• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Bushnell Fusion 1 Mile ARC 12x Rangefinding Binocular Review

Bushnell Fusion 1 Mile ARC 12x Rangefinding Binocular Review

This is going to be long. If you want the short version, here it is:

Beg, borrow, lie, cheat, or steal. Do what you need to do. BUY THESE NOW! I'm serious.

Ok, now for the long version, I'll break it down into a few categories. I'm purposely leaving out the packaging and stuff because in reality, nobody cares. I don't care what the youtube reviewers say. It was good packaging. Nuff said.

Well, before I dive into the gritty details, I'll start by giving a little background of myself, my type of shooting, and my current equipment that I'm comparing to for reference. For starters, I'm a benchrest guy. For any of you who don't know, that means I'm the pickiest of the picky, and probably still a little pickier than you're guessing. I'm concerned about quality "without caring about budget". That last part is in quotations because I actually do still work for a living so sometimes I still can't buy what I want. The type of shooting I do is shooting benchrest groups and prairie dog shooting. (I actually do a lot more different types of shooting than that, but that's where the rangefinders come in) I'm a Nightforce guy. Specifically, I'm a Nightforce Competition model guy. The one with the ED lenses that costs an arm AND a leg. Yeah, I use those. When it comes to glass clarity, believe me when I tell you that I have some clear glass to compare these binos to. Many of you already know that the middle of the day, when mirage is at its worst, is a rangefinders worst nightmare. We have several 1k yard rangefinders that simply will not range dogs beyond 200 yards in these conditions. You know how it is. Well, the Bushnells live up to their 1 mile name, and then some!

Let's begin.

To start with, I bought these just a hair over a year ago. My initial impressions were good, but yet skeptical. They worked amazing, but I knew the real test wouldn't be until I got them in the prairie dog fields.


Overall quality.

I'm not sure if they still do, but mine came with a magnetic close case, neck strap, and Butler Creek flip up caps for the objective lenses. One of my flip up caps simply would not stay snapped closed which was a minor annoyance. I called Bushnell, they sent new caps. The caps were the wrong size. I called again. They sent again. Wrong size again. I called again. They sent again. Correct size this time. Now in all fairness, these were a new model at the time and the employees were struggling to figure out the correct part numbers to send me. All of the flip up caps that they had to fit their other rangefinders, binos, and scopes would not fit these. Eventually, they figured it out and got me fixed up. Professional and friendly the entire time, blah blah blah, they're great people. Seriously. (Remember I said that when you don't see the "Customer Service" part of this review. That sums it up. Great people. Anyways, the magnetic close case is really kind of unimpressive I suppose. It's not fancy, it's probably not really even needed, but it does work and I use it as a storage bag in the safe. The body of the binos is like a hard rubbery material/coating. If you dropped these onto concrete, they would probably bounce unharmed, but I'm not trying it. The lens covers on the eye pieces work well and are attached to the neck strap so you don't lose them. Not very fancy, but they do a good job. The flip up covers (aside from that one in the beginning) work great. They flip up and they flip down. What more do you really need them to do? The neck strap? Ahh yes, the neck strap! Ok, I'll say it, these are not a typical small fit in your pocket set of binos. They're big. They also have a little bit of weight to them as they should. The neck strap is fantastic! It is nicer and better padded than any of my rifle slings. Big plus there!


Ease of use.

Can you push buttons and twist dials? If you answered yes, then you can use these! They're pretty simple. Seriously, if you can use a rifle scope, you can use these. Speaking of rifle scopes, let's jump into glass clarity.


Glass Clarity.

