lightstream vs bushnell

[Pod]

^^^^

[TARGETZERO]

Its a real shame that you didnt find the problem with the rifle before you wrote the original test, I cant believe that you didnt know that the the turrets are1/8" of an inch per click at 100 yards and that they are DOUBLE sprung for perfect repeatability.
These scopes have been specialy built to Alans exacting standards with cost coming second regardless and then someone who obviously has little understanding of either the rifle or scope puts himself forward as an expert and writes the sort of drivel we have above, if your going to write a report make sure you have a little understanding of the subject and can use the odd full stop and comma in the right place.

Ben
FIRST POINT,I WAS ASKED TO DO THE WRITE UP,SECOND POINT I NEVER CLAIMED TO BE AN EXPERT,THIRD POINT THE GUN WAS PURCHASED OFF THIS SITE,ON THE DAY OV THE FIRST TEST,THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME IT HAD BEEN SHOT BY ME,THIER SEEMED ABSOULUTLY NOTHING WRONG WITH THE GUN,AFTER GETTING BOTH ITEMS LOOKED AT BY A PROFFESSIONAL, HE CLAIMED THE BARREL HAD BEEN KNOCKED ,NOT ENOUGH TO NOTICE ,BUT ENOUGH TO MAKE A SLIGHT DIFFERANCE,I HAVE ALREADY SPOKE TO ALAN OVER THIS,AND TOLD HIM I WOULD POST AN UPDATE AS SOON AS I FOUND OUT WHAT THE SCORE WAS,I KNEW ID GET SOME CRAP OVER WHAT ,I INITIALLY WROTE,I COULD OV LEFT IT,BUT ITS A REVIEW AND THESE ARE MY FINDINGS,NOT YOURS.I STILL THINK THE SCOPE IS AN ALRIGHT SCOPE BUT NOT WORTH THE MONEY.AND LAST POINT KEEP TO MESELF PS THIS WOULNDNT HAPPEN TO HAVE ENY BEARINGS ON YOUR ABOVE COMMENTS WOULD IT I have some of these in stock and they are truly top notch, sold 2 already and users have both already got back to me to say how amazed they are at the overall quality and specialy the price. Light Stream will go far..

Ben

[blue]

Why should someone who is not deemed an expert be deemed incapable of writing a review?
If you use a scope, your perception of the piece of equipment is valid, especially to yourself.
Is it a requirement that we adopt the "Airgun World" or "Airgunner" method of reviewing kit
As for the correct use of grammer, should he perhaps have dictated his findings to someone to write for him That seems to work in the odd magazine too.

I had no problem in either reading or understanding the review. The barrel issue was unfortunate, but it was admitted and as stated, did not affect the optical quality. As it stands, that has not changed since the initial review.

[TARGETZERO]

[dbc-65]

I had no problem in either reading or understanding the review. The barrel issue was unfortunate, but it was admitted and as stated, did not affect the optical quality. As it stands, that has not changed since the initial review.[/QUOTE]
AS FROM BLUE

I'll go alone with that, i was one of the chaps that asked for a veiw of Perry and enjoyed reading it and commenting on it.
Perry saved me from rushing out and spending another load of cash which i thank him and a few others for.

Cheers Perry.

Dave

[TARGETZERO]

thanks dave,just been informed a thread was pulled on this topic,any ideas why???

[TARGETZERO]

These scopes have been specialy built to Alans exacting standards with cost coming second regardless and then someone who obviously has little understanding of either the rifle or scope puts himself forward as an expert and writes the sort of drivel we have above, STRANGELY ENOUGH BEN ON FURTHER INVESTIGATION THE GUN IS ONE OV YOURS,THE LAD WHO HAD IT REGGED GOT IT DONE BY YOURSELF,AND HAS SAID HE HAD TO SHIM HIS OWN SCOPE WHEN HE GOT IT BACK,SO HE COULD ZERO ,NOW IM NOT NO EXPERT LIKE YOUR SELF,AND MAY BE IM SHI#E AT TYPING ,BUT THE GUN THAT CAUSED THE INITIAL PROBLEM,WAS KNOCKED SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE ,POINT BIENG EVEN AN EXPERT CAN OVER LOOK CERTAIN THINGS. PERRY

[TARGETZERO]

