTS. Regardless, 8 or 10 ounces is a big step up.
I have used the LRTS on small frame ARs, but the DMR is way to heavy. It may be useful for a bench rest, long & heavy barrel AR, but at that point there are many optics that'll get 25-30x on the top end at a similar weight.
Bullshit. So tried of chads repeating what other chads spout on the web.Pity they've had reliability issues ...
Neither of you have any idea of actual failure rate. So, you are pretty much both full of shit, and posturing.Bullshit. So tried of chads repeating what other chads spout on the web.
What? Half a pound on the top of a smallish rifle is a big deal...When you have a pig already another 8-10 ounces is not a big deal. If you are trying to save weight, neither should probably in the conversation.
If weight doesn't matter, why not the XRS3?You can say it how ever many different ways you want. Its not changing my opinion. The 3.5-21 design has been their bread and butter in this market for a long time. I don't see that changing, and didn't find anything I preferred about the XRS2 over the DMR3. You seem like you just want to argue about whose opinion is better which is fucking useless.
I was hoping you'd realize what you're saying, by using your position to demonstrate the DMR is pointless relative to the XRS. Even moreso than the LRTS & DMR combo.Cool story bro. are we playing if i say everything over and over, you will agree with me?![]()
You can say it how ever many different ways you want. Its not changing my opinion. The 3.5-21 design has been their bread and butter in this market for a long time. I don't see that changing, and didn't find anything I preferred about the XRS2 over the DMR3. You seem like you just want to argue about whose opinion is better which is fucking useless.
Even going back to the ERS, I highly preferred it over the higher mag XRS.
I've already read multiple statements in this thread from people wishing they would have bought more during the closeout or likening these scopes to other $500 offerings. These are arguments based in value, which is fine. I said in my post that I thought they were a great value.
From a quick Google Search, here's an LRTSi for $1,350 that is showing as available from Brownells (unilluminated is unavailable).
![]()
ELITE TACTICAL LRTS 3-12X44MM FFP RIFLE SCOPES | Brownells
Long distances present unique challenges to the precision shooter. The Bushnell Elite Tactical LRTS cuts through tough conditions, allowing shooters to make precision holdovers at any range and engage moving targets. The ThrowHammer Lever lets you...www.brownells.com
That optic has been closed out for well over a year (maybe two years?) and it's still for sale even though many talk about how they wish they would've bought more. To me, that paints the picture of a value argument during the closeout period, not of a total performance argument. Of the people talking about how much they love these 3-12's and wish they would have bought more, who here is going to put their money where their mouth is and pick up a few at $1,350?