4200 Elite 6-24x50 scope length

.............426245T......................I'm considering one of these as a target scope, but am baffled by the photo in SWFA's on-line catalog. The pictured scope appears to be only about twice as long as the sunshade parked next to it, while the specs list the scope length as 16.9". Is this an illusion, or is this thing actually shorter than than the listed length? I would totally appreciate someone actually putting a tape on one to get a true measurement (without the sunshade).

The reps at Bushnell won't be troubled with the request and I understand they are busy with the phones, but I have good reason to believe their listed spec is in error.

Can anyone help with this?

Thanks

NNPF
Thanks very much. It's the number I needed. However, according to specs the scope should be slightly under 17". Any way to account for the extra length. Is it possible scope measurements are taken glass, to glass?

Thanks again, NNPF......................

chasw44,
Thanks. I know you went to some trouble to get that photo.
Problem is, I'm looking at the 6-24x50, which has the 30mm tube and a much shorter "look.

I have a friend who noticed the sun-shade in the SWFA photo appeared to be about 1/2 the length of the scope, itself. He called SWFA, one of the CS agents got one off the shelf, measured it and the measurement was approx. 13 1/2 inches. I can't get any of the Bushnell folks to actually measure one, so I'm trying to verify the length here, on THR.

I already have a 4200, 6-24x40 which measures just as expected, like yours, right at 17". The optics are superior, but knowing what I've learned about the 6-24x50, I won't buy one. The total reticle adjustment on the 30mm tube is only 50 MOA, which, I think, is the range of the 1" tube. This implies that Bushnell may be using the same internal components in both scopes, which I find unacceptable. The advantage of the 30mm tube is increased adjust-ability and if that isn't present, what's the point of the 30mm tube.

I'm not particularly confrontational, but I would like one more measurement so that I can call (if the meas. is 13 1/2 in.) the people at Bushnell and say to them "your published specs are in error", or find out that the thing really is 16.9'' long and forget the whole thing.

I simply believe that Bushnell should have their "stuff" together and if they don't, someone ought to tell them.

Wow!!!!.......I just now went to the SWFA site to copy the photo and specs in question and they have changed the scope length to 13.1" in their specs. Bushnell, however, still has it listed as 16.9" on their site.

Oh, well..........................