The three sights are:
- an older (1980's) Bushnell Holosight (the 'N'-cell version),
a 2009 Tru-Glo Red/Green Multi-Reticle, and
a 2010 Burris Fastfire II.
I've shot with the Bushnell on several firearms over the years, from a 12 gauge Mossberg pump to a Ruger mark-II .22 LR, and it has been flawless in function until without paying attention, I managed to 'bottom out' the elevation setting, and thinking it was 'broken', managed to fiddle with it enough to break the seal and now I have to figure out how to get some anhydrous gas into it and re-seal it, since THE BUSHNELL FACTORY NEVER RESPONDED TO MY "SERVICE" REQUEST...
The Tru-Glo is nice, in that it has a green 'daytime' dot and a red 'nighttime' dot (and circles and crosshairs and other options vs. the 'dot' one). BUT the Truglo is way too bright, even on the 1/5 setting, for true night use, whereas the Bushnell is dimmable to the point that even at night you can barely see the dot, and the Burris automatically dims quite satisfactorily for midnight-with-a-flashlight use (it may help that the sight's light sensor would not be shone upon by the flashlight the way I mounted it). I DO like the Tru-Glo's ability to change reticle shape and color.
Weather-wise, the Tru-Glo claims to be water 'resistant' but the Bushnell I think claims it is submersible in salt water at 10 meters for 72 hours or some such 'mil-spec' type thing.
The Bushnell is the only one of the three which has an ENCLOSED beam (i.e. two 'windows' that the beam comes up between - thus the extra bulk), so of course it should be the winner for 'weatherproof'.
(...even if not 'AJ-with-a-screwdriver-proof'
) As for the Burris - the Fastfire-I brochure claims to be 'water resistant' whereas the Fastfire-II brochure claims to be 'water proof', although like the Tru-Glo, it is an 'open' beam design. I assume some 'improvement' between the Fastfire I and II versions is probably a legitimate claim, so although I don't plan to practice any 'Navy Seal' maneuvers with the Fastfire-II, I don't plan to 'baby' it.
I've not shot the Burris much yet, but I'll post more comments when I get a chance.
As you can see, the SIZE difference (and weight) is tremendous.
To be fair, the Bushnell I have has a STURDY metal 'shroud' (similar but way lighter is available for the Burris) for 'mil-spec' durability, and it IS removable, but I've never bothered. I really don't care about WEIGHT on a light carbine ranch/home-defense gun like my project I called the 'Night Scout'.
Night Scout project link = http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=23531.
Here's pics of the three sights, side by side for comparison:
Here's pics of the three sights on a Marlin 1894css:
Night Scout with the Bushnell (before I refinished the stock and "matted" the stainless with emory cloth):
Night Scout with the Tru-Glo:
Night Scout with the Burris:
The Burris is almost small compared to the under-barrel pistol laser!
As you can see, the Burris is substantially smaller than the others, and yet it DOES rise just high enough to easily see over the (cheap, BSA, but on-a-carbine-does-ok) 'pistol' laser mounted on the Night Scout. That was really important to me, because I like the 'double-dot' on-target to be sure things are ok for a shot in dim or no light. Additionally, if the gun were pressed into duty as a home defense firearm, it could be necessary to aim from an unstable/fallen position, where proper 'alignment', even for a holosight, might be impossible. It also provides a redundant backup sighting mechanism (in turn backed up by the Williams WGRS mounted in the 1894's rear scope holes, reversed, since it was designed for the longer 336 action).
I know some would agree with the Dick's Sporting Goods guy who told me "lasers are for gang-bangers and we don't ever plan to stock them", that with a holosight, what's the point in a laser, but they're welcome to come out at night to close up the chickens and check the livestock, and see if THEY can see/hit a scurrying predator the size of a feral cat at 40 yards, and explain to me why a laser is NOT helpful for verifying target/placement vs. just a plain holosight and LED flashlight. For that matter, I've had city-fellers who thought the LED flashlight 'looked stupid'. Hmmm - none of the raiding predators we've pointed it atseemed to laugh; must be a matter of 'taste', kind of like the blued/stainless thing...
NOTE - In fairness to the manufacturers, Tru-Glo DOES make a smaller sight, much like the Burris, but without the red/green multi-reticle option, and Bushnell DOES make smaller Holosights, partly by leaving off the shroud, and partly by just - making the new ones smaller. Chinese copies are available of the Tru-Glo and Burris for less money, as well, but I wanted reliability I could count on. Prices vary depending on particular models, but for the ones I have, Bushnell was most expensive ($350?), then the Burris ($210), then the Tru-Glo ($80?).
I guess overall, if I had to pick the 'best use' I could dream up for each of these sights, I'd put:
- the Bushnell on a heavy gun like an M-1A or even Mini-14 or some versions of AR-15, due to extreme 'combat' durability, and very dim adjustment capability - OR - on another 'night' gun - a Tapco-stocked 10/22 set up like my 1894css - on THAT gun, the way-forward 'scout' mounting seems to make the Bushnell not as obtrusive, and the super-lightweight gun with synthetic stock just doesn't look as 'bulked-up' with the Bushnell as the levergun does.
the Tru-Glo on a 'Range' gun for target/educational use, as it seems to be the most fragile (exposed laser, and also undercarriage), yet presents a wide variety of reticles for a variety of users and targets. I DO like this sight. I think I might put the Tru-Glo on the little Ruger 96/22 LR that we usually use to introduce 'newbies' to the shooting sports; it currently wears a bulkier BSA red dot one.
the Burris seems to me the best choice for a light carbine intended for 'ranch' or home protection duty like the Night Scout project, due to compact streamlined size and durability, and only one 'control' - the on/off switch. . .
that's hard to mess up - even for me..!
Found an even better light, at the local Lowe's (lumber/home improvement store) - a "(link) - Coast T7 LED-Lenser" - (Coast brand - http://www.coastportland.com). It is 190 lumens (vs. 70 for the previous Duracell one) which basically means BRIGHT. Larger diameter (30mm rings fit just right) than the Duracell one, but not a heavy light at all. Another nice feature is that it has a 'dim' battery saving mode that means you can use it for ordinary see-where-you're-walking-at-night use without having to have a separate light (the 'bright' mode is simply too intense to use pointed at the ground by your feet, if you expect to have your night-vision at all useful when you're checking gates, or feeders, or whatever chore you're doing).
I like this setup alot - handy, durable, and the .357 Mag has more varmint-potency than a .22 LR, but way less noise and flash than a .223 or similar gun one might desire for 2-legged predator control. Hearing damage isn't something I'm willing to have just to make one less coyote around the farm, or one less chicken-eater in the chicken pen. It is accurate enough that I can go out in pitch black and hit the 8" 100-yd. gong without a problem, or a soda can at 50 yards.
Maybe I need one in .44 Mag, though...