Ok, as I've said before, I own Nightforce Competitions. Here's the thing about glass clarity. Lots of people don't seem to quite grasp how this works so I'll take a few min to try and explain. Imagine a piece of glass that is just perfect. Crystal clear. Now, if you were able to magnify it while looking through it, like for example 55x on the Nightforce Comps, or a camera zoomed in, or whatever, then you'd see your target, now greatly enlarged and just as clear as it was on lower power. That's where glass clarity is important, the very high magnifications. If you go to whatever local store and look through a Tasco on 3x, you'll swear it's every bit as clear as anything else. I promise you, it's not. The difference is you don't have the ability to magnify it enough for the imperfections in the glass to really begin to stand out. If you're limited to 9x, then it could seem to be very clear glass, and for all realistic uses, it certainly would be. So now that we understand glass clarity requirements are directly related to magnification, let's go back to the Bushnells. They're available in 8x, 10x, and 12x with mine being 12x. My Nightforces are 15-55x so for the comparison, I'm comparing to them on 15x. Honestly, I can't tell any difference. The Bushnells are freaking clear! Now MAYBE if I set up a newspaper at 50 yards, then I might be able to distinguish a few differences between them, but for real world use (prairie dogs), these Bushnells are every bit as clear as my Nightforces. Bottom line. Let that sink in. I'm telling you these Bushnells are every bit as clear as my $2500 Nightforces. If you've never looked through a scope with ED lenses, then imagine the clearest scope you've ever looked through. These are as good or better than that. I had no problem using these as spotters to locate dogs, guide the shooter in, watch vapor trails, and call shots.



Features.

Brace yourselves. I have a lot of good things to say here. First off, the ARC in the name stands for Angle Range Compensation. Think about that for a second. ANGLE range compensation, not just range compensation which would be your typical ballistics. These range finders have an inclinometer inside that measures the degree uphill or downhill, and then figures it in to the ballistic data for you! If you don't know that shooting uphill or downhill changes your dial or hold vs shooting on flat ground, then just be thankfull it has this technology. Yes, it does matter, but no, you won't have to worry about it. So yes, not only is that part figured out for you, but it also has rudimentary ballistic software built in. It is NOT a kestrel. I do NOT do any type of shooting where first round hits matter. I don't hunt large game nor am I a sniper. That being said, close is good enough for me. 2nd or 3rd round hits are just fine for prairie dogs so keep that in mind. Now I say "rudimentary" ballistic software because it has presets that are matched to popular factory ammo ballistics. There's a list in the owners manual of what those are and there are about 80 or 90 more than that listed on their website. I don't shoot factory ammo and I don't shoot with anyone who does. Even still, I was able to find a setting that fairly matched the ballistics of our 22br, 6mm br, 6mm ppc, 6mm Remington, and 243 ackley with various loads for each (all the same setting on the rangefinder by the way), and one other setting that fairly matched our 308 and 6.5x284 although with so many others covered, I never bothered to change it. Again, especially considering the wind, I never expected first round hits. However, if you know how to zero in 2 shots (which you should), then 2nd or 3rd round hits are easy to do with this data. It also has ballistic settings to choose from for bows, but since I don't shoot bows, I haven't played with those at all.

Now aside from the ballistics, there are a few other features/settings worth mentioning. Specifically the modes. It has Target mode, Brush mode, and Normal mode. Now to really explain these, I need to talk a little bit about beam divergence. Beam divergence is the measurement of how tight the laser stays. Imagine it like MOA. It's really tight up close, but it spreads out as range increases. This is why getting a range finder capable of 1,000 yards+ is not a cheap thing to find. The tighter the beam divergence, the longer it can range, and the higher the price. A bad beam divergence is also part of the reason why our 1,000 yard range finders don't do so well in the mirage. Too wide of a beam combined with mirage equals bad readings. In all honesty, based on the price, I was going to be very happy if these Bushnells would read 500 yard dogs in the mirage. I was shocked at how much more they can do! 500 Yards is childs play for these things! Dogs at 1,000 yards were pretty easy to range with these. Due to location, I was unable to see any dogs further so I couldn't try to range them. However, there was a metal building in the background that the mirage was absolutely radiating off of. I was unable to range the building itself, but did range a tree beside it at 1830 yards. Actually, a friend ranged it and I didn't believe him so I had to see for myself. 1830 yards it was. In the 2 o'clock afternoon mirage.

