Swfa 1-4x24 classic with Illuminated reticle or SWFA 6x42 Milquad
I have used the 10x42 Milquad and liked it in the fields but hard to see reticle in the woods. Like the fact I can use the windshield or dial if I want. Is the 6x42 with the same MQ reticle easier to see in the woods than the 10x42 Mq ?
Also been giving a lot of thought to the 1-4x24 Classic with Illuminated reticle as that would seem to solve the issue to of being hard to see in the woods. BUT it is a variable and not as tough as a fixed power. I have seen some that tape the scope so the the power cant be changed but it is still a variable with more parts .
So Mixed terrain hunting anywhere from say 25 yards in the woods to 400 in the fields.
Most of the time I hunt the fields but occasionally hunt in the woods so I dont know if the the trade off from the fixed 6x42 MQ durability to the Illuminated reticle of the variable is 1-4x24 is the way to go ?
for me, the 1-4 would be all I need for 25-400. The 6x MQ just loses the reticle in lower light in woods/brush. YMMV
Nut
Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Its all right to be white!! Stupidity left unattended will run rampant Don't argue with stupid people, They will drag you down to their level and then win by experience
I was just curious what you were mounting it on. I think the real difference is whether you think the reticle will be hard to see. If yes, I'd go with the 1-4. Otherwise I,d go straight 6x.
Good luck either way.
Bob Enjoy life now -- it has an expiration date. ~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
I am in the same quandary as bcraig, and this is largely the thing I am concerned with. Low light performance is critical to me, and will likely be to bcraig also. Both are great scopes, no doubt, but what are the differences? The 1-4 is illuminated, sure, but is the light gathering ability there to make it useful? Does the 6x gather enough light to make illumination during shooting hours a non-issue? Or do both have issues in low light?
I don't know about bcraig, but I hunt meat, and do not take shots at running game, so 1x is not really a big deal. But the scope has to perform from 15-400 yards in bad weather and less than optimal light. Durability is a concern for me as well, much like bcraig, but neither scope is known to be weak in that area. So the evolving question seems to be, which scope is better for the conditions bcraig put forth, taking into account the lighting and weather conditions that will be present?
I am in the same quandary as bcraig, and this is largely the thing I am concerned with. Low light performance is critical to me, and will likely be to bcraig also. Both are great scopes, no doubt, but what are the differences? The 1-4 is illuminated, sure, but is the light gathering ability there to make it useful? Does the 6x gather enough light to make illumination during shooting hours a non-issue? Or do both have issues in low light?
I don't know about bcraig, but I hunt meat, and do not take shots at running game, so 1x is not really a big deal. But the scope has to perform from 15-400 yards in bad weather and less than optimal light. Durability is a concern for me as well, much like bcraig, but neither scope is known to be weak in that area. So the evolving question seems to be, which scope is better for the conditions bcraig put forth, taking into account the lighting and weather conditions that will be present?
100 percent with you on the performance thing. I am a little concerned about the fine reticle in low-light.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
I have no issues using the 6X's reticle in low-light. As long as I'm using the crosshair in the middle, and not the hash marks indicating the mils and half-mils. The hash marks disappear for me pretty quick but I can dial and use the middle right up to sunset.
Whatever that's worth...
Travis
Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
My thinking is the idea of a light rifle is not to carry extra weight.I would use a VX3 1-5 that weighs 9 oz. with a Boone& Crockett or LR Reticle.A rifle with a heavier barrel for shooting longer ranges would be fine for a heavier scope.JMHO ,Huntz
Its all right to be white!! Stupidity left unattended will run rampant Don't argue with stupid people, They will drag you down to their level and then win by experience
I have no issues using the 6X's reticle in low-light. As long as I'm using the crosshair in the middle, and not the hash marks indicating the mils and half-mils. The hash marks disappear for me pretty quick but I can dial and use the middle right up to sunset.
Whatever that's worth...
Travis
I had no trouble using the 10x42 Milquad in the fields just in the woods.
Do you find the 6x42 Milquad reticle difficult to find in the woods when it is either early in the morning or when the light is low in the woods ?
![[Linked Image]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-DY4EaScGNw0/VkAlOSncLKI/AAAAAAAAHPQ/h-Bwo7sGSZA/s800-Ic42/SS1-4x24_SFP%25255B1%25255D.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://farm1.staticflickr.com/773/21299517802_017a59b278_k.jpg)
