Originally Posted by 4th_point
Can you expand on the "optical system" comment? Which models?

And what is better for the price?

Thanks,

Jason


What's better for the price depends upon what one focuses on. As I said, I have the 10x SS. The primary complaint is that optical system is very difficult to get behind. Particularly, there's a shadow that floats around the view no matter where one places one's eye (verified by several others looking through the scope). It reminds me a bit of a Tasco Varmint scope I have when I turn it up to 10x. The scope has been returned to SWFA for eval, and returned to me with neither comment nor adjustment; this is just how they are, it seems. This is certainly not the worst thing in the world, it just doesn't belong on a $300 scope manufactured any time in the past 10 - 20 years.

Thus, in terms of the optical system, the following scopes I have or had, which cost me the same or less money, are better:
Redfield Battlezone,
Leupold VX-2,
3 Nikons (a Buckmasters from ~5 years ago, and 2 Monarchs that are older than that),
Simmons Whitetail Classic (close; this one has fishbowl effect pretty significantly).

And, of course, my Weaver Tactical and Leupy VX-3 Long Range are significantly better scopes. They cost more, though.

In a 3-15, I'd take another Weaver Tactical over the new SWFA of the same magnification and extremely similar specs.

I don't know how many baby seals I could club to death with any of the above scopes; I haven't done any of that sort of thing in recent memory. wink I suspect that, given the rough service I subject at least some of my rifles to (in the field, in vehicles, in precision rifle matches, etc.), I'll be able to tell you in several years whether anything has failed. The SWFA will not fail, I am sure, mainly because it sits in the closet rather than on a rifle.