Ok so anyone who has ever ranged a prairie dog knows that you aren't actually ranging the dog itself, but instead are ranging the ground around it (that whole beam divergence thing again), which brings us to the modes I mentioned earlier. Target mode will give you the distance of the very first thing it hits. Very useful for ranging a small target with large objects in the background. Want to range a prairie dog that has a tree 50 yards behind it? Put this thing in target mode and it's done. Brush mode is the opposite of target mode. Brush mode gives the range of the furthest object it hits. Want to range a deer but there are a few tree branches in your way? You see where I'm going with this. Bush mode came in ESPECIALLY handy in one of the fields we shot. There was a field sloping slightly downhill from where we were for about 400 yards, then a dirt berm maybe 10 or 20 feet high separating it from another field. That back field hadn't been shot much, probably due to the difficulty of shooting sometimes inches over the top of the berm to hit the dogs below on the other side. Well, we hit the berm a few times too, but we certainly whacked our fair share of dogs back there! Brush mode allowed me to range them all. Without brush mode, I would've only been able to range the berm, which was about 100 yards closer than the dogs we were shooting. Finally; normal mode. Normal mode may not sound like anything special, BUT normal mode allows you to scan. Instead of pressing the range button and getting a reading, you can hold the range button down and it will give continuous changing readings of everything you pass over. According to the manual, this is (understandably) harder on battery life. Speaking of batteries, this thing runs on a single CR123, I've been using it often for a year now, with a solid week of sun up to sun down use prairie dogging, often in scan mode just because, and not only am I still on the original battery, but the battery meter still shows full battery! I took 4 backup batteries with me and brought all 4 back home.

It also has 4 brightness settings (which could probably affect battery life too). Mine has been on the brightest setting since day one. I suppose I'd need to dim it for low light situations so it didn't wash out the display, but I don't shoot in the dark so I've never needed to turn it down.


Price.

Retail is around $1300 for the 12x model, less for the 10x and 8x. 30 Seconds on the google turned up the 12x for under $1k. If your google-fu is strong, you can do much better.


Conclusion.

Why are you even still reading this? GO BUY THEM NOW! They're amazing! I've only used one range finder that was better, but that one has a $6000 price tag. Seriously, for varmints, you NEED these. For deer or large game, you could probably get away with the 8x or 10x model instead.

13726589_10155098508963289_4341108754979353764_n.jpg 13776045_10155098509103289_6966632850217229445_n.jpg
 
Cool. Sounds like theyd be a good pair of binos for varmint hunting. Pretty reasonable price for the performance.

For big game hunting in the mountains, I gotta have the top tier glass for low light and long range resolution. Bushnell ain't quite there yet. Cant really compare binos to scopes. Not a great thing when a binocular with two 50mm objectives is only AS clear as a scope with one 50mm objective on similar power settings. But definitely sound like a good deal for the price point.
 
Last edited:
Cool. Sounds like theyd be a good pair of binos for varmint hunting. Pretty reasonable price for the performance.

For big game hunting in the mountains, I gotta have the top tier glass for low light and long range resolution. Bushnell ain't quite there yet


These are outstanding for varmint hunting and I have to say, honestly, I'd take that bet on long range resolution for your mountain hunting. However, for mountain hiking, I'd be a lot more tempted to use a smaller range finder and glass with my rifle scope. I would probably leave these behind for the weight and space savings. Personally, I don't do any of that type of hunting, but I definitely do understand the ounces = pounds, pounds = pain mindset.
 
So if used on relatively flat prairie dog areas they might show 400 yard and 600 yard dog holes, ranging the difference?

Getting something to actually read those distances, without some kind of bank or prominent object to range, is near impossible for anything I have used. Just curious.
 
So if used on relatively flat prairie dog areas they might show 400 yard and 600 yard dog holes, ranging the difference?

Getting something to actually read those distances, without some kind of bank or prominent object to range, is near impossible for anything I have used. Just curious.


