- Messages
- 3,679
- Reactions
- 8,909
I have both of these sights in my possession so I figured I would write up a review for you guys who are thinking about getting one.
I always hated when people do comparisons and never give their opinion on the matter, so I will be up front and say that I think the PA Micro is a better sight. They are both the same price, and in truth are both fine sights, but the PA has more features, and a better dot overall.
The Bushnell
The quality of the 3moa dot on this sight is very good. The dot is clear and I would say more circular than the PA sight. However, on its lowest setting (both are 1-11) the dot is invisible except in the lowest lighting. On 11 the dot is very clear, though it does not get as bright as the PA sight. The battery housing/selector on the bushnell is harder to turn and somewhat mushy in its engagement. Also note that it is at a 45 degree angle as opposed to the PA's 90.
Bushnell on lowest setting
Bushnell's Highest setting
On the Bushnell the angle of the LED emitter is at 6 o'clock, and sits lower in the housing than the PA sight. To me, the Bushnell wins in this department. It feels like it obstructs less of the view through the glass. The finish on the Bushnell is shinier than the PA and has a bright white logo on the side.
The biggest downside of the Bushnell to me was how the dot disappears on the top quarter of the lens. I tired to get a picture of this phenomenon but to no avail. I am not sure what is causing this to happen, but if the dot strays too high in the tube it will vanish completely. Definitely not something you want to happen, though you can train for it as I have done. Overall a good sight for the money, though I feel the PA is much better.
Primary Arms Micro
Both of these sights sport a 3moa dot, and as said previously the PA dot is not quite as circular as the Bushnell. at its lowest setting you can see that it is more of an off-set oval, though I do not find this as a hindrance in anyway. In both low light and sunny situations the PA sight is more effective as it has a broader output range.
Pa Lowest Setting
PA Highest Setting
Another pro of the PA is that it has a removable base as opposed to the Bushnell's fixed. This allows for broader applications on differing platforms. The front of the PA is also threaded allowing for instillation of a sunshade that can be bought separately. On both sights the windage and elevation screws have an o-ring to keep water out of them, and I would be willing to say that those parts are sourced from the same place. They are literally the exact same, so no comparison there. Same goes with the lens covers; both are the exact same.
The finish on the PA sight is more of a matte black, and the logo on it is small and inconspicuous as opposed to the Bushnell's in your face logo. As stated above the dial on the PA is easier to turn and has a positive click into each setting; much better than the Bushnell's mushy one.
One aspect of the PA sight that I do not love is the 7 0'clock position on the LED emitter. PA claims that is is for better co-witness on an Ar15. That may be true, but it protrudes more so than the Bushnell, and is somewhat distracting. Plus I do not use it on an Ar15 so I have no idea if the claims have any merit.
There you go guys. I hope this helps somebody in their decision. The PA sight is mush more sight for the money in my opinion. If somebody wants to donate a real Aimpoint or a Vortex I will be glad to do another comparison
View attachment 122361 View attachment 122363 View attachment 122365 View attachment 122367 View attachment 122369 View attachment 122371 View attachment 122373 View attachment 122375 View attachment 122377
I always hated when people do comparisons and never give their opinion on the matter, so I will be up front and say that I think the PA Micro is a better sight. They are both the same price, and in truth are both fine sights, but the PA has more features, and a better dot overall.
The Bushnell
The quality of the 3moa dot on this sight is very good. The dot is clear and I would say more circular than the PA sight. However, on its lowest setting (both are 1-11) the dot is invisible except in the lowest lighting. On 11 the dot is very clear, though it does not get as bright as the PA sight. The battery housing/selector on the bushnell is harder to turn and somewhat mushy in its engagement. Also note that it is at a 45 degree angle as opposed to the PA's 90.
Bushnell on lowest setting
Bushnell's Highest setting
On the Bushnell the angle of the LED emitter is at 6 o'clock, and sits lower in the housing than the PA sight. To me, the Bushnell wins in this department. It feels like it obstructs less of the view through the glass. The finish on the Bushnell is shinier than the PA and has a bright white logo on the side.
The biggest downside of the Bushnell to me was how the dot disappears on the top quarter of the lens. I tired to get a picture of this phenomenon but to no avail. I am not sure what is causing this to happen, but if the dot strays too high in the tube it will vanish completely. Definitely not something you want to happen, though you can train for it as I have done. Overall a good sight for the money, though I feel the PA is much better.
Primary Arms Micro
Both of these sights sport a 3moa dot, and as said previously the PA dot is not quite as circular as the Bushnell. at its lowest setting you can see that it is more of an off-set oval, though I do not find this as a hindrance in anyway. In both low light and sunny situations the PA sight is more effective as it has a broader output range.
Pa Lowest Setting
PA Highest Setting
Another pro of the PA is that it has a removable base as opposed to the Bushnell's fixed. This allows for broader applications on differing platforms. The front of the PA is also threaded allowing for instillation of a sunshade that can be bought separately. On both sights the windage and elevation screws have an o-ring to keep water out of them, and I would be willing to say that those parts are sourced from the same place. They are literally the exact same, so no comparison there. Same goes with the lens covers; both are the exact same.
The finish on the PA sight is more of a matte black, and the logo on it is small and inconspicuous as opposed to the Bushnell's in your face logo. As stated above the dial on the PA is easier to turn and has a positive click into each setting; much better than the Bushnell's mushy one.
One aspect of the PA sight that I do not love is the 7 0'clock position on the LED emitter. PA claims that is is for better co-witness on an Ar15. That may be true, but it protrudes more so than the Bushnell, and is somewhat distracting. Plus I do not use it on an Ar15 so I have no idea if the claims have any merit.
There you go guys. I hope this helps somebody in their decision. The PA sight is mush more sight for the money in my opinion. If somebody wants to donate a real Aimpoint or a Vortex I will be glad to do another comparison
View attachment 122361 View attachment 122363 View attachment 122365 View attachment 122367 View attachment 122369 View attachment 122371 View attachment 122373 View attachment 122375 View attachment 122377
Last edited by a moderator:
