Bushnell Banner Scopes Holding Zero Question

i never had a bushnell loose zero, but as i mentioned on your other post the lower end models tend to have short eye relief compared to similar priced scopes. the new gold models seen better tho. whats your plans for the rifle,

You buy a high dollar rifle you don't put a low dollar scope on it. Spend the money on a Leupold scope. You will be happier later. Also don't go cheap on the rings/bases. Buy the best glass ssystem you can afford.

Franks right. I own Leupolds and have 4 Bushnells, owned 6. I have not had any issues with any Banners ever even on a lightweight 7mm.

Thats a nice gun, it deserves nice glass.

It might work, at least for a while. I'd be willing to bet that you will soon want better glass and the Banner will end up on a 22.

The Banner line, not the blister pack Walmart version I believe ran around a few years ago, were great little scopes. I beat the hell out of several of them over the years, including running on 45-70 leverguns. For the money, you’ll be very hard pressed to find a better optic value than the Banners.

Which Vanguard model you have would determine whether you’re putting a $40 saddle on a $5 horse.

Varminterror said:

The Banner line, not the blister pack Walmart version I believe ran around a few years ago, were great little scopes. I beat the hell out of several of them over the years, including running on 45-70 leverguns. For the money, you’ll be very hard pressed to find a better optic value than the Banners.

Which Vanguard model you have would determine whether you’re putting a $40 saddle on a $5 horse.

Click to expand...

Even those blister pack banners (which are still around) we're pretty good for the most part. I DID manage to kill one, but I bought 5 of the 4-16s on closeout, and only the one had any issues. I had one on my air rifle which gets dialed quite a bit, and it actually tracked pretty well for a cheap scope.
I switched it for an Intensity, which is a Weaver 44/40 copy, that's now part of the bushnell gold line (if I remember correctly). It's not really much better, but it is a LITTLE better.

I've still got some older banners (and other stuff) laying around for times when I get a new rifle and haven't decided on a scope, or to give to friends.

I think the banners are very good for the cost, as are most of the Bushnell's, but I'd go up the line a bit.
Probably up to an elite, or one of the newer mid/highends they came out with.
I still need to try some of those.

Another vote for save the Banners for a 22.

Part of the issue with the larger calibers is the ammo/range time loss of fiddling with a re-zero
on a cheap, balky scope. IMO, you're better off spending 100$ more than you should, in reduced
frustration and "down time". If you hunt, what's the dollar value on that prize buck that just pranced off
into the woods, because you saved a few dollars on that "bargain" scope? Not to mention, trips to the range,
there's planning, road time, round trip, to add into all the additional expense.

If guys are claiming Banners won’t hold zero, they haven’t used a Banner.

Varminterror said:

If guys are claiming Banners won’t hold zero, they haven’t used a Banner.

Click to expand...

I've had a couple, they held zero fine.

The rather heavy crosshairs, mediocre clarity, not great light gathering, parallax & finicky focus are another matter.

If I need to top a centerfire rifle with glass and don't want to pony up for Leupold, I'll go with a Nikon Prostaff/Buckmasters or Weaver V-series.

Leupold vx1 or Nikon prostaff. I’ve had bushnell fail and cause me to wound a deer. Never again!

They'll work fine, until they don't. A 300 WM will break even the most expensive scopes. You're Banner may last for years, decades, or weeks. It is a $120-$150 scope and it is a roll of the dice. But one thing I've found is that nothing ever breaks at the range. It always seems to break when you really need for it to work.

You don't have to spend $1000 to get decent optics, but in my experience usable quality starts at about $200 MSRP, if you can find it cheaper then good. The Burris FF-II has earned a reputation for being one of the toughest entry level scopes out there. As tough, if not tougher than Leupold and the scope I'd put on a heavy kicker priced under $400. For only a little more money the odds of getting a tougher scope go up dramatically. And at $200 you will get much better glass than at $150. Especially in low light.

jmr40 said:

They'll work fine, until they don't. A 300 WM will break even the most expensive scopes. You're Banner may last for years, decades, or weeks. It is a $120-$150 scope and it is a roll of the dice. But one thing I've found is that nothing ever breaks at the range. It always seems to break when you really need for it to work.

You don't have to spend $1000 to get decent optics, but in my experience usable quality starts at about $200 MSRP, if you can find it cheaper then good. The Burris FF-II has earned a reputation for being one of the toughest entry level scopes out there. As tough, if not tougher than Leupold and the scope I'd put on a heavy kicker priced under $400. For only a little more money the odds of getting a tougher scope go up dramatically. And at $200 you will get much better glass than at $150. Especially in low light.

Click to expand...

Shhhhh. Don't let Jeb Stuart hear you. Apparently any of us who don't think an $80 chinese scope is quality are self-appointed consumer reports snobs!

jmr40 said:

They'll work fine, until they don't. A 300 WM will break even the most expensive scopes. You're Banner may last for years, decades, or weeks. It is a $120-$150 scope and it is a roll of the dice. But one thing I've found is that nothing ever breaks at the range. It always seems to break when you really need for it to work.