I was in the same boat as you struggling to do exactly that, but yes, these are doing so just fine. It was always a guess when changing holes before. Sometimes they looked the same distance but were actually a big difference apart. You know how it is when everything is flat. These Bushnells have completely solved that problem. 525 yds. Change hole. 535 yds same hold. Change hole. Ohh that one is 586 yds, might wanna hold a little high. Change hole. 520 yds. Use last hold...... It's simple now, plus, if you're paying attention to the ballistic range hold, you can see the difference in where you need to hold based on the caliber you're shooting (Or where to tell the shooter to hold)
 
I was in the same boat as you struggling to do exactly that, but yes, these are doing so just fine. It was always a guess when changing holes before. Sometimes they looked the same distance but were actually a big difference apart. You know how it is when everything is flat. These Bushnells have completely solved that problem. 525 yds. Change hole. 535 yds same hold. Change hole. Ohh that one is 586 yds, might wanna hold a little high. Change hole. 520 yds. Use last hold...... It's simple now, plus, if you're paying attention to the ballistic range hold, you can see the difference in where you need to hold based on the caliber you're shooting (Or where to tell the shooter to hold)


Lasers will give you returns, but not always what you think you are getting.
On flat prairie, you cannot get reliable ranges with a laser, no mater what brand it is. Aat 500 yds, the diameter of the laser beam is ~ 20 to 30", and you are getting reflections from everything in front, and behind, and both sides of what you are ranging - sure, you get "numbers" in the windows, but if you need accurate ranging for dial-ups, you are S.O.L.

I have the best ever laser (an AN/GVS-5) a $12,000 military range finder. It is +/- 15 feet at 6 miles, and it is useless against PDs in flat prairie, past 350/400-ish yds. I use big military optical rangefinders for flat fields. A Swedish Periscope, and a Wild 800. Both are +/- 15 feet (worst case) at 1,200 yards. and you can range one small target in a cluttered field, and know exactly what you have ranged.
 
Lasers will give you returns, but not always what you think you are getting.
On flat prairie, you cannot get reliable ranges with a laser, no mater what brand it is. Aat 500 yds, the diameter of the laser beam is ~ 20 to 30", and you are getting reflections from everything in front, and behind, and both sides of what you are ranging - sure, you get "numbers" in the windows, but if you need accurate ranging for dial-ups, you are S.O.L.

I have the best ever laser (an AN/GVS-5) a $12,000 military range finder. It is +/- 15 feet at 6 miles, and it is useless against PDs in flat prairie, past 350/400-ish yds. I use big military optical rangefinders for flat fields. A Swedish Periscope, and a Wild 800. Both are +/- 15 feet (worst case) at 1,200 yards. and you can range one small target in a cluttered field, and know exactly what you have ranged.


You're absolutely right. What I'm talking about is being close enough to expect 2nd or 3rd round hits. If you want better than that, you've gotta spend a lot more.
 
You're absolutely right. What I'm talking about is being close enough to expect 2nd or 3rd round hits. If you want better than that, you've gotta spend a lot more.

"... 2nd or 3rd round hits." That for girls ;) ;) ;)

PDs are dumb as rocks - but you wanna whack Woodies at range, you better be able to dial up on the correct range.

upload_2016-7-18_20-50-23.jpeg
 
Now how the heck can I carry that in my shirt pocket for final check while shooting?

Not wanting to take this posting from the OP. Reasonable size and performance is important. Of course, binoculars are around the neck or on my portable table. Getting the Bushnell binoculars means I can wear a T shirt without pocket.
 
Now how the heck can I carry that in my shirt pocket for final check while shooting?

Not wanting to take this posting from the OP. Reasonable size and performance is important. Of course, binoculars are around the neck or on my portable table. Getting the Bushnell binoculars means I can wear a T shirt without pocket.

Get a bigger tee shirt ;) ;) ;) .....

For me, there are two kinds of varmint shooting - walking, light rifle, and little laser... and long range shooting, where you set up your kit and work a field. For the second, it does not matter how big your rangefinder is (or how heavy your rifle is).

The problem with small, walking lasers is that without a tripod, they're limited by your ability to hold them steady - I have two Bushnells and they are just OK for 300-350-ish yards (in New England chuck country), but they can get return pngs from 800+ yards... they are limited by the ability to hold them steady without a tripod. Hand holding them means you are pinging everything around the target.
You can't hand hold a "1 mile laser" on a small, furry target @ 100 yds and get accurate pings.
If it is on a slope, then you are pinging the slope (which is OK)... but if it in the middle of a flat field, you are lost.
 
