Bushnell trophy MP red dot Gen1 or Gen2?

[ar-15 fanatic]

i am planning on getting a bushnell trophy MP red dot scope in a couple weeks and was just wondering what generation scope to get 1 or 2? i want to get one that looks the most like a trijicon ACOG, so whatever one you guys think looks the most like a real ACOG just let me know. for those who say "don't waste your money, just get a real ACOG!", here is my answer: i don't care that the bushnell is a red dot scope and not magnified, all i want is the ACOG look, and i really don't want to/can't spend $1200 on a scope. i might as well just buy a new gun!


Generation 1 scope

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj110/straightshooter93/My%20AR15/75030.jpg

Generation 2 scope

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj110/straightshooter93/My%20AR15/master_BUP434.jpg

My AR15, just to give you guys something to picture the scope on to help me decide what scope would look best.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj110/straightshooter93/My%20AR15/mynewgun008.jpg

Thanks,
Michael

[Sam]

I don't know about "which looks the best" on your gun, but I have what your picture showed as Gen. 2 on my gun. It's actually a very decent scope. Probably won't take the abuse like an Aimpoint can but a use one of these can be found for around $100. I've had a couple handred rounds through the gun and the scope hadn't blown up yet. :) Here is how it looks on my back up carbine.

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/bushnell_001.jpg

Your rear BUIS may get in the way, you may have to replace it with a folding BUIS. I use a Troy.

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/bushnell_002.jpg

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

Go for the Gen II. The unit's a little more "tight" feeling, and it appears they've made some positive adjustments to the knobs being sturdier, etc.

Overall, the fit-and-finish is better on the 2nd Gen. As well, I'd argue that the 2nd Gen will hold up better than the first, due to these improvements. It seems like the 2nd Gen has had a hanful of improvements, as well as the addition of the built-in backup irons, which surprisingly, aren't bad.

Plus, the Gen 2 stands on its own as a non-ACOG. It's definitely borrowed from the Trijicon's styling, as well as the inclusion of BUIS, but its definitely no longer a straight-up ACOG clone.

The Gen 2 is the heat.

[akviper]

I have a gen I on a Ruger 10/22. It's been in the cold (-15F) and in the rain a lot and still functions fine. I'm pretty happy with it but it does eat batteries much faster than an Aimpoint. I bought a gen II to put on a spare AR15 but the reticle was canted new out of the box so I returned it.

For target shooting or games they are fine but I would hesitate to put one on a rifle used for serious social purposes.

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

AKViper's contention is shared by myself, though I apply this rule to all advanced/electronic optics. I wouldn't put ANY scope on a rifle if I didn't have operational use of BUIS. Period. I don't trust any optic that much.

This rule is excepted only in the use of LR/Precision/Marksman Rifles, as without a magnified scope, their functionality is thoroughly reduced.

[Damascus]

I think the Gen 1's "look" more similar to an ACOG, which is what you're wanting, but the reason I would get a Gen 1 is because they are not as bad to come with canted reticles. I may be wrong, I've never owned one, but from all the reviews I have read online, I read more Gen II's having canted reticles, than Gen I's. That granted, the Gen II's updates and improvements may more than make up for that risk.
Even the best can make a mistake, even Leupold is kicking out quite a few Mark 4's with canted reticles LOL... only difference is, Leupold will fix it! LOL
Buy whichever one you can get the best deal on, and have fun with it!
EDIT: Here's a pic of my M4 w/ ACOG (http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii47/Damascus_747/Rifle_9-6-08004.jpg), this is bad pic, but at a distance, people who don't know any better won't be able to tell the difference LOL.
EDIT: Read this: Torture test Trophy MP https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=18751

[Gramps]

Why do the mounting screws on the bushnell appear to be "Cockeyed"? They look like the front one is up higher than the rear one. :confused:
Any comments ideas?
Thanks

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

Grampy:

The cockeyed skewing of the mount is because the first screw is low-hanging, as it contains the pin that locks in between the gaps in the rail.

The second screw is what tightens the "clamp" on the mount itself.

I never noticed the difference in height, which surprises me, as I'm usually pretty astute of a cat, but after you mentioned it, I looked on mine to see what was up.

Good eye!

[Gramps]

Grampy:

The cockeyed skewing of the mount is because the first screw is low-hanging, as it contains the pin that locks in between the gaps in the rail.

The second screw is what tightens the "clamp" on the mount itself.

I never noticed the difference in height, which surprises me, as I'm usually pretty astute of a cat, but after you mentioned it, I looked on mine to see what was up.

Good eye!

Thanks, I have been wondering about those, and I also read some reviews about canted cross hair, but if you use a dot then would that matter?

[IroquoisSnakePlissken]

I haven't experienced any canting issues with either of mine, but it does occur from time to time.

I wouldn't see it throwing off your game if you're using it for CQC ninja shit. The dot is centered, regardless of T-reticle pitch.

As well, Bushnell's hounourable about the canting issues; simply send it in and they'll repair or replace. If you can find a shop that carries it, you can inspect the unit before purchase.