Bushnell Elite 1 Mile ARC range finder - First Look

K

K0na_stinky

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
41   0   0
Well I think I might be one of the first people to get my hands on one of these. I have had my eye on them since I seen them at Shot Show. On Tuesday I noticed that they were in stock at B&H Photo for a smokin’ price so I went for it. (I got a price locally and it was close to double)

First off I’ll have to say that my knowledge about range finders is quite limited. Up until now all I had was a Bushnell 600 sport.

When you first get it in your hands it feels like it has a nice weight. It comes in at about 12 oz. so it’s easy to keep steady. It is also a lot larger then my Sport 600. Both the weight and size help me stay a lot more stable then my Sport 600.

Picture046_zps656a0189.jpg


Picture047_zps2130329b.jpg


Picture048_zps72a086fa.jpg



So far I have only ranged a few things around my camp. Today is a little hazy so that may hurt performance. I was able to get trees at 1350 yards across a lake in the bright sunlight. I ranged some camps at 1200-1320 yards. So far every thing I have ranged has either given me a number on the first shot or not given a reading at all because it’s to far (I’m assuming).

I will add to this review when I get to use it some more. I’m pretty excited about it and couldn’t wait to post.
 
um... these have been on sale for at least 2 years.... I say two because they were on sale when I started working at WSS part time. They could very well be older.

Personally I find the glass garbage, in both the monocular and the binos of this series.... its hazy at long range and dark, they are useless in low light.

After messing about with the bushnell arc 600, 800, 1300 I wasn't expecting much from this one for the range finder electronics. However... the electronics are great, unlike the lesser bushnell rangefinders the electronics are bang on. They give good reedings out to there max range. I was genuinly impressed at how well they worked on both soft and hard targets.
 
LordEvilPepper said:
um... these have been on sale for at least 2 years.... I say two because they were on sale when I started working at WSS part time. They could very well be older.

Personally I find the glass garbage, in both the monocular and the binos of this series.... its hazy at long range and dark, they are useless in low light.

After messing about with the bushnell arc 600, 800, 1300 I wasn't expecting much from this one for the range finder electronics. However... the electronics are great, unlike the lesser bushnell rangefinders the electronics are bang on. They give good reedings out to there max range. I was genuinly impressed at how well they worked on both soft and hard targets.
Click to expand...

Is there a possibility that you are thinking of the Elite 1600 ARC?

I'm interested to know what makes the glass garbage? Mine isn't very hazy or dark.
 
either way it is a Bushnell, and you cant hold it steady enough without a tripod to range anything to a mile and put that on a furry critter and divide by at least 2 for something resembling accuracy
 
gunpro said:
either way it is a Bushnell, and you cant hold it steady enough without a tripod to range anything to a mile and put that on a furry critter and divide by at least 2 for something resembling accuracy
Click to expand...

Bushnell says 600 yards on a deer.

What else is there for range finders in this class? I can return it if I made a mistake. Please let me know.

Thank you.
 
Ive always been fond of Swiss Optical rangefinders good to 20km, no laser projection telling the zombies where you are, used survey tools can be used also and are inexpensive, I have a Bushnell 1200arc ranger and its a chore for me to hold steady past a hundred yards or so
 
condomboy said:
I have an older Elite 1500 and it will read by hand on hard targets to 1400+ meters (ranged a truck across a field in some farm land)
Click to expand...

Mine does the same. I can get ranges up to 1700 on reflective targets like cars/billboards. Any range finder I have heard (brother uses the Lieca 1600, it is the same) of will only range soft targets at about half it's max range. It isn't difficult for me to hold mine steady. Seems lots of poster ####ting on sound reasonably priced gear in this thread. Like they might #### on a 10yr old truck worth $7k while they make payments on $100k rig that is parked next to me at the campsite.
 
K0na_stinky said:
Is there a possibility that you are thinking of the Elite 1600 ARC?

