Bushnell Elite 1-6.5 BTR 2 SFP vs Trijicon Accupoint 1-6 red triangle

[Jeepman1320]

I need some persuasion towards one of the optics in the title. I have been ready till my eyes bleed and then reading some more. Having a hard time deciding between the Bushnell Elite 1-6.5 BTR 2 SFP vs Trijicon Accupoint 1-6 red triangle. The Trijicon is right at my max budget and I have read pros and cons on both. I have been unable to locate a whole lot of information regarding actual battery life of the Bushnell and if it truly is daylight bright like an Aimpoint or an EoTech (some say yes, some say no). I like the idea of the Trijicon being nice and bright during outdoor use, but have also seen some complaints of shooting from under a covered bench to onto a bright target. I do not do a whole lot of shooting from a bench, but can see this translated to other scenarios where it could be an issue. I have seen some folks with cheap LED's held on the ocular to combat this, but wonder how well it works with actual usage.

The optic will be going on a 16" .308 AR that will be used as a multipurpose rifle. Would like to be able to quickly engage targets from PBR out to 250 yards and on occasion out to 500 yards. I know the Bushnell reticle would be the way to go for hold overs, but I do not mind having to dial for elevation as I do that on my precision rifle anyways.

I have a Burris XTR II 1-5 in the safe and like the illuminated reticle, as it is definitely daylight bright. Problem is the mil-hashes are so small they are unusable for my eyes. I looked at the SWFA SS HD 1-6, but the battery life and dim reticle killed it for me. Any help would be much appreciated.

Clay

[NongShim]

The Bushnell is not daylight bright but in the SFP the reticle is bold enough to make up for that. I hate dialing so that makes the choice easy for me. If Trijicon would make a good reticle in the Accupoint line it would rule.

[dbain99]

I have the Bushnell atop my 300blk and while the reticle is visible and easy to pick up it does not POP like an Aimpoint or an ACOG. I can't give you any numbers but the battery life was disappointing IMO.
That being said I really like the scope for the price I paid, $650 demo from Natchez, I couldn't see myself paying retail for another.


Sent via telegraph with the same fingers I use to sip whiskey.

[Jeepman1320]

Well what if I threw the SWFA SS HD 1-6 back into the mix and added the Razor HD Gen II? Since the Bushnell is not daylight bright and the battery life is not very good, it would be on the same playing field as the SWFA SS HD 1-6. maybe the standard mil/moa reticle in the Trijicon?

[soulezoo]

The Bushnell is not daylight bright but in the SFP the reticle is bold enough to make up for that. I hate dialing so that makes the choice easy for me. If Trijicon would make a good reticle in the Accupoint line it would rule.

^^^ This. In this optic you may be overplaying the whole "daylight" bright thing. The horseshoe is large enough that it really does not need to be that bright. The black reticle (not using illumination) is very good in even decent daylight. Battery life is wanting but not a deal breaker/that doesn't mean "not very good"-- more like EOtech battery life. Not every illuminated optic has Aimpoint battery life.

If you desire something else, then cool; I have found the bushy to be excellent in the price point.

[ccoker]

Some like the triangle.. some don't..
I am in the latter camp.

I have a mildot 1-6 Accupoint and that is what I would recommend for you.

[.30kal]

I went from Trijicon Accupoint 1-4x (and the SWFA 1-4x) to the Bushnell 1-6.5x w/the BTR 2 SFP and haven't looked back. The Bushnell has better glass and the reticle is far superior both up close on 1x and at 6.5x at distance. The illumination isn't as good as the Trijicon, but the triangle over the thick post is practically useless as distance. I have found that FFP isn't really necessary or better on the 1-4/6x scopes and the illumination is weaker.

[SomeOtherGuy]

The Bushnell is not daylight bright but in the SFP the reticle is bold enough to make up for that. I hate dialing so that makes the choice easy for me. If Trijicon would make a good reticle in the Accupoint line it would rule.

