Why a 1-4 - I love the 300aac, but mainly for its flexibility. For me, it's a sub-150yd utility tool that wears some of my shortest barrels and sees supers and subs, both with and without cans. Perhaps that, along with the fact that I still have pretty good eyesight, equate to it being more of a 1-4x candidate, than 2 or 3 to 8 to 9. I'm more interested in speed and flexibility, for my 300s, than precision. I'll be honest here, if I'm looking for something beyond 200, I'll reach for a round with flatter ballistics. But inside of that range, few cartridges offer the flexibility of the 300 BO.
For me, an illuminated 1-4 is perfect for the 300, of the following reasons: red dot-like CQB speed, adequate precision for sub 200yd hunting, illumination for night hogs and varmint, relatively light weight. I currently own quite a few 1-4 glow-sticks, and have been through even more than that. And I think I just found my favorite:
Previous 1-4x scopes evaluated - I currently own: Burris MTAC 1-4, Burris TAC30, and a Vortex Crossfire 2. I've also owned several Millet DMS1s, an Accupoint 1-4, a Leupold VXR, along with several non-illuminated 1-4s. So far, this little Bushnell 1-4 FFP is way ahead of all of them, for my 300aac stuff.
CQB & Tactical - The BTR-1 FFP is dynamite, in this scope. It works because at 1x, though the reticle is a bit "noisy", the hash marks and such are really too small to be a bother. You just aim in the middle of the circle, and spray whatever needs lead. The FFP circle is so small at 1x, that there aren't many distractions. Most of the other 1-4s I've used, the reticle is too big at this range. Really, I find it about as fast as an Eotech... maybe faster. Time will tell, when I get more range play. But blown away, thus far. While most focus on the consistency of hashes across the magnification rage as being the biggest benefit of FFP, the usefulness of the tiny circle at 1x was a big eye opener for me.
The pic above is actually from their 1-6x (~$1,000 glass), but pretty close to what this one looks like (couldn't find a good 1-4x pic). I will say that, with the 1-4x, the fish-eye would be a bit more profound, at this very close range. Otherwise, it looks about the same. For me, it's more "Aimpont fast" than "Eotech Fast"... less clutter to worry about, at 1x. Also, I love the fact that there are no distractions, outside of the red-dot. Even other FFP systems I've seen have too much clutter at this magnification, while this scope does not.
100-200yd - At 4x, the BTR-1 FFP reticle is perfect. Most of the SFP reticles I've owned are too small at this range. This one is just about perfect, in that I can easily read the hashes. I know I'll catch some flak for this, but I just don't really see much use for caliber-calibrated reticles at this range. Yeah, this scope is designed for 55/62 5.56. But with the 300, it does give me some idea of what's going on. Also, with the 300, I'm running bullets that may vary by ~100grns, and those super-sub combo reticles seem gimmicky. At 100-200, I'm more interested in the way that the reticle frames the sight picture, than in calculating with the hashes. I know, I suck, but that just works for me... I get some idea of how far off I am, as well as elevation and windage.
With SFP, manufacturers have to choose a comprimised reticle size that's OK at both magnifications. With FFP, the most appropriate reticule size for each magnification is presented.
Hunting - I'm mainly interested in hogs and varmints, so illumination is mandatory. This illumination seems pretty good. The bleeding at the mid-to low settings isn't and, but I need some time under a feeder to know for sure. Thus far, my "extensive evaluation" has been nighttime peering at deer in my yard. Bleed has been the biggest killer, with other scopes. The Millets, the TAC30, and even the MTAC (though better than the TAC30) were all pretty bad here. When it's so dark that you can barely see a dark animal, you don't need a lot of illumination taking over - but need just enough to see. Really, the fire-dot styles are best at this (VXR, Vortex CF). But so far, this Busnells seems to be a good compromise.
And having the 1x option is great, for walking around. I've been surprised by critters more than once, only the be presented with blurry images of fur and plant stuff, when looking through magnified glass. While it's not really very useful sitting in a stand or watching a feeder, it;s good for getting too and from those locations, as well as dealing with other things that pop-up.
Mid-LR Precision - Sorry, but I don't really use my 300s for this. If I did, however, I think I could do the math and start to work with this reticle. 4x isn't the best, but many can work with it. Also, with a 30mm tube, there's quite a bit of adjustment potential. Really, this is a strength for me with this particular option. The fact that it doesn't try to be a LR precision optic means that it's not crowded with lots of distracting hashes and numbers all across my field of view. Keep it simple seems to be the motto here - which is OK for my 300aac uses.
Negatives I see include - Hate the hassles to zero the turrets (several screws). Not a big fan of tower turrets for a 1-4x scope. Heavier than some other types of optics, though average weight and bulk for a 1-4. And I'm sure a few other knit-picks will come along.
Another negative, for hog hunting, is that a 1-4x probably won't gather as much light as a 50 or 56mm objective. I've used some glass that's better than this, at that job. But those tend to be very expensive & heavy (e.g. the 2.5x10 Accupoint I owned) or very heavy (eg. the Vortex 3-12x56 I'm probably returning). And they're not as good at close range. But for a 1-4x, this glass seems pretty darn good. And I'm still on the fence as far as how much more noticeable light a 56mm will let in, vs this one. Was playing with this scope vs my 56mm Vortex last night and tech difference wasn't striking. But the weight and bulk of that particular 56mm glass are prohibitive.
Most importantly, the glass is outstanding! 1x is pretty close to true, though it's more like 1.5x at the edges with the fisheye at very close range (e.g. 10ft). But that's true with just about every 1-4 I've owned (never owned one with an MSRP of over $600). Farther than that (e.g. 50ft), this scope is pretty closet to true 1x with very mild fish-eye. And the rest of the range, and light transmission, are great.
Illumination is OK in bright daytime, but not great. The really good news here is that, in bright daytime, why bother with illumination? The glass looks just fine, turned off.
Again, this is early feedback. But I'm really liking tis scope for the 300. Really, at $199, this thing is a steal. I currently own 3 300s (2x16 and a 10.5). I hope to have my 9" AAC soon, and will likely build a 7.5 after that. I woulnd't be surpassed if at 3-4 of them are wearing this glass, in the near future.
You can buy this scope at Amazon ffor $199, here... http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AU6 ... PDKIKX0DER
Other places may have it cheaper.
CAVEAT - I don't have much experience with very high-end glass. I've had quite a few ACOGs and AccuPoints, as well as a Leupold Mark 4. But that's about the extend of it... Not saying this glass is in the neighborhood of any of that stuff, but it's pretty good for sub-$500. And it's ideal for the 300, at least for me... YMMV
Also, I'm too early in my eval to suggest that anyone else buy one of these puppies. But I would love to hear feedback from people that have.
