Ok this is new to me- 4200 Elite Bushnell

rockinbbar

rockinbbar

New member
This is way different to me. I'm a pro Leupold guy. Every rifle I own sports a Leupold.

Here's the deal...

I have a Bushmaster Predator on the way. Be here in less than a month....(It will become my primary coyote gun)

I've got LaRue Tacticle mounts for it.

I'm really not pleased with clarity & light gathering of my leupolds here lately.

I don't spend $500-600 bucks on a scope, so I saw the Bushnell elite 4200 3-9x40 for like $269....

Does anyone shoot these scopes? If so, whats your opinion of them.

These are what I look for in a scope...(In order of priority)

1) Ability to hold zero in rough conditions. (ATV truck rides)

2)Clarity

3) Light gathering

I really appreciate all the help.
Who knows? I may switch brands.... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif

Thanks,

Barry
 
I love them. I have 5 or 6 of them, both 3200's and 4200's. I have yet to have any problem with them. I think you will be very happy with the quality of them on all aspects. Also the rainguard coating is great, rain, snow, or breathing on the scope in the cold and still a clear image.

TJ
 
I can't speak to that 3x9 specifically. That's kind of an odd duck for the 4200 line, which have always been 4x scopes (4x16, 8x32 etc.). Never used one of the 3x9's, but I believe they are supposed to use 4200 glass (coatings) in a 3200 design.

That said... Just my opinion on 4200's in general, and nothing more:

Quote:

1) Ability to hold zero in rough conditions. (ATV truck rides)




No worse than a VX3 Leupold.

Quote:

2)Clarity




Better than a VX3 Leupold.

Quote:

3) Light gathering




Ehhh... I dunno... There really is no such thing as "light gathering" in a scope. So I'm not comfortable with the term "light gathering" in general. It really has no meaning, since it doesn't actually happen. What really happens, is that lenses have coatings, and the coatings more or less determine the percentage of light able to pass through the lens. Then, there are design parameters within the body of the scope that can either help the light continue through the lenses, or scatter and reflect some of it back out. Then there is also the matter of the actual number of lenses within a particular scope the light must pass through.

So, assuming that exit pupil is the same between two particular scopes, it's the the three parameters above that determine the percentage of available light transmitted through the system (and it's always less than 100%). You can usually find specs for individual lens elements. That's what you see in the advertisements - "99.7% light transmission", or whatever. But that doesn't tell you how many lenses you are going to lose .03% each on, or how well the system is designed to minimize light loss to scattering and reflection etc.

So... I say all that, to respectfully suggest, that we all stop even saying "light gathering". Light gathering doesn't happen. All scopes transmit less light than enters them. But some scopes do a better job than others in preserving or transmitting the light available to them.

And, finally, my opinion comparing a Leupold VX3 to a Bushnell 4200 for light transmission... As I said to begin with, I've no experience with the 3x9 model. And you can't really compare a more typical 4200 with a 4x magnification range to a VX3 Leupold with only a 3x magnification range. If both scopes have equal light transmission, and equal exit pupils, the 3x scope will kick the 4x scopes azz every time. So of course, the VX3 line does better in low light than the 4200 line, in general. BUT! This 3x9 model, being only a 3x magnification range, I would guess is at least the equal to a Leupold, and might very possibly surpass it. I'd be dang surprised to see the Bushnell perform noticeably worse, at least.

- DAA
 
Quote:
This is way different to me. I'm a pro Leupold guy. Every rifle I own sports a Leupold.

Here's the deal...

I have a Bushmaster Predator on the way. Be here in less than a month....(It will become my primary coyote gun)

I've got LaRue Tacticle mounts for it.

I'm really not pleased with clarity & light gathering of my leupolds here lately.

I don't spend $500-600 bucks on a scope, so I saw the Bushnell elite 4200 3-9x40 for like $269....

Does anyone shoot these scopes? If so, whats your opinion of them.

These are what I look for in a scope...(In order of priority)

1) Ability to hold zero in rough conditions. (ATV truck rides)

2)Clarity

3) Light gathering

I really appreciate all the help.
Who knows? I may switch brands.... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif

Thanks,

Barry



The 4200s have nice glass... but they are not very strong and I would never put one on a truck gun - (I have broke two, WITH MINOR BUMPS).

Light gathering is a function of the diameter of the objective, divided by the power - it has nothing to do with tube diameter or anything else.

Even though I have bunches of Leupolds, I am NOT thrilled with them these days.

There are better scopes for less money. I think Leup is coasting on their reputation and asleep in the design department.


Lookie at Nikon.