Last edited:
I have to disagree about the glass. It has a tint to it that make it worthless in low light, which is critical if you are hunting in the morning and evening. While it is significantly better than the previous models it's still not up to par. It is fine during the day but like wearing sunglasses in the evening. The rangefinder works very well as stated, beyond a mile, but a better option in the handheld rf is the Sig Kilo2000. In the "scan" mode you can hold the button down and continuously range an object as it moves away, like a car driving away. Or scan across objects to see if you're hitting it or the background. It is more on par with the Leica 1600 for beam divergence, has inclinometer, but no ballistic feature,(the Leica 1600 ballistics are worthless), and is only $400 with the Leica being in the $700.
If using the Bushnell during the day they are great. If using in low light you will be disappointed. Try them at the store in the evening and you will see the sunglass effect. I've had 3 pairs of Bushnells that my friends now use in their matches but not for hunting and now I have Leica HD-B's which you can program your custom ballistic profile just like the G7BR2 out to 800 yards. It does work as advertised and will sometimes give the solution to 1,000 yards although they only advertise 800. The rf feature easily read past a mile. I think the Bushnells are the cheapest rf binos out and they are very convenient but the glass needs to step up. Rudolf Optics just released some for $850 but I have no idea I have never used any of their products.
http://rudolphoptics.com/rudolph-binocular-rangefinder-8x42-1800m/
 
I have to disagree about the glass. It has a tint to it that make it worthless in low light, which is critical if you are hunting in the morning and evening. While it is significantly better than the previous models it's still not up to par. It is fine during the day but like wearing sunglasses in the evening. The rangefinder works very well as stated, beyond a mile, but a better option in the handheld rf is the Sig Kilo2000. In the "scan" mode you can hold the button down and continuously range an object as it moves away, like a car driving away. Or scan across objects to see if you're hitting it or the background. It is more on par with the Leica 1600 for beam divergence, has inclinometer, but no ballistic feature,(the Leica 1600 ballistics are worthless), and is only $400 with the Leica being in the $700.
If using the Bushnell during the day they are great. If using in low light you will be disappointed. Try them at the store in the evening and you will see the sunglass effect. I've had 3 pairs of Bushnells that my friends now use in their matches but not for hunting and now I have Leica HD-B's which you can program your custom ballistic profile just like the G7BR2 out to 800 yards. It does work as advertised and will sometimes give the solution to 1,000 yards although they only advertise 800. The rf feature easily read past a mile. I think the Bushnells are the cheapest rf binos out and they are very convenient but the glass needs to step up. Rudolf Optics just released some for $850 but I have no idea I have never used any of their products.
http://rudolphoptics.com/rudolph-binocular-rangefinder-8x42-1800m/

I haven't looked through the new ones, but I did look through the old Bushnell RF binos. One glance left me disgusted. Nasty blue tint to them. Sounds like it's still present from what you're saying. Either way, Bushnell is a far cry from top shelf glass quality.
 
Last edited:
Newer generations are much better than the 1st ones but(and it's a big, hairy butt) they still have the tint that kills them in low light. The last pair I got used for $450 figuring I would just leave them in the truck but ended up replacing them with a set of Hawke Frontier ED's. It is nice have the rf in the binos as it really helps your range guestimating skills when you can constantly range objects, butt the trade off is too much in my opinion. I do see Bushnell improving their glass in the future and as stated they are a fantastic company to deal with.
 
I use the Meopta Meostar HD binoculars. Absolutely stunning glass. I previously had the Vortex Razor HD binoculars and had looked many times through my buddy's Swarovski EL Swarovison binos. I sold my Razors because the Meopta's easily outperformed them in all aspects and I felt that the resolution was just a hair better than the Swarovski. Very hard to tell, but with long range viewing, I felt I could make out slightly more detail with the Meopta's than I could with the Swarovskis and I liked the color rendition better with the Meopta glass.

Outdoor Magazine conducts rigorous in depth reviews of various optics from time to time and they also crowned the Meostar HD binoculars as king in first place over the Swarovski EL binoculars. The EL finally came in second place for the first time in any review that I can remember. And I have no reason to disagree with their ruling. The Meopta Meostar HD binoculars definitely some of the nicest glass I have ever seen. And Meopta gives us that luxury at half the price of Swarovski ELs.
 
Last edited:
For a RF, I use the Leica 1600. Pretty nice, but I recently looked at one of the Sig Sauer Kilo 2000 RF's and was very impressed by its speed and ranging capability for a $500+/- RF. Scan mode is much faster than my Leica 1600. I never use the ballistics in my Leica and the air temp is never right because i carry it in my pocket while hunting so those extra features arent that great for me. My son needs a RF because he will be 12 and doing more hunting this year. Plan on getting the SIG for him. Though I may keep it for myself and give him my Leica ;)
 
Ledd Slinger, although this is getting off topic I agree with you about the color in the Swarovskis is a little flat. It was my first pair (15x56)and at first was a bit disappointed but then they outperformed the others in the low light which I will accept as a trade off.
 
Ledd Slinger, although this is getting off topic I agree with you about the color in the Swarovskis is a little flat. It was my first pair (15x56)and at first was a bit disappointed but then they outperformed the others in the low light which I will accept as a trade off.

Not really off topic when the OP said he'd bet me the Bushnell binos would best top shelf binoculars in long range resolution ;)

Those 15x56 Swaro's are very nice. Had a buddy who used them religiously. Definitely suck up all the light with those big objectives. Meopta makes the Meostar B1 HD in 15x56 as well, but I haven't looked through them yet. They also make a 12x50.

I went with the 10x32 Meostar B1 HD in order to cut weight for the high country. They are amazingly bright for such a small set and still maintain a very wide field of view. The resolution and color rendition is second to none in my opinion. Compared to my previous Razor 10x50 binoculars (which I sold a while after getting the Meoptas) the little Meopta 32mm can almost hold on too low light viewing as long as the much larger 50mm Razors I had. Really is amazing and truly speaks for the glass and coating quality. The big Razors held on to low light viewing for about 7-10 minutes longer, but the weight savings of the 32mm and far superior resolution of the Meostars at long range is worth the trade off to me.

The Vortex Razors wouldn't stand a chance in low light against the Meopta Meostar B1 models with identical size objectives.
 
Not really off topic when the OP said he'd bet me the Bushnell binos would best top shelf binoculars in long range resolution ;)

Those 15x56 Swaro's are very nice. Had a buddy who used them religiously. Definitely suck up all the light with those big objectives. Meopta makes the Meostar B1 HD in 15x56 as well, but I haven't looked through them yet. They also make a 12x50.

I went with the 10x32 Meostar B1 HD in order to cut weight for the high country. They are amazingly bright for such a small set and still maintain a very wide field of view. The resolution and color rendition is second to none in my opinion. Compared to my previous Razor 10x50 binoculars (which I sold a while after getting the Meoptas) the little Meopta 32mm can almost hold on too low light viewing as long as the much larger 50mm Razors I had. Really is amazing and truly speaks for the glass and coating quality. The big Razors held on to low light viewing for about 7-10 minutes longer, but the weight savings of the 32mm and far superior resolution of the Meostars at long range is worth the trade off to me.

The Vortex Razors wouldn't stand a chance in low light against the Meopta Meostar B1 models with identical size objectives.


That's not quite what I said. I said I'd take the bet on the bushnells being clear enough with high enough resolution to use for your mountain hunting. Comparing them to a regular non rf bino is apples to oranges. I never said they were better than top tier binos, only that these new ones would probably surprise you.
 
That's not quite what I said. I said I'd take the bet on the bushnells being clear enough with high enough resolution to use for your mountain hunting. Comparing them to a regular non rf bino is apples to oranges. I never said they were better than top tier binos, only that these new ones would probably surprise you.

I see. I misunderstood. Glass is glass though. RF binos or not. Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski make RF binos using their top tier model glass and the image is every bit as good as their model equivalent non-RF binos. So the image quality of RF binos to non-RF binos is not apples and oranges.
 
Last edited:

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,063
Messages
2,189,414
Members
78,688
Latest member
C120
Back
Top