You don't have to spend $1000 to get decent optics, but in my experience usable quality starts at about $200 MSRP, if you can find it cheaper then good. The Burris FF-II has earned a reputation for being one of the toughest entry level scopes out there. As tough, if not tougher than Leupold and the scope I'd put on a heavy kicker priced under $400. For only a little more money the odds of getting a tougher scope go up dramatically. And at $200 you will get much better glass than at $150. Especially in low light.

Click to expand...

How funny, i hadnt thought about it for a while, but I had a Korean made Trophy on my 7.5lb .300WM.
The scope held up fine, but the front Tasco type mount (probably even cheaper than tasco, considering what I could afford and was buying then) had a screw come loose, and the rear mounts claw pulled loose tossing the scope back into my face then onto the ground.

Ill second the FF-2 being a tough scope, Ive probably got 200ish rounds down range on my .375 ruger now and its held zero from day one, glass is nice on it as well.

i had a older bushnell and a 80s tasco scope one time or another, on my savage 300 rum. the scopes did fine, it was magnaported but that's only about 15% less recoil. still about the same as the 300 weatherby. i had a simmons whitetail 2 on it, only sope where the tube bent from recoil. i had leupold dovetail bases and standard rings the held up fine, but keeped snaping bases screws. my dad had a tasco target scope on his 338-8mm rem mag to test it, shot a good 200 rounds with it. 3rd on the burris FF-2.

troy fairweather said:

i had a older bushnell and a 80s tasco scope one time or another, on my savage 300 rum. the scopes did fine, it was magnaported but that's only about 15% less recoil. still about the same as the 300 weatherby. i had a simmons whitetail 2 on it, only sope where the tube bent from recoil. i had leupold dovetail bases and standard rings the held up fine, but keeped snaping bases screws. my dad had a tasco target scope on his 338-8mm rem mag to test it, shot a good 200 rounds with it. 3rd on the burris FF-2.

Click to expand...

The RUMs are abusive. I have a Leupold VX-II 4-12 on my .375 RUM, and with specified torque on the Leupold rings, the scope moved forward under recoil. I had to crank them down about as tight as they'll go without stretching & snapping.

It's much better now with a can on it, though, feels more like a lightweight .300 mag.

house stark said:

go get a NF NXS

Click to expand...

That would definitely be a case of

Varminterror said:

putting a $40 saddle on a $5 horse.

Click to expand...

Wonder how many scope issues came about due to ring/base problems.

Bushnell Banners, I've had a few, back in the late 90's. They were fine.
Saw a bunch of them go back for warranty work not long after they moved production.
Dunno if or when that got straightened out.

Seen many a customer mounted scope done wrong (some ruined). Only two sets of bad rings, out the hundreds I've inspected/done.
One set of bad bases.

Not all of the damaged scopes/improper mounting done by newbs either.
Just gotta smile and fix it, even though your brain is screaming "What in the heck were you thinking???".

Like they just figured more screwdriver was the solution, when things obviously not right.
Funny, but kinda sad too.

I expected some of these folks to have a little more on the ball.

Hookeye said:

I expected some of these folks to have a little more on the ball.

Click to expand...

Smart folks do dumb stuff when they can't find the right tools....

Scope mounting while not difficulty, does have a number of surface interfaces that all need to be making contact correctly. Ive found that if everything is lined up its pretty hard to cause damage to a scope, but get stuff out of alignment, and it's hard not too.
Alot of folks, who (your right) really should know better, just assume all you gotta do is screw stuff together and your good to go.

i have put on a lot of scope, id say in the 1000s. i went to work with my dad on the weekends and made good tip money putting sopes on. i take my time even if it takes a hour i don't care, as long as the scopes on right. MACHV!SHOOTER. i do scratch the inside of the rings with 80 grit and wipe the dust off with those first aid wipe. seems to help keep the scope from moving.

troy fairweather said:

MACHV!SHOOTER. i do scratch the inside of the rings with 80 grit and wipe the dust off with those first aid wipe. seems to help keep the scope from moving.

Click to expand...

It's not been a problem for me on any other rifle. The rings on the .375 were lapped, but that rifle was a beast without the can. Barely over 8 lbs with scope and loads driving 300 gr. bullets @ 2,970, various recoil calculators average a FRE figure of 78 ft.lbs @ 26 FPS. That's quite a lot more than my 8mm Rem Mag or my .45-70 shooting heavy 405 gr/2,050 FPS loads. With the can, it feels about the same as the 8 mag, perhaps even a touch less.

MachIVshooter said:

Barely over 8 lbs with scope and loads driving 300 gr. bullets @ 2,970

Click to expand...

^^^^^^^^^

Hahahaha!

Before putting the can on it, it was something that I refused to shoot off the bench without a sled, and was done after a few rounds off hand. Most people who were given the opportunity chose not to fire it, and those who did almost always handed it back after 1 round. It actually really hurt a couple of people.

Like I said, though, suppressed, it's not too bad. Some weight added (26 oz with the taper lock brake), but more just the effect of the can. I'd estimate the FRE to be more on the order of 45-50 ft.lbs. now, with a marked decrease in velocity. It still isn't anything you'd want to put dozens of rounds through in a session, but it went from downright abusive recoil to what I'd call quite stout.