What SWFA do you have and why?
Soooo, say I might have found a way to get a SWFA fixed power scope to my country (legit) but can’t decide wich One to pick, what are your personal suggestions?
I am thinking of the 10x because it will be used for hunting and that should be enough right:
http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-10×42-Tactical-Riflescope-P53712.aspx
But maybe I should get two while I am at it? A 16x as well perhaps? Or maybe a 20x
The thing is I want a simple lightweight hunting scope for my Cricket compact -> 10x. But I might get a .25 later that can Hunt at longer distances so getting a 16x or 20x for future purposes might be Nice, they are not as lightweight though.
All Replies
Cricket, I’m using med mounts, I’ve had them so long I don’t remember who’s they were. I don’t use my cheek piece, I can load mags faster without it.
I bought the Delta Optical Titanium 4,5-14×44 FFP and it too had a very thick reticle, so thick you could use it at 4,5x. I didn’t really like it that much so I sold it two days ago
Brian, as you know I’m a pretty big SWFA fan as well and your absolutely right on the 3-15×42 FFP SWFA SS reticle being too thick at high magnification. I use this scope a lot and do like it quite well for hunting. But what you have not seen yet in any of my videos is my 3-15×42 SFP SWFA SS. I actually like this scope much better than my FFP for my applications. The subtensions are smaller and reticle is a little different. It’s much more suitable for long range precision shooting than the FFP. Check it out if you have not yet… :8:
Because that is about what I have to pay for One 12×42 scope with accessorie
YES it sure is IMHO
Nice. What scope mounts are you rocking on your cricket Zonkers? Are you using the Cheek piece with it?
[quote=”Cricket”]is it worth $500?
Because that is about what I have to pay for One 12×42 scope with accessorie
YES it sure is IMHO
Sweet, thanks
It’s very thin for a field scope. I also own the 3-15X42 FFP SWFA SS. The glass is a little nicer but I never use the scope above 12X because the reticle is too thick at 15X. The fixed power scopes is about perfect.
Right, sorry. I will order them anyways. I just want a Nice simple scope without any fuss and a great reticle. Fits the bill!
How thick is the reticle? (Or thin)
I have a 4,5-30×50 for paper punch
My post was for Steel, I know you want a hunting scope. My experience is a hunting scope is a compromise if your goal is 10x targets. I have zero interest in punching paper holes.
Purposes: hunting
I have a 4,5-30×50 for paper punch
Notice in my post I never mentioned target shooting. If you are a paper puncher I would look for a different scope. A fine duplex is the best option for target shooting. There is no need for a milquad when shooting at preset ranges
is it worth $500?
Because that is about what I have to pay for One 12×42 scope with accessories
Keyser, can you please tell us more why you would not recommend the 20x SWFA?
Yes:
20X
FOV @ 100 m = 1.6 Meters
12X
FOV @ 100 M = 3.2 meters
It can be very difficult to find small critters in your scope with a limited FOV.
You also lose a lot of holdover, remember the reticle stays the same size so because of the increase magnification you lose some holdover at the bottom end. For field work anything more than 16x causes too much mirage.
according to the SWFA site, the FOV at 100m for the 20X is 1.9meters.
I think that is enough view for long range target shooting…in my case, yes, 100meters, where I used a standard A4 print paper for targets.
It’s easier for me to raise my hand off the stock to adjust the parallax on the side rather than moving my hand to the rear of the scope trying to adjust the parallax. It just makes it faster for me
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
you all seem to have me at a disadvantage here. I bought the SWFA 16x (with MRad reticle). In retrospect, I’d have bought either the 10x or the 12x. But I can easily live with this scope. I had it on my R3M, but my Short inherited it when I sold the Eddy. I’d watched a few You Tube reviews on the brand, and came across this video by TiborsaurusRex: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRpBxLbxhAo The opinions he provided helped me decide on the brand. I happen to need the extra magnification to aid my eyes. I’m primarily a paper-puncher, and I find 16 very useful for my eyes at 25 yards when I’m trying to hit circles that are about 0.35 in diameter. The glass is clear, and I really like the reticle. The weight wasn’t so bad, and doesn’t make the Short feel top-heavy, and the price is right in my budget. The scope is reputed to be quite rugged, and track well (box test?). It’s not springer rated, iirc. Advantage: older eyes!
Darryl
PS Tibor has a bunch of videos out on long-range shooting, and has reviewed quite a few scopes. He also has a video on the SWFA story. Interesting guy.