This, and


I went from Trijicon Accupoint 1-4x (and the SWFA 1-4x) to the Bushnell 1-6.5x w/the BTR 2 SFP and haven't looked back. The Bushnell has better glass and the reticle is far superior both up close on 1x and at 6.5x at distance. The illumination isn't as good as the Trijicon, but the triangle over the thick post is practically useless as distance. I have found that FFP isn't really necessary or better on the 1-4/6x scopes and the illumination is weaker.

This also.

I've been using that model Bushnell and the 1-4x Accupoint (red triangle) frequently the last six months. I like both, but for different uses. The Trijicon triangle is a good RDS replacement for me, but not good for precision at any moderate distance. The Bushnell has worked well for me out to 300 yards and OK out to 400 on steel. It's not ideal at those distances, but better than most other options I've tried that go down to 1x.

The Bushnell illumination is visible in typical daylight, but not at all bright. It wouldn't be visible in super bright conditions (noon on a snowfield) and is definitely less bright than the Burris 1-5x, which would be another good option, although I see you find the hashes a little too small.

Between your two options I'd go with the Bushnell. I would also consider the Razor 1-6x if its price and weight are acceptable to you.

[Jeepman1320]

I am considering the Razor 1-6, but due to the responses I am leaning heavily towards the Bushnell. I have looked at the BTR-1 SFP and liked the reticle due to less clutter, but I am not really sold on the BDC. If I zero at 75yards the hashes come to 300, 400, 500, and 600 yards. My only concern is the lack of a reference points for anything in between 75-300 compared to using a standard hash. That is why I was leaning towards the BTR-2 in SFP. I am lucky enough to be 30 minutes away from SWFA so I'll be going out there after to first of the year to compare. I am probably WAY over thinking things, but when it comes to dropping that much cash I prefer to do it once. This will be my first venture into a multipurpose optic. All my other my AR's sport irons only or aimpoints with my bolt guns having standard high mag glass...

As for weight, I am trying to keep it on the low side. Gun is currently right under 10lbs with a full 20rd Lancer, MBUS, sling, and Aimpoint Pro. If I could keep it around 11lbs swapping the MBUS/Aimpoint that would be great.

[mic2377]

The red triangle in the Trijicon, either in the 1-6 or 1-4 (I have a 1-4x TR24), is right up there in speed with a red-dot. In most conditions it works GREAT. The fiberoptic illumination works well even with some light differential - it has to be extreme to really black it out, and even so it is still dull red. The big weakness would be lack of ranging ability, but this is only important from 250 yds on out. They have good turrets which make dialing reasonable for long range.

The Bushnell is a great scope as well, and probably a little better for long-range. I have a 1-6.5 SFP with the BTR-1 (BDC) reticle. The BDC is easy to range with fine hash marks, but they are widely spaced. It is fairly bright, and the horseshoe is quick, but not as fast the red triangle.

I looked at the Razor 1-6 in the store but haven't shot it. It is a TANK and large/heavy, but incredibly clear glass, large FOV, and a simple, uncluttered reticle with a very bright dot.

To throw another option into the mix - the Leupold VX-6 with a CMR-2 reticle. I have one of these too - search my posts, I have comments about this elsewhere. It is lightweight, good glass, and useful reticle, only problem is that the illumination is not very bright. It has a very advanced illumination module though, with excellent battery life and auto-on/off.

The problem with this is that the search for the perfect optic will never be over. Ask me how I know... As a vote for the Trijicon, there is something really nice about picking up the rifle and knowing you always have functional illumination. I have my TR-24 on my KISS rifle (5.56) and it is perfect.

[Jeepman1320]

Figured I would update the thread. I had an opportunity to look at all of the scopes side by side finally. Ended up just taking the weight penalty and getting the Razor. Glass of course is crystal clear and reticle is bold enough I can easily see the hashes. I ended up getting the VMR-2 MOA reticle mainly because the subtensions dang near match my dope perfect out to 700 yards. Turn the illumination up and it is stupid bright, very easy to pick up in broad daylight without the illumination being turned all the way up. I feel it is quicker to pick up than my Aimpoints, not sure why. Have only zeroed it and shot a few 9 hole drills, but am very happy with the purchase.