Bushnell 850 ARC Thoughts

[Musky hunter 82]

I'm looking at getting a New rangefinder, I can spend about $150 and am going back and forth between the Bushnell 850 with ARC and the Nikon pro staff 5. What one would you guys get? I would use it mostly for Minnesota archery deer hunting with a little rifle hunting, and maybe out west antelope hunting, seeing that the Pro staff 5 goes out to 550 yards on a reflective target, and the Bushnell goes out to 850 yards. How do they compare to reading a deer? I'm not going to be shooting a rifle out past 300-400 yards anyway, but is it worth it to have the ARC for bow hunting? I'm usually 15-25 feet up a tree so does it really matter much? I just don't want something that isn't going to work, or be hard to use.

Thank you

[TruthWalleyes]

I just got Leopold RX-800i TBR with DNA...Blows the lower end optics away. $340 fits in your shirt pocket. Had many people tell me the lower end rangefinders just don't work worth a darn.

[harvey lee]

I will say, the Bushnell model I have used for bow hunting has worked out very well for me in the stand. Yes, I have used the RF also for gun hunting and that also worked out fine.

A friend of mine has a Nikon model and that one was a bit more spendy and I believe is a bit nicer than mine.

I cannot speak directly to the models you are considering but the Nikon model my friend has and my Bushnell have both worked out wonderful.

I realize they make ones alot better and of course for alot more in the cah dept but the ones we use work just fine.

I used a friends Lieca this weekend and I can say that was a very nice RF but a hefty price tag came with it. I simply do not ned one that spendy as mine gets the job done well for me.

Alot like buying a set of field glasses. The ones I have ran about $400 10 years ago. I consider them a great set of glasses.

Now,I have also used a very good set of Lieca glasses and they were something else but I do not need a set that good and the price was way up there. I guess if I had this kind of money to buy a set like the LIeca's I would own a pair but there are other things in life I would like to buy or do than own a pair that spendy.

If I was going to be hunting in the mountains and looking 500 yards at a animal, then I may look at the ones that run alot more.

All depends on where you will be hunting, the range and just how clear one believes they need them. What works for some would never be good enough for others as some have to have the big named products.

Just the way I feel about very expensive optic's when the ones I own get the job done.

[Scott K]

There will be very few times when you will need the ARC for archery, it typically only is a couple yards difference out to 50 yards anyhow. But if you are going to use it in the mountains shooting a couple hundred yards, then I would say it is a must.

I just bought a Leupold 600i with DNA, all I can say is wow, on how clear the lens is. it is like looking through a top end binoculars. I paid $200 for it. But it doesnt have arc, but I am only using it for archery, and some playing around in stand while rifle hunting. If you want the arc in Leupold, you will have to buy the 800i like Truth was talking about.

As for your two options, my brother has the Nikon Prostaff 5, and he really likes it, it works good for everything around here, but his lens isnt as clear as mine, but maybe that isnt all that important for you. As for the Bushnell 850, it seems like the better bargain, but if you read some of the reviews on them, they arent always positive reviews. Although, I dont always depend on others reviews online, people like to complain about everything. In your price range if you think you need ARC, the Bushnell will be the way to go, unless you want to spend another $100, then there are a lot of better options. If you dont need the ARC, I would either go buy the Leupold RX 600i with DNA, or get the Nikon Prostaff 5.

[Lip_Ripper Guy]

I have the Bushnell 1000 ARC. Only had it for a week or so, but I do like it.

You can't go wrong with Nikon, either.

[Wanderer]

Musky hunter,

If you hunt MN bluff land, the ARC can be your friend. If not, you likely won't gain a lot at your stand heights and hunting flatter ground.

If one of those choices has a lighted display vs. black, choose that one. One other thing to consider going by the info you posted - the ranges listed on the units is for highly reflective targets under optimal conditions. Real life and low light changes that distance dramatically. If you honestly think you might be shooting pronghorns out to 400 yards, get the longest range model you can afford.

Other than that, ease of operation should be equal in all the newer models. Different maybe, but difficult to use shouldn't even be on the shelf with today's technology.

Good luck with your purchase!

[Neighbor_guy]

I have a Nikon ProStaff 5. I am very happy with it. It does not have the arch compensation, but that has not been an issue just yet. It has the back lit red option for nightime or low light, it can be a little distracting in that mode and the image is not as clear as when in regular (black) led mode. Again, that has yet to be a real issue.

It says 550yards on it, and easily does 450-485 on trees and things out in fields etc. I do know that there is a buildboard west of here that is 632yards from the top of the roof. But that was a very large, very reflective target.

Now if only I could remember to bring it allong on more trips instead of just playing with it in the yard or at work.