ONE MORE THING MR TAYLOR I cant believe that you didnt know that the the turrets are1/8" of an inch per click at 100 yards and that they are DOUBLE sprung for perfect repeatability.
IF YOU READ THE FIRST POST,WHICH IT DOESNT LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE,YOULL NOTICE YOUR ABOVE COMMENT IS WELL OUT OV TEXT

[bengarzy]

Why should someone who is not deemed an expert be deemed incapable of writing a review?
If you use a scope, your perception of the piece of equipment is valid, especially to yourself.
Is it a requirement that we adopt the "Airgun World" or "Airgunner" method of reviewing kit
As for the correct use of grammer, should he perhaps have dictated his findings to someone to write for him That seems to work in the odd magazine too.

I had no problem in either reading or understanding the review. The barrel issue was unfortunate, but it was admitted and as stated, did not affect the optical quality. As it stands, that has not changed since the initial review.

So the fact that he slated the scope when the rifle was faulty is ok in your oppinion?
The fact that he did not have the knoledge to recognise this would then mean he does not have the ability to air his views and adversly affect the sales of a brand new product.
The fact is the Light-Stream is built to the same exacting standards as the top end scopes but is more than 30% less expensive than them BECAUSE it does not have the magic names engraved on it.
If you are going to put a review on here it would make sense if your other equipment was of a KNOWN high standard previously so that some sort of judgement could be made, not go off half cocked and then come back to try to put it right.

Ben

[bengarzy]

These scopes have been specialy built to Alans exacting standards with cost coming second regardless and then someone who obviously has little understanding of either the rifle or scope puts himself forward as an expert and writes the sort of drivel we have above, STRANGELY ENOUGH BEN ON FURTHER INVESTIGATION THE GUN IS ONE OV YOURS,THE LAD WHO HAD IT REGGED GOT IT DONE BY YOURSELF,AND HAS SAID HE HAD TO SHIM HIS OWN SCOPE WHEN HE GOT IT BACK,SO HE COULD ZERO ,NOW IM NOT NO EXPERT LIKE YOUR SELF,AND MAY BE IM SHI#E AT TYPING ,BUT THE GUN THAT CAUSED THE INITIAL PROBLEM,WAS KNOCKED SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE ,POINT BIENG EVEN AN EXPERT CAN OVER LOOK CERTAIN THINGS. PERRY

You obviously are NOT an expert as you would realise a REGULATOR conversion would NOT affect the zero, just consistency and shot count.
Also you have previously stated you found (eventualy) the rifle had had a"knock" which had caused the problem,hardly anything to do with me I think even you will agree.
Yes I do stock Light-Stream scopes but your test would have drawn the exact same comments from me regardless of what name was on it, it was a thoughtless and ill concieved piece you wrote so lets leave it at that.

Ben

[Gary C]

Having looked through pretty much every Bushnell and the Lightstream, I'd go Lightstream every time.

I'll no doubt get the "scope snobs" jumping up and down on me but sorry chaps, Bushnell isn't the marque it was.

[baz]

Having looked through pretty much every Bushnell and the Lightstream, I'd go Lightstream every time.

I'll no doubt get the "scope snobs" jumping up and down on me

I have had that a few times too, I havent looked through a Lightstream but I have had a Nightforce which when I likened it to Bushnell optics a couple of NF owners almost had a sheetfit In fact the 4200 had better optics than the £1k+ NF I was using

I like Leupolds, jap made, medium priced, but one thing I need is long eye relief on some guns and the 6.5-20x40 has that along with varmint ret so I like them

Ben, I must get up to see you and look through one of these Lightstreams to see what the fuss is about

Baz

[nurek]

Ben, I must get up to see you and look through one of these Lightstreams to see what the fuss is about

Baz, if I remember correctly, I have read somewhere that you had a Weaver Tactical. The Lightstream is very similar to it, if not identical to the 4.5-14x44 Weaver Tactical. These are very nice scopes and I like both.

[baz]

Baz, if I remember correctly, I have read somewhere that you had a Weaver Tactical. The Lightstream is very similar to it, if not identical to the 4.5-14x44 Weaver Tactical. These are very nice scopes and I like both.

I did have a Weaver Tactical, nice optics as you say

Baz

[rapidpaulus]

Have to say,i had a look through a lightstream today a 5-20-50..was very crisp optics..cheers mike..