Bushnell Elite confusion


PDA






matai
November 6, 2009, 06:54 AM
I'm looking to replace the scope on my Ruger 10/22 that I use for target/bench shooting. I have a Mueller APV 4.5-14x40mm on there right now but its very frustrating due to its eye position sensitivity. Not so bad for me but whenever I let other people shoot they have a difficult time.

I'm thinking about upgrading to a Bushnell Elite 3200 or 4200. I was comparing the two on Bushnells website and it showed this info:

Bushnell Elite 3200 5-15 x 40mm
Exit Pupil (mm) 9-2.7
Eye Relief (in / mm) 4.3 / 108

Bushnell Elite 4200 4-16 x 40mm
Exit Pupil (mm) 10@4x / 25@16x
Eye Relief (in / mm) 3.5 / 89

Are either of these going to provide any significant improvement over the APV which is:

Mueller APV 4.5-14x40mm
Eye Relief (in): 3.5 - 3.25
Exit Pupil (mm): 8.89 - 2.86

Also is there much improvement with the 4200 over the 3200?

Any help would be great, thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Bushnell Elite confusion" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
45crittergitter
November 17, 2009, 08:54 PM
I cannot compare for you, but I do have the 4200 you mention with the AO, and it is a very very nice scope. Very bright and clear, high quality and no problems. Would buy another in a heartbeat.

JDGray
November 17, 2009, 09:33 PM
I had an Elite 3200 10x40, great scope but lacked a parallax adjustment. Sold it and bought an Elite 3200 5-15x40, equally as good but with an AO. Glass is as good as any Leapold I've owned, tracks very well, love the tactical turrets! The 10x40 was half the price as the 5-15x40, but I prefer the adjustability. Can't comment on the 4200 line, but they are pricyer, but supposed to have better glass.
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b278/JDG357/IMG_0089.jpg

minutemen1776
November 17, 2009, 09:40 PM
I replaced the Mueller APV on my Savage .17 HMR precisely because of the eye position sensitivity you mention. The scope I chose to replace the Mueller is the Bushnell Legend 5-15x40AO. I am very pleased with it. The glass is extremely sharp and clear, and the mil-dot reticle is nice, too. I can't compare directly to the 3200 or 4200 series Bushnells, but the Legend looks about as nice as the B&L Elite 3000 (i.e. the predecessor of the Elite 3200 series) I once owned. I've also read that the Legend scopes actually have a slightly higher light transmission percentage than the Elite 3200 scopes. The price is also much nicer for the Legend scope, running at about $170 for the model I bought.

matai
November 17, 2009, 10:27 PM
As far as any scope goes, isn't the exit pupil the objective lens diameter divided by the magnification? So is that what really influences "eye position sensitivity?"

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 17, 2009, 10:34 PM
Nikon Omega or Slugmaster, then (certain) Trijicon Accupoint, then Leupold, then Zeiss Conquest, then Sightron, then Bushnell Elite, then other Nikons.....

IN THAT ORDER (after the first two, the orders are *approximate* :) )

for best eye relief.

But blackout is a function of both edge-to-edge glass quality and more importantly, exit pupil size, which is a function of objective lens size & magnification. Look for a 50mm objective to decrease blackout / increase forgiveness in eye alignment. Of course, you increase parallax error however, when shooting with uncentered hold.

FWIW, on some precision rimfires right now, I have the following and am happy with all of them:
--Sightron S2, 4.5-14x42mm AO
--Bushnell Elite 4200, 6-24x40mm AO
--Bushnell Banner, 4-12x40mm AO

On a HUNTING rimfire, I have a Mueller 3-10x44 and true enough, its eye relief is limited, but you don't get scope eye from a .22 mag. :)

matai
November 17, 2009, 10:48 PM
Thanks for all the great info!

So do you guys think the glass quality of the Bushnell Elite 4200 series over the 3200 will provide much difference in blackout?

I'm trying to keep the price down and since I'll be using this only out to about 100 yards I'm wondering if the features of the 4200 series would make any difference.

MGD 45
November 17, 2009, 11:11 PM
JD,

I also have a Bushnell Elite Tactical 3200 10x.......it doesn't have a parallax adjustment because it's a relatively low fixed power scope (meaning not 15 or 25 or 40X magnification)...so the reticle is always on the same focal plane as the object your looking at. I've never needed a parallax adjustment on a fixed power scope.....were you experiencing some problems with this?

DBR
November 18, 2009, 01:16 AM
Is the "black out" you are referring to because of side to side misalignment or front to back (eye relief) misalignment?

matai
November 18, 2009, 01:22 AM
I was talking about the side to side misalignment. I haven't had any really good scopes before so that's been an issue I'm looking to resolve.

glockman19
November 18, 2009, 02:36 AM
I have the 3200 on my hunting rifle a Remington 700 CDL in .30-06. I have the 4200 on my M1A a 6-24x40. On my 10/22 I have a simple Bushnell banner scope. 3-9x30 I think.

I love the 4200 and will get another couple in different magnifications for future use.

Finally I buy my scopes from Opticsplanet.com I think I paid $485 for the 4200.

Offfhand
November 18, 2009, 08:08 AM
We use a lot of scopes where I work, for our own use and evaluations for consumer groups. Our optical specialists give high marks to the Zeiss Conquest 4.5-14X MC for use on rimfire rifles. The side focus feature allows quick and convenient focusing at the shorter ranges at which rimfires are typically fired. I expect the Conquest is more expensive than the Bushnell, which is a budget consideration I'm sure. But may be worth checking out the difference.

Shoot well, safely, and often...
Offfhand

DBR
November 18, 2009, 11:01 PM
If you are having a problem with side to side misalignment your cheek weld is not correct. A larger "exit pupil" will help but the real problem is between your cheek and the stock. You need to find a way to get behind the center line of the scope. Might be as simple as tilting your head or a different height of scope ring.

If you do not look through the center line of the optic there will be some degree of parallax at most ranges and you will not be looking through the best part of the optic.

Cypress
November 19, 2009, 09:24 AM
I just got a 3-9x40 3200 and a 2.5-10X40 4200 and there is only a slight difference in glass quality. Not worth the extra $$ if you ask me. Both seem to be good scopes though.

kmullins
November 19, 2009, 11:44 PM
I own the 3200 Bushnell 5-15x40mm, and it's a great scope. It's very clear on the 15 power setting and is not sensitive to eye position like some lower quality scopes can be. I paid $250 for mine from a guy who was selling it new in box. I think they retail for around $340. I love this scope so much, I think I am going to put a Bushnell 3200 10x40mm on my new varmint AR-15, when it comes in that is :)

usmc1371
November 20, 2009, 06:44 AM
I have the 4x16 4200 AO on my 300 wm and its been great, I also have a 4200 2.5x10 and for a hunting scope I like it better than the higher power scope. I think you can get the 4x16 with side adjustment now wich I like way better than the old stile AO. IMHO the glass on my 4200's is every bit as good as my Leopold vx3 LR 4.5x14 for half the price.

If you enjoyed reading about "Bushnell Elite confusion" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!