Bushnell’s new version of the company’s competition-based riflescope, the Match Pro, is priced to be a precision-made riflescope for rimfire or PRS-style competitions.
With an online cost of $449.99 and $499.99 for the non-illuminated and illuminated models respectively, the scope’s standard features include a first-focal-plane optical system, parallax down to 10 yards, locking turrets, tool-less zero reset, an etched glass MIL reticle, and fully multi-coated lenses.
The Match Pro’s price point helps keep rimfire rifles under the $1050 limitation for NRL22’s Base Class.
Both the illuminated (MP6245BF8) and non-illuminated (MP6245BF2) Match Pro models will be available in early May.
The new Bushnell Match Pro comes in a 6-24×50 configuration with a 30mm tube. The 10-mil locking turrets have tactile clicks and offer 18 mil of windage and elevation travel and 15 mil of reticle holdover.
The FFP Deploy MIL reticle is on etched glass. The Deploy MIL reticle is a “Christmas Tree”–dot reticle, and because it’s first focal plane, the subtensions are always accurate no matter the magnification. The fully-multi coated optics employ the EXO Barrier coating that repels moisture, fog, debris, and guard against scratches.
“As more and more people enter into the world of long-range precision matches, be it through the NRL22 or PRS, the need for a budget minded scope that doesn’t fall flat on capabilities has never been greater,” said Greg Palkowitsh, Bushnell’s riflescope product manager. “The Match Pro riflescope offers the perfect blend of performance and cost, giving shooters all of the features they need while still qualifying for base class and open class competition.”
Sounds good, right? But there’s a catch. The scopes will be sold exclusively through Bushnell.com. First production samples will be limited, so Bushnell encourages consumers to sign up to make sure they are notified once the riflescopes are available.
F Bushnell. I had a brand new scope that I mounted…used proper torque specs and everything. It wouldn’t track. I sent it to them. They sent it back (still broken) and said the scope was “abused” and not covered by warranty. I’ll never buy another. Bushnell…the Taurus of optics.
I had a Bushnell that wouldn’t adjust either windage or elevation properly. It was a new red dot sight. They wanted to charge me for a repair on a new sight. Never again.
“Bushnell…the Taurus of optics.”
That was really well said!
I bought a sporterized Eddystone 1917 with a Bushnell mounted on it. The adjustment turrets were inoperable, so I wrote customer service and asked them if they would help. They said yes; I shipped the scope to them (at my cost) and they shipped it back in perfect working order.
why do so many scopes now come with 1st focal plane. Not necessary any more with ballistic calculators, and turret adjustments. The reticle covers up the target at max power. I think much better with 2nd focal . Thats my opinion , like it or don’t.
Second focal plane optics are only good for F class and rail gun shooting. Any type of shooting that takes place over unknown distances where you might not always be at max magnification, first focal plane optics will absolutely shit all over second. And, hell, even in F class and rail gun shooting an FFP optic will do fine while a SFP optic will not in the alternative.
Your FFP reticle says the antelope is a touch more than 5MOA at the shoulder.
You’re zeroed for 250 yards on a .308.
Do you take the shot, and what’s your holdover.
Quick, before he turns!
A decent SFP optic and a decent rangefinder will get you there faster…
Joke’s on you, boomer, I wouldn’t bother with three oh hate. Nor would I ever zero any optic for 250 yards. Or use MOA. Jesus everything you say is just awful and nonsensical.
To answer your question more seriously, I’m assuming you’re getting at the ranging capabilities of any decent optic where the magnification and reticle subtensions match (a non-issue with FFP optics,) and to be honest, outside of matches I rarely if ever use my reticle to range estimate. Usually I’ll use a range finder or just eyeball it. With practice you can get pretty damn good at it. As for saying that an SFP optic will be faster, I can’t agree or disagree with that statement since I’ve never found either plane to be inherently faster when it comes to the act of shooting. Now, when I have to actually make adjustments, move my magnification around to spot targets and look around the environment, I am infinitely faster with an FFP optic because it takes all the guesswork out of whether or not my holds are accurate. I know that when my optic is in the 12x-16x range where it usually resides, my holds will be accurate 100% of the time. You simply can’t with an SFP scope. And if you’re talking about a simple duplex, I hate to tell you but it’s just not going to be as effective because it provides less usable data to the shooter.
