Print Page | Close Window

FYI: Bushnell Parallax Change

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Rifle Scopes
Forum Description: Centerfire long gun scopes
Printed Date: May/24/2019 at 12:44
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 -

Topic: FYI: Bushnell Parallax Change
Posted By: Dallas
Subject: FYI: Bushnell Parallax Change
Date Posted: May/15/2008 at 17:33

This is an FYI only.

About 29 years ago, Bushnell started a program in which shooters could send them scopes and have the parallax re-set without charge. This was an era in which Bushnell scopes were manufactured in the USA or Japan, and had a much stronger overall reputation than today. It was also an era in which almost all manufacturers had not yet come to grips with the fact that rimfire shooters wanted "real" scopes, instead of the ridiculous little 3/4" tube models, which were the only scopes with parallax adjusted for less than 100 yards. (Police carried revolvers, there were no stainless rifles, only Ruger and S&W produced quality stainless handguns, Colt produced the most popular handguns, Walther & Baretta produced the only "wonder nines" and accounted for most of the inported handgun sales, stocks were made of wood, virtually all scopes were black "gloss", and we used stone tablets instead of email).

In a G&A article, Bushnell's president offered to adjust the parallax for free for shooters who sent in 1" tube Bushnell scopes to have the focus/parallax reset for rimfire use (22 LR and 22 WMR were the only rimfires). I immediately sent them 2 scopes and paid a small S&H fee. I was then the only kid on the block who had "real" scopes with the appropriate parallax for 22s.

I recently contacted Bushnell in order to send another scope for a parallax re-set. Not only has the program to re-set parallax for free disappeared, but I was told that Bushnell no longer performs any "post production" alterations of any kind.  Period.  Did you say  that you want the parallax adjusted to 150 yards in your Elite 4200? Tough luck. Of course, many of us know how to do it, but it's risky due to potential seal damage, lack of (dry) nitrogen, and the ability to properly purge and re-fill a scope, if it should become necessary.

It was suggested to me that I purchase a new scope with an AO. Duh. This suggestion not only demonstrates a failure to recognize the issues, but offers no solution of any kind, i.e., how to make a Bushnell scope useful to its owner. More than anything else, it suggests to me that scopes are now viewed as disposables.

I own a variety of scopes, i.e., Leupold, Nikon, Redfield, Weaver, Bushnell, Tasco (Japanese), Simmons (pre Meade), Burris, etc. etc.. But, more Leupolds than any other individual brand. Why? Reason: #1: Durability / Reliability.  Reason #2: Service - I would never have heard such a suggestion from anyone at Leupold. Long after many other manufacturers have moved their production from the USA or Japan to Korea to Singapore to the Phillipines to China and on to Bangladesh, Leupolds will still be durable, reliable, and made and serviced in America. SERVICE. It's a difference in philosophy, and shows up in every aspect of a company - including the quality of  its products. Unfortunately, no warranty - lifetime, limited lifetime, or otherwise - can instill quality into a product or provide quality service. Moreover, without these things, warranties are meaningless. Features and specifications aside, one can usually determine the overall quality of a product by looking at the quality of the service. Again, it's a matter of company culture.

BTW - Leupold is by no means the only example of service and quality. It's merely the one I chose to use.


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: May/15/2008 at 23:41
OK and a 1911 govt Colt was $225 and a ruger 10-22 was under $50. and gas was nineteen cents a gallon - I was there too - now that we have made our trip down memory lane lets face the fact that while some things have gotten worse and more expensive other things that are useful have been invented and if you want a scope to adjust parallex down to where it can be used for rimfire you should be able to find several that will work on the other hand it is almost certainly not cost effective to pay the rate of pay an american worker expects to make to have them adjust your parallex,  at todays labor rate it might cost more than the scope.  You have to draw the line somewhere if you are going to stay in business. I can remember at nineteen cents a gallon not only did you get gas but they checked the oil the air pressure in the tires and washed the windshield and were polite about it because they appreciated your business.  So if we cut through the chase is there a scope issue you need help with?


"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger

Posted By: Dallas
Date Posted: May/16/2008 at 04:37

You missed the point.

Posted By: jonbravado
Date Posted: May/16/2008 at 06:52
well, i never would have guessed that bushnell would EVER have done stuff like that, so i am not too suprised that they killed the program.
As for leupold, everyone knows that they are about the best for service. And they have an extensive offering lineup - you just pay dearly for it.  Americans are expensive. That is why it costs LOTS more to buy a solid american product. But give me 600 bucks, and one of the last scopes i would buy would be leupold because there are so many more offerings that give you more glass/coatings with DECENT service.  If the lower end leupolds would get closer to the top end leupolds as far as glass/coatings go - i would shell out an extra 50 or so bucks on a vx11 or vx111 - until that happens, i'll give my money to zeiss, ior, nikon, and even bushnell.  Americans are quickly losing the work ethic that made this country great. It's a cryin shame.  It's being bred out of us with each passing generation. Leupold still has it in spades, and i commend them for it. But with ole Uncle Sam taking a third of every dollar i make, i either buy a scope i can afford, or don't buy a scope.
my 2 cents.

Posted By: Chris Farris
Date Posted: May/16/2008 at 13:09
I could not agree with you more.  Most all of the old scope companies that were being run by the owners and founders are all gone.  Once they started selling to investment bankers, service went out the window.  The bean counters take over and the company starts heading down hill in a hurry.
Leupold may be the last of a dying breed.

Posted By: Dallas
Date Posted: May/17/2008 at 04:51
Jonbravado -

I fully agree with you, including your view that Leupold offers less for the dollar than most of the other manufacturers. While I own more Leupolds than any other individual brand, they still represent a minority of my scopes - perhaps around 30%. Some were purchased decades ago when Leupold was king of the hill in terms of their specifications. However, they were too expensive even back then. BTW - my last two purchases were Nikon Monarchs.


Thanks for weighing in.

Yes, off the top of my head, I can't think of many independent labels. Those that haven't been bought and sold, like Tasco, usually started out as part of a large corporation, like Nikon or Bushnell. Icons like Redfield and Weaver have vanished.

You, better than anyone, have seen what has happened to customer service over the past few years. I wasn't surprised that Bushnell wouldn't adjust the parallax for free. However, I was surprised to discover that they wouldn't perform a simple common task even if paid to do it. Of course, I was shocked by the inability of their customer service personnel to understand the issues and focus on the situation as it existed. However, the gentleman I spoke with may have done exactly as he was trained to do. But that's the problem! He wasn't trained to recognize the problem/need/request of the customer and to respond to it accordingly. Even if he had done so, it wouldn't have resulted in appropriate action being taken by his employer. It's a reflection of their corporate culture, and a far cry from what it was when I sent them two scopes years ago. Not only did Bushnell produce better products, but I'm reasonably certain that they held a bigger share of the scope market. Oh, well. Crying over it won't change anything.

Thanks again.

Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 -
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. -