Bushnell 4200 Elite Tactical 6-24X50

I received it today and I like it so far - though it ain't mounted and no rounds have gone downrange.

With the understanding of the magic exil pupil numbers of 4 and 7, the scope has utility at lowest power and in near darkness.  Likewise, the scope is entirely useful and at its best at 12X in daylight.  It is still acceptible at 24X but not great.

The construction is solid, the knobs have a tactile and audible click.  The parallex turret moves well, not too tight, not too loose, and well marked with range rather than hashes or artitrary numbers or symbols.

It ain't Nightforce glass, not even Zeiss, but it beats much of what I've looked through. I'd say, if the internals work as well as other 4200s have,  I'll be pleased with the purchase to say the least.

It is what it claims to be, and I do like it. Worth every cent, maybe even more.

I don't see it as an issue of budget so much as value.  I could spend significantly more on a scope, but why; again, if this scope gives me 95% the performance of a $1,500 scope - yet for less than half the price - I see that as a good deal (with the understanding that 5% of the time, I will have equipment that isn't optimal.)  Since the gun it is going on is a range gun/100-yard deer gun, I really don't need to worry about whether I can take shots at dawn/dusk at 24X.  If I need to take a long-range shot in low light, I take a different gun.

I see no need to buy more scope than gun or more scope than needed.  Would I take an S&B Precision Hunter for the price of this scope: yes; would I take one for the $1,500, nope - not because I cannot afford it but because its utility doesn't match its price - not for me, at least.  And not on this particular gun.

As soon as my Warne rings arrive, I'll snap a few and post them.  Till then, I'm stuck sighting in on my idiot neightbor (scope only, no gun - don't point guns at people till you are ready to shoot them.)

Optics, like firearms, definitely have a pride-in-ownership component, but don't mistake nice gun/nice scope for shooting skill or utility. Circumstances should dictate the gear.  I recently bought a Tikka T3 stainless and put an ugly-ass brake on it.  I could'a bought a Sako hunter for 3x the price; however, in a few months, this rifle will be strapped on the wing of a single-engine airplane and flown to the northwestern-most edge of Alaska.  It is a gun that will be subjected to extremes of environment, conditions, weather.  And, in case you didn't know, guns with presentation-grade walnut with hand-checkering and hand-etched recivers don't do particualrly well in snow and water and 2 hours rubbing agaisnt a wing and a few straps.

Utility is the key; not what you spend, but what you need.  There is a time and a place for an AI .338 with S&B PM3, but I didn't buy this scope for that palce or that time.

Caribou and wolf (the wolf tag is free: the little bastards are everywhere, screwing up the whole affair.)

Should be fun.  The 300WM will reach out and touch but is still bearable in a 7-pound gun (with brake.)  Fear not, there will be pictures!

I have a couple pictures i took yesterday when i got home.....

I can take more of whatever angle or whatever anyone wants. just let me know.

bein wrote: Could you take a picture through the lense ?, so we can see how the milldot looks ? Thanks

From Sniper Central:

http://www.snipercentral.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9263

(There's some pics of the Mil Dot in there.)

Those pictures were really quite awesome.  Must be a pretty nice camera.

Thanks for the indulgence.

With sunshade it is 16.9.

And whatever the specs say for weight, that's true too, it's a heavy piece of gear.

heres one on 12x. Sorry its hard to get a really good picture to show how good the glass is.

Hope this will do

You hunt trees?  Take out that branch at 7 o'clock?

Put an Iranian revolutionary guard in the cross-hairs, then I'll comment on the reticle. 

With this, I see trees!

Looks good though, for $600, and for trees.

I finally had the chance to put a few rounds through the damned thing (rings almost never came in) and I gotta say, for the price, I like it.

Decent glass (at anything in daylight under 18X), good controls, seems to track well.

Took a bore sight-in and 3 shots to get dead bull - then shot 2 more to make certain it was what I thought it was.  Moved the crosshairs out to their limit, then went back to zero and fired another round, dead bull.

The real test will be later, but at least it warrants a "real test."

It's a great deal on a good scope.  A Nightforce it is not (nor IOR, I'm guessing), but at half the price - at least - it will serve my purposes well.  If my life depended on this scope, I might be a little reluctant; since it does not and probably will not, I give it high marks.

I shot this group yesterday at 400yards with Blackhills 168gr Moly-BTHP. Not too bad but could be better, maybe I just need a little more practice.........now the only thing i can complain about with this scope is the mirage on 24x. lol. I'm still really impressed with how clear and bright it is even on 24x

Very nice pics. I like the lettering on that scope, very precise and readable.

Hope my (ordered) 6.5 20X 50 Zeiss Conquest is that impressive looking. Seems to be a heck of a lot of scope for the money, I'll keep it in mind.

TBC

edit: The Sniper Central pics, I meant.

I thought I posted mine here on this forum somewhere.......guess not. Here they are now

Nice stick!!

So far I have been fairly happy with mine and up to 16x, comparable to my vx3. I am a little disappointed in the sightly foggy view through the lens at 20-24x and I wish the marking on the tactical turrets would align with the zero marker better than they do - kind of splits in between 0 MOA and -1.4 or + 1.4 MOA. Overall, a decent scope and with a 100 m zero, I can dial my .308 175 SMK's into 700 m with my 20 MOA base, but not much further - the biggest flaw (significant flaw) is the lack of elevation MOA adjustment. It holds zero and guides my SMK's into one ragged hole at 100 m. I would consider it a "you get what you pay for" mid-range scope. Here is a pic of the scope and my stick.

dpopular, welcome to The OT!!

Good looking rig.

Who's bolt knob is that?

I guess I should'a qualified my review of the Bushnell with this:  "If you can shoot well out to 700 yards, this isn't the scope for you."

I live in Houston and shoot at a certain 600-yard range here and am always alone in doing so.  I bought a Bushnell tactical for another gun that will never sees a 600 yard shot. 

This is purely a 500 yard or less scope.  Sure, it goes to 24X, but there are BSA's  that go past 24: power is a function of physics, not optical quality.

In my opinion, it's a good scope for the price - so long as you don't think at 24X it'll be as clear as a Zeiss at 10X.

And if you plan to shoot at 700 m targets, save up and buy a USO or Nightforce or S&B - you, like few others, will notice and appreciate the difference.

Cheaptrick...thanks...badger ordnance

RC: "This is purely a 500 yard or less scope". Sorry, I disagree...

My rifle range only goes out to 700 m (770 yards or so), so for this purpose the 4200 works fine. I have a 20 MOA TPS base and with a 100 m zero, can dial it right into 700 m on the nose, so I figure it'll do 800 yards. From there I can hold over with the mils out to 1000 yards I am sure. I know it'll do way more than 500 yards, it is just how you set it up (and how you shoot). Here's the pic from this morning ringing the 700 m 12 inch gong every time.

When I want to reach out further, I break out the 300 RUM/Leupy which starts where my .308/4200 ends. Here are some pics of that rig. Thats 700 m way back there.