.
 
rockinbar,

I agree with Cat on the Nikon's. Another option, Weaver grand slam line.

The last 2 scopes I've bought from the Optic zone have been Weavers! I'm surprised how good they are for a (cheap)
grade of glass. Jerry
 
Like you RB I've always been kind of a Leupold guy. Until several years ago I was a little hesitant to try anything with Bushnell written on it. From what I have found after owning a few is the 4200 Elite line is a whole different animal.

Now, I have NO experience with the 3x9 4200, but have been using the higher mag 4200's and so far I'm quite impressed, especially with the clarity. I would consider it better than any VX-3 I own when comparing clarity. The jury is still out on the dependability since I simply haven't had them long enough or used them in rough enough conditions to say one way or the other. Time will tell, but so far so good.
 
I have Nikons and Bushnells. If I was in the market for a 3-9X40 scope, the 4200 and the Nikon Buckmaster would be given the most consideration. SWFA sells the 4200 for $250. A Nikon Buckmaster can be had for about the same money.

IMHO you can't go wrong with either one.
 
I find the 4200's clearer than any Leupold I have looked through in the same ranges of power. The clarity issue however is hardly noticeable. Alas I have not used the 3 to 9 Bushnell but others have been rugged enough and definitely held zero and would box from a rest.

I agree with Leupold resting on their laurels.

I wholeheartedly agree /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowingsmilie.gif with DAA's post on light gathering it is light transmission and exit pupil size. Light gathering should only be used in discussion of night vision scopes which are digitally enhanced.

Rockinbbar I think you would be pleased with the 4200.

Or the Nikon's or ........... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif
 
Perhaps the fact Leupold has been resting on their laurels is why they are dropping the VX3 line this year and coming out with a whole new line of scopes. They are getting burned and they know it. I will be anxious to see what they come up with. That said, I agree the Weaver Grand Slam is very impressive for the price. The Nikon Monarch is pretty darn nice as well. I'm not above buying a Bushnell 4200 either, but it does take some mental work to get past having the name "Bushnell" on one of my rifles. Yeah, yeah, I know they used to be B+L scopes, but some of us have had very bad experiences with Bushnell products, though none of mine have been with the 3200 or 4200 series scopes.
 
The Elite 4200 3-9x40 is a great scope and a great buy. According to Bushnell, this scope will no longer be made. Once the scopes are gone at Bushnell, the Distributors and retailers, they will not be available any more.
 
....i have a couple of the earlier 4000 series. have had no issues with either but they are loooong scopes. you may wanna check out the length specs. maybe the newer 4200 series are shorter. the rainguard coating would be an asset. also,everyone's eyes(vision) is different....for my ageing eyeballs the nikon and bushnell gives me a clearer image than recent leupolds(with exception of an oooooold leupold 12x AO)
 
Quote:
Buy the Elite, and the rest of your leupys will be in the for sale section. You will become a Bushnell fan.



Well, I wont go quite that far, but I will say that dollar for dollar you just cant beat them dang Bushnells. I have two 3200 (one is badged as Browning, but it a 3200) and two 4200 models. I also have more Leupolds than any other brand. But with the possible exception of my Zeiss Conquest, I think that the 4200 and only slightly less so the 3200 scopes have all my other scopes including my Leupolds beat. This grinds me a tad because I have been a Luppy man for 35 years, but what can I say? Everyone else that looks trough my scopes says the same thing. I guess it must be true.
 
Thanks for the info guys. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

Stealth, While I may get it cheaper at another place, The Optic Zone is a sponsor here, & I like to trade local so to speak. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif

As I said, it's going on my Bushy Predator for my primary calling rifle. I'm going to have it out & in the truck or on the ATV at least 3-4 a week in arid, dusty, rough conditions.

I don't tear things up, or dent guns or scopes at all...They just get jostled a LOT by the terrain.

If any of you guys think that 4200 scope won't handle that, please tell me.

I'd be a tad whizzed off at worrying about Zero all the time.....I guess that's what kept me coming back to the Leupolds...I knew my zero would be there when I needed it.

I just don't want to have to babysit a sensitive scope....I hit it hard when I coyote hunt. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

thanks

Barry
 
I have (3) Elite 4200's in 4-16x40 and love them. I too was a Leupold man, but only have (2) left. All my recent buys have been 4200's or Zeiss Conquests, and , for my old eyes, they are definately better than the Leupys. As far as surviving rough use, I can't say one is superior to the other, including Leupold. About the roughest use they have been subjected too is banging around in ATV gun case.
 
Back
Top