See, what evie259 is saying here demonstrates why people buy these things.
He doesn’t have enough experience with his rifle to have the dope to stop being a dope. It costs more, so it must add about 20 accuracies over that cheaper thing over there. And if he spends 10 minutes typing stuff into the cell phone that gets a great signal on the 200 yard local range, he gets a shooting solution that works great at 70° with a light breeze. That 16″ steel at 200 yards never knew what hit it.
FFP scopes are fun range tools for range tools. But most people don’t even fully understand how to use them. Case in point…
I guess the ballistic calculator doesn’t know how to solve for an antelope. Again. Still.
Oh, trust me, I can tell you my dope out to 1650 yards and am certain it’s spot on. The point of my post is to say that you’ve hardly an argument because SFP scopes, despite being simpler and cheaper, add an unnecessary level of complexity to shooting and have very few if any advantages. You don’t counter any of these claims and merely double down on saying that FFP scopes are for the range only despite every single competitive long range shooter I’ve ever shot with has used an FFP scope. Now that may seem like an appeal to authority, but it’s really more of an appeal to common sense. Why wouldn’t you want something that is accurate through its magnification range? If you care to put forth an actual arguments instead of trying to bash my supposed lack of experience, I’d love to hear it.
Evie, there’s nothing you’re doing with that FFP optic and complex reticle you couldn’t do with the knob on the right side of a much less expensive optic, bless your heart. And all the reticle you’d need is a simple cross with no subtensions at all. (it’s why people care about the box test, sweetheart)
You’ve wasted hundreds of dollars on a capability you don’t even know exists, much less understand how to use. Your ignorance is my argument, front to back.
Now, tell me about that antelope. It’s the capability you don’t know exists; the capability you paid serious money to get and have never even tried to use. That’s what makes a FFP scope worth the money. Not fueling Kentucky Windage.
I’m not sure where all Bushnell products are manufactured. However, for some reason, I have recently developed a distaste to purchasing products made in China.
No MOA option???
500 dollar scope on a 200 dollar .22lr rifle
only in america
I have $3000 scopes on $1600 rifles. If you have to splurge on one thing, splurge on your optic.
Check out the prices on the Ruger Precision Rimfire, or the CZ, or a number of others n the $500 to $1000 range. And these are still “midrange”. Then there is a set in the $2000 to $3000 range that dominate these competitions, which is why a special class was created that limits the total package of rifle and optic to $1050. Nor are we talking about plinking at 25 to 50 yards, but at variable ranges out to 300 yards. Are there $200 rifles that will ring steel at that range? Sure, but you need a pretty good optic to do it consistently.
This article sure did bring out all the 30-06 is king, you dont need tactical turret or FFP, deer hunting fudds.
Some of you are just so out of touch. This scope will run circles around many scopes twice its price.
Sure. On a square range poking paper.
I like to do it too, but different tools for different jobs.
Might want to tell all the snipers in the military that their FFP scopes are only good for poking holes in paper.
Post a link to an image of your DD214, Captain Keyboard.
It’s sure fun to watch the range tools line up to prove me right. Evie uses her FFP scope to do Kentucky Windage after playing with her iPhone for a few minutes. And J.T. here watched American Sniper once. (the book wasn’t recorded as an audio book yet, and he’s scared of the big words and possible paper cuts)
Could you hit that antelope, Mr. Badass Sniper?
Looks like a nice scope is all I came here to say. I need a better scope on my .308 and will take a look through one of these.