Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Opinions on Swarovski Z3 3-9x36.

I can get the 3-9x36 Swarovski Z3 for super low price right now.

What is the consensus regarding the quality and functionality of this scope?

Would it be an upgrade over my 3-9x40 Conquest?

The price is really great and it has me thinking.

Any help will be appreciated.

A steal of a deal on something like that is not something to pass up, even if you already have a conquest.

From what i've read, yes the z3 will beat out the conquest. What i've read entails that sworo puts their best glass in all their scopes and zeiss like so many others has different levels of glass, conquest being their lower end.

Buy that sucker quick.

Not to cause a fuss.....but they are not for me.JMHO and YMMV.

Whats up with them Bob? I've been curious myself if they are worth swapping the 2.5-8 out to the Swaro 3-9X36.

@bobin, Any reasoning behind this to help him decide on his purchase? For assistance and interests sake, his assistance and my interests... no fuss.

I have one and really like it. It is mounted on a lightweight mountain rifle (Sako 85 Finnlight) and it is the perfect size for the rifle. It went through a couple rainy days last season without missing a hitch. I shot a doe using it at 100 yards @4x on a dark, dreary morning and the sight picture was excellent. I bought a second one (got a great price) and I don't even have a rifle to put it on (yet).

I'm jaundiced...The details are sort of excritiating.It's predecessor, the AV,failed invidiously,sort of gradually,on me(I could not figure out what was going on as I made the mistake of buying the scope a month or so before the hunt,and failed to get more than 60-70 rounds under it before taking off.)

Forget the "whys"...it would not hold zero through power changes;it hit higher from field positions than off the bags(no, it was not me or the rifle),it would not stay zeroed from Boston to Alberta....it caused me to miss a chip shot in Alberta.....

I saw the symptoms in Manning, Alberta,but just did not recognize them until I got home when I could test more thoroughly...after watching all sorts of wierd behaviour, I replaced it with a 4X Leupold....all the problems disappeared.

It was replaced by Swaro; I sold the scope without opening the box.I am told by folks I trust the guts are no different on the Z3.They are too expensive to chance it again.

I am not the only one who had a problem.Others can relate if they wish.Some have had no problems with them. I won't own another.I'd much rather hunt with a 4X Leupold.

The ergo's are very nice on the Z3;the optics are good but not as good as a Summit to my eyes.I'm not going to spend $500-$900 to find out if the Z3 is better than an AV.I'll save longer and get a S&B;hopefully it won't break in under 100 rounds,like the AV did.

thanks bobin.

well if you dont like it, it sounds like its such a good deal that you could make a profit off of selling it. lol

Thanks Bob, your opinion carries a lot of weight with me.

I'm still thinking about it since the price of ~$600 brand new seems to be pretty decent.

Also looking at the Minox Z-5 3-15x42 with the German #4 from Doug for $380 or the Minox 2-10x40 with the Mino-Plex for $350.

i hear more and more great things about minox all the time. I personally have a pair of 8x56 minox binos that i love. Minox would not be a bad choice for a scope but i don't know if it would replace the conquest.

for scopes under 200 bucks i suggest nikon

for scopes 300-400 bucks i suggest minox and meopta

for scopes higher up it depends on what you want.

and on a personal prefference level i would take the #4 over a plex reticle any day. easier to pick up the crosshairs at night.

I have the Swaro AV. I've recently battled the mysterious POI shift as BobinNH explained. It is fixed good as new from Swaro, but I'm going to sell it and get something else, maybe the Summit people rave about. IMO, the Zeiss Conquest is the best bang for the buck variable on the market at $399. I don't feel there's anything as good or better in that price range.

i would love to see it side by side with the minox. I don't expect the minox to beat it out but an interesting comparison none the less.

Here's exactly what you're looking for. Koshkin comparo

I have one with a 4A on my M70 06' and thus far am very happy with it. A nice, bright,light trim package and so far has tracked perfectly. The zeiss is a nice scope to be sure, but I'd pick the swaro.

I have the 3-10x42 AV; same internals as the Z3 I believe. It's been a great scope for me. It was on my .325 Montana with no issues.

I'll believe that Swaro is continuing to sell a defective product when I see it. Maybe e they had some issues early on; I dunno. It's would be unimaginable to me that they'd keep selling a scope that wouldn't hold zero!

At any rate, mine does. It'll be going on my Montana again when I get it back from the New Barrel Store <g>.

It'll be a size & weight upgrade over your Conquest. Optically it'll have a bit more resolution but less contrast. I wouldn't expect it to be brighter, given the objective size difference. My 3-10x42 is slightly brighter than my 3-9 Conquests but not enough, I don't think, to matter in the field. Both are very good.

nsaquam I hate these conversations because I am no optics expert, just a user,and lots of other people on here have had good experiences with them; so I don't like to say good or bad about anything....all I can do is relate what happened to me....and note in passing that I am more hung up on mechanical reliability in a scope than finer shades of optics.

So when something like that happens I am not the most forgiving guy in the world. I tend not to give things a second chance so to speak...

I liked my Z3 3-9x36 so much I traded it for a 3.5-10x Leupold. I'll not run another Swaro.

I have its predecessor, got it in a trade 15 years ago. It is superb, with low light performance better than it should be. The ocular lens is a bit bulky, but no issues otherwise.

perfect. thanks nsaqam.