I'm interested to know what makes the glass garbage? Mine isn't very hazy or dark.
Click to expand...


the only difference between yours and the old one (1600) that's been out for years is a minor update to the display and yours isn't black

ok, hazy is a bit of a vague way.. but when you compare it to better class its "clear" as day how bad the Bushnell stuff is. look at a lettered sign at 400-800 meters (depending on optical power).. in the Bushnell (anything) the letters tend to be a bit fuzzy. Not terrible, but almost like you need to put on a pair of reading glasses. then look through a Licca, vortex, swarvorski, stiener or Leupold... that "fuzz" is not there, the letters are super crisp. To me what good is a pair of optics if the sign im looking at looks "closer"... but i still can't read it? Applying this to game, it makes it very hard to make the call on species and rack size on a deer. I use my rangefinder as my spotting scope now, so its a major issue to me personally.
in low light the Bushnell will appear dark, like wearing sunglasses dark, in comparison to other manufactures.
 
LordEvilPepper said:
ok, hazy is a bit of a vague way.. but when you compare it to better class its "clear" as day how bad the Bushnell stuff is. look at a lettered sign at 400-800 meters (depending on optical power).. in the Bushnell (anything) the letters tend to be a bit fuzzy. Not terrible, but almost like you need to put on a pair of reading glasses. then look through a Licca, vortex, swarvorski, stiener or Leupold... that "fuzz" is not there, the letters are super crisp. To me what good is a pair of optics if the sign im looking at looks "closer"... but i still can't read it? Applying this to game, it makes it very hard to make the call on species and rack size on a deer. I use my rangefinder as my spotting scope now, so its a major issue to me personally.
in low light the Bushnell will appear dark, like wearing sunglasses dark, in comparison to other manufactures.
Click to expand...

spot it with the range finder, range it, use your scope to verify target and elidgeability of taking the shot, then take the shot. you'd think to verify all that it would be better to have crosshairs already on it to move down and squeeze... but again... as you said... preferences
 
condomboy said:
spot it with the range finder, range it, use your scope to verify target and elidgeability of taking the shot, then take the shot. you'd think to verify all that it would be better to have crosshairs already on it to move down and squeeze... but again... as you said... preferences
Click to expand...


Better yet, glass with binoculars with a built in rangefinder, until you find game, judge the animal as you range it, then if it meets your criteria, shoulder your rifle, and shoot it.
 
LordEvilPepper said:
the only difference between yours and the old one (1600) that's been out for years is a minor update to the display and yours isn't black

ok, hazy is a bit of a vague way.. but when you compare it to better class its "clear" as day how bad the Bushnell stuff is. look at a lettered sign at 400-800 meters (depending on optical power).. in the Bushnell (anything) the letters tend to be a bit fuzzy. Not terrible, but almost like you need to put on a pair of reading glasses. then look through a Licca, vortex, swarvorski, stiener or Leupold... that "fuzz" is not there, the letters are super crisp. To me what good is a pair of optics if the sign im looking at looks "closer"... but i still can't read it? Applying this to game, it makes it very hard to make the call on species and rack size on a deer. I use my rangefinder as my spotting scope now, so its a major issue to me personally.
in low light the Bushnell will appear dark, like wearing sunglasses dark, in comparison to other manufactures.
Click to expand...


I'm using my range finder to find ranges from me to a steel target. I see what your saying about the glass not being super crisp. But it doesn't limit the ability to range things I want to range.

Where I live shots on game are most likely going to be 10 – 200 yards. So ranging and spotting game with it isn’t an issue for me.

So far I’m happy with my purchase. At less then $500 I’m laughing. I’ve been able to range 1450 on trees. 1300 seems to be around the limit to easily range trees. I was able to range just shy of 1800 on a yellow street sign. I got a reading every shot and it only gave me readings +/- 1 yard. So when I know I am going to be ranging far I will pack something that’s reflective to help me out.

I really wanted a Vectronix Terrapin but it was over 4 times the price. I think the Bushnell is a good compromise.

If I had the opportunity to do it again I would go the same route.
 
at under $500 bucks its not bad. I guess they dropped the price... or did you get a deal on it?

The old one is $599 and to me the extra $250 to get the leica 1600b is well worth the price. better glass, half the size, more ergonomic. buy once cry once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom