Bushnell has just recently introduced a new affordable scope line that curiously uses not only moa turrets (which are common) but moa reticles (not common at this price point) as well. This excited me because I have always wanted just this arrangement because it seems to make much more sense to me for anyone that uses inches vs the metric system in their day to day lives but I have never found this in a price range I could afford. That's a whole 'nother discussion, but just in case there are any others here that are interested in such things I figured I'd give yall a peek at mine.
The Bushnell Engage line of scopes includes very affordable (low $100s to mid $200s) hunting scopes with 1" tubes and capped turrets, and mid priced ($350 - $500) tactical scopes with 30mm tubes and large uncapped tactical/target turrets. I wanted to try one out on my Ruger American in 300blk which I primarily shoot subs out of at ranges of 50-100 yards but want to be able to engage from 25yds to 150yds or farther when shooting supers. When it came time to ding my wallet I gave serious thought to just what I really needed for this application. Another consideration was weight. This is a lightweight rifle and I didn't want it to feel top heavy. I decided I didn't need the 30mm tube (can always get a 20moa base) and huge turrets so I could save some weight and $ there, but I really wanted side focus to eliminate parallax especially when shooting at shorter ranges. Luckily, the hunting version retains the side focus of the tactical models, and the MOA retical. I chose the 4-12x and saved 5oz of weight and almost $200 over the 2.5-10x tactical version I was initially considering.
So anyway here's the scope next to what it's replacing on the Ruger, a Weaver Grand Slam Tactical 3-10x mil/mil which was twice the price of this one. The first thing I notice about the Bushnell is it's size, it's huge compared to the Weaver, especially the ocular lens assembly. It looks strange and ungainly, and the styling makes the 1" tubes both have look much narrower on the Bushnell. It's not a good looking scope IMHO. I find out soon that it doesn't quite have the eye relief of the Weaver either, which is actually a good thing because it's so long it's practically in my face.
I can move it forward if need be.
The turrets are capped but finger adjustable by grasping the outer ring. The elevation turret had nice crisp clicks but the windage was a little mushy.
Just looks positively huge on this rifle, but I didn't buy it for looks.
BTW it came with those Butler Creek scope caps. So how well does it do what scopes do? Was the MOA reticle worth it?
Yes. I love the MOA reticle for what I am doing here. It's a very precise reticle graduated in 1 moa increments. I can see it getting lost in a busy background of foliage, etc. so it might not be the best for hunting, but for target shooting it's awesome. The graduations line up perfectly with the 1" target squares, what more could you ask for? Comparing against the Weaver pointing them both at a blank wall, I could barely make out that I thought the Weaver might be a tad brighter, but looking through them both long range I could not tell a difference in brightness, although I didn't test this in fading light. I also thought they both were quite clear to the edges. I can see a softening of the image toward the left edge in the pic below, but I had never noticed it when using the scope. The Weaver was made in Japan, this one in Korea.
I did not do any box tests, etc. This is just a quick peek not an extensive review or test, but it was simple and quick to sight in. The focus and magnification controls both work smoothly and don't require excessive effort. The entire Engage line is SFP, but I just don't see that being an issue in this power of scope, if I need to range and/or hold over I'll be at max mag. Hope this was interesting/helpful to someone.
The Bushnell Engage line of scopes includes very affordable (low $100s to mid $200s) hunting scopes with 1" tubes and capped turrets, and mid priced ($350 - $500) tactical scopes with 30mm tubes and large uncapped tactical/target turrets. I wanted to try one out on my Ruger American in 300blk which I primarily shoot subs out of at ranges of 50-100 yards but want to be able to engage from 25yds to 150yds or farther when shooting supers. When it came time to ding my wallet I gave serious thought to just what I really needed for this application. Another consideration was weight. This is a lightweight rifle and I didn't want it to feel top heavy. I decided I didn't need the 30mm tube (can always get a 20moa base) and huge turrets so I could save some weight and $ there, but I really wanted side focus to eliminate parallax especially when shooting at shorter ranges. Luckily, the hunting version retains the side focus of the tactical models, and the MOA retical. I chose the 4-12x and saved 5oz of weight and almost $200 over the 2.5-10x tactical version I was initially considering.
So anyway here's the scope next to what it's replacing on the Ruger, a Weaver Grand Slam Tactical 3-10x mil/mil which was twice the price of this one. The first thing I notice about the Bushnell is it's size, it's huge compared to the Weaver, especially the ocular lens assembly. It looks strange and ungainly, and the styling makes the 1" tubes both have look much narrower on the Bushnell. It's not a good looking scope IMHO. I find out soon that it doesn't quite have the eye relief of the Weaver either, which is actually a good thing because it's so long it's practically in my face.
I can move it forward if need be.
The turrets are capped but finger adjustable by grasping the outer ring. The elevation turret had nice crisp clicks but the windage was a little mushy.
Just looks positively huge on this rifle, but I didn't buy it for looks.
BTW it came with those Butler Creek scope caps. So how well does it do what scopes do? Was the MOA reticle worth it?
Yes. I love the MOA reticle for what I am doing here. It's a very precise reticle graduated in 1 moa increments. I can see it getting lost in a busy background of foliage, etc. so it might not be the best for hunting, but for target shooting it's awesome. The graduations line up perfectly with the 1" target squares, what more could you ask for? Comparing against the Weaver pointing them both at a blank wall, I could barely make out that I thought the Weaver might be a tad brighter, but looking through them both long range I could not tell a difference in brightness, although I didn't test this in fading light. I also thought they both were quite clear to the edges. I can see a softening of the image toward the left edge in the pic below, but I had never noticed it when using the scope. The Weaver was made in Japan, this one in Korea.
I did not do any box tests, etc. This is just a quick peek not an extensive review or test, but it was simple and quick to sight in. The focus and magnification controls both work smoothly and don't require excessive effort. The entire Engage line is SFP, but I just don't see that being an issue in this power of scope, if I need to range and/or hold over I'll be at max mag. Hope this was interesting/helpful to someone.
Last edited: