I would like to question you guys in the know about what I think is a scope failure. The scene is this: I'm shooting a Blaser rifle (.300WM) with a Swaro AV 4-12X50 SR (rail mounted); shooting off a Caldwell Lead Sled rest. Things are going well through about 20 rounds, then I notice that I'm having trouble getting both the target and the reticle in focus despite ocular adjustment, in fact I cannot get anything sharply in focus except the reticle (a TDS). What could have gone wrong? It's going off to Swaro to be looked at, I just though someone might have experience or information on this.
Don

It puked, same thing happened with my Loopy. Mine was the erector assembly.

My buddy's Swaro suffered a broken reticle when we were trying to sight her in. It shot wonderfully accurate though. The reticle just vibrated at each shot.

It left his house on Monday and was on his Texas doorstep Wednesday. They picked up shipping both ways.

Does indeed sound like something to do with the erector assembly, or just the reticle cell.

JB

Thanks for the input. I think this scope failure may determine which rifle (NULA) I take on the upcoming hunt (sheep). It's probably a no brainer to most but I really like the packability of the Blaser takedown system. That NULA in .30-06 is shooting too good to leave home on the very hunt it was designed for!
Don

It is a well-known FACT according to certain optics experts on this and other forums,, that Swaro optics NEVER fail or break,so, you must be crosseyed from anticipation of your sheep hunt!

I have seen more "breaks"with Swaro optics than any other quality brand, but, the Z6 I just looked through was the finest scope in terms of optics I have ever seen. For best scope at a "workin'man's price", the Zeiss Conquests I have just bought are my pick; for tough, working scopes, LEUPY still owns my loyalty.

I just returned from the range, shooting, "Thumper", a P-64 H&H action fitted with a Classic-70 sts. bbl. cut to 20" and with Weaver steel Grandslams, Burris Zee rings, Recknagel irons and a Micky P-64 style stock. "Thumper" is to be my new packing rifle for Grizzly country and today, four consecutive groups of 300NP, WW brass, CCI 250 and 78.5-H-4350 went just under an inch, each.

This was with a Leupy 2.5C MHD which has been on my Merkel drilling in 12-12-9.3x74 and my Benelli Nova, shooting Brenneke slugs and 3.5"Turkey loads. After several years, this little scope is still rock-solid and I can use it with both eyes open.

"Thumper"is a NEAT little rig, built from salvaged parts and it will shoot, carry well and with this Leupy, it will be ideal for BC conditions, leupies don't seem to break much.

I don't remember anyone saying that Swaro's never break. I personally haven't broken one yet and I have more than a few, most on Magnum rifles. When one does I'll be complaining about it . I have broken a couple leupolds but I did have quite a few of them too. Anyone who thinks that they are invulnerable because of the brand of Scope they use is setting themselves up for dissappointment.
Anything can break, sorry that you had a problem. Let us know how Swaro service treats you.........................DJ

Me neither,either someones memory is failing them or their imagination is getting the best of them. I do own six av scopes and all have proven to be totally reliable despite use on high powered magnums,but I certainly would not be so naive as to post that it is not possible for a swarovski scope to fail.Any product by any manufacturer can certainly fail.Hopefully Swarovski will make things right with a timely repair or replacement.

I've often wondered if using the lead sled produces more stress on the rifle/optics. It just makes emperic sense to me that when the rifle recoils against a relatively fixed object like the sled it pays a penalty versus the rather "cushy" organic material (my shoulder) it would usually recoil against.
Don

Swaros are good... Er.. Make that great scopes and Bino's.... However, Every manufacture is gonna have the occasional lemon, even Swaro... So, to think that swaros are perfect is a strecth.. In this instance, Swaro's customer service is whats gonna stand out.. Everyone is gonna make the occasional pos scope.. Its how the manufacture handels the pos that makes the difference... I believe leupy makes more pos scopes than anyone.. However, they also make more scopes than anyone as well.. Its the percentage of scopes that makes the difference.. I believe that Swaro and Leupy both have a small percentage of scope failures compared with the amount of scopes they build..

That is entirely possible considering that after the rifle suddenly recoils backwards and compresses the recoil pad,it must suddenly deaccelerate against the lead sled.This might cause similar stresses to that produced by a high powered springer air rifle.These types of air rifles are well known to be extremely hard on rifle scopes due to the recoil force in both directions.I do know that I have seen wooden stocks cracked while being used with lead sleds.

Got a 4-12-50 that got fuzzy on 10-12. Sent it back to Swarvoski. They fixed it. Told me it would take about 8 weeks, Had it back in 5. Seem's their much more organized than Leupold.Who told me 10 Days, Got it back in 36 days.

I have never had any serious issues with swaro products, but on the minor ones swaro customer service was top notch. Just call them and let them know the problem! I am very sure they will be eager to help you.

I thought it obvious that I was being slightly facetious in view of the frequent "wars" that rage here where some advocate certain brands as being far superior under hunting conditions. Maybe my attempt at sly humour was a bit too subtle.

I would have to believe the Lead Sled had something to do with it, at least a contributing factor.

I have friends who insist on using them and I am not a fan of those things by any means but they like shooting the big boys but don�t take recoil very well. The Swaro should not have had an issue with the Lead Sled but it could have contributed and it is always better to learn of a problem while you are just shooting paper (on a hunting rifle) than when it counts. Personally, my Swaros have never had a problem but the sister company Kahles I killed one with 2 shots out of my 30-378�completely different designs but anything that is built by human hands can fail.

A few years ago I contacted Swarovski about a possible scope problem on a DGR. I had a hunt coming up using my 416 Rigby. Swarovski offered to overnight a loaner scope & stated this was available any where in North America. It wasn't the scope so I didn't need the special service. I was told one has only to ask. Upon return from the hunt you return both. Not a bad offer in my opinion.

I'd have to believe the same thing. It seems it couldn't help but put more stress on the scope/mounts.

tbear,
Thats what real optical companies have been doing for decades.
dave

its funny if you pay over a grand for a scope it should be tuff as nails, I hear all the time about swaros takeing a dump, in fact there has been more than one thread about it here, its kinda like people thinking mercedes, audi, and VW are great fine cars that are german enginerred and because they are a superior car that is why they cost so much, ever checked to see what those 3 car makes are rated at these days by consumer reports, pretty much bottom of the barrel for reliability, I think this is a case of that in scopes.

Don,

I had the exact same problem with my Swaro 4-12. I mounted it on my 300wsm, and it was doing great. I had to send the rifle back to the 'smith to increase the length of pull, and when I got it back and remounted the scope, it would not focus on 12x. I sent it back in and they sent it back about 3 weeks later. I don't know when mine go messed up, but I was shooting off of my lead-sled before I sent the rifle back in. I wonder if the 'sled is the culprit here.
Glenn

I have to ask... are you kidding?

I am another vote that the lead sled could have contributed.

I doubt the factory tests are done with lead sleds are anything that stops the recoil so abruptly.

And I also believe any brand of scope can puke.

Barsness, in his excellent book, says exactly that. All scopes will fail from recoil if shot enough. If they don't make it past the first 40-60 rds., they are defective from the factory. All brands occasionally have this problem. So, the first thing you want to do after mounting that new scope, or one freshly rebuilt, is to shoot it for 40-60 rds.
After that it's a matter of which style, fixed magnification scopes last far longer than variables, and size/weight vs. recoil. On really light rifles of the '06 class or sporters of the .300/.338 magnum class, you can expect the really big, heavy 50mm scopes to crap out at between 300-500 or, if you're lucky several hundred rds. But fail they will, sooner, maybe much sooner than the smaller, lighter variables; depending on a number of factors. E

Another set of lies and misinformation from E.

You can not generalize like this. It dependson how well the scope is made. How many USO scopes have you seen failing, for example?

ILya

[quote=koshkin]Another set of lies and misinformation from E.

Are you really surprised?

The only time I sent a scope back to Loopy it took exactly 7 days including shipping both ways...

-jeff

Really Koshkin ? And just what have you seen that contrdicts all this ? You are a great one for taking your scopes to a lab to determine some nit picking difference in optical clarity, but I've never seen you post anything about using scopes on extra light or extra hard kicking rifles. You don't even bother to post any eye relief test results. How about some test results of a practical nature ? You know, something useful for us to know as hunters. Or is it that you have so little experience hunting that the practical aspects of scope testing has escaped you ?
I cited the source of my information. I've seen big 50mm scopes go sour on hard kicking magnums. I've seen even the smaller variables go sour on hard kicking magnums. This first hand experience has matched Mr. Barsaness experiences perfectly. That's why I believe him. He is always posting stuff of a practical nature. Things like how to focus a scope. How to use the eye piece to remove some parallax. What do you need to see that buck at the last of the legal light, etc. All I see you post is nit picking, like one 6X resolves 20% better than another, w/o bothering to tell us what that means in a practical sense. E

Me too. Seven days. E

You are right about quality scopes. I guess the Svarovoski PH I have on my ported Rigby is ready for the junk heap despite no one that I know that has one has had a failure. Oh well, its in a book & no custom gun maker recommends them(really)so that's better than pratical experience. Mine has been abused to hell & back. I see quite a few in Africa on DGR. Poor misguided hunters.

You've got alot of guts to ask someone to post their personal experience, when in fact you have been asked many, many times to do the same and you ignore it. You've either got alot of guts, or just real stupid. Koshkin has proven you wrong (along with too many others to mention) numerous times.

I bought a 3-9 Swaro AV and shot it on a 7 mag off and on for two months before a November hunt.It SEEMED OK and initially passed the usual tests for holding zero through power changes. But when I got to Alberta I noticed it had shifted zero; I resighted and thought it was fine. Later discovered it would (get this)shoot fine if left at 6X over sandbags; but from hand supported positions it would hit much higher. (no, it was not me ,as later tests with a 4X Leup confirmed) It also shifted POI significantly when cranked to 9X.All problems with the rifle went away when I put a 4X leup on it.
The tec at Swaro put it on a machine and declared it fine; I asked did he put it on a rifle and shoot it! Bottom line was that something in the adjustments, and no doubt the erector lens assembly, was subtly shifting, and it stopped holding zero. They gave me a new one, which I promptly sold.I've learned in reading and conversations with industry people that the AV is not so hot mechanically. I will not own another.

IMO, in a scope intended for big game hunting, mechanical reliability trumps the subtle nuances of optical purity
every single time.High end variables that are untrustworthy suck; that's why I do not trust the advertising hype of these scope manufacturers.

I have a matched pair,,actually two pairs, of P-64 Mod. 70 rifles, each is within a few digits of the other's serial number, (by accident) and they wear Rimrock synthetic stocks, are .338 Win. Mags. and shoot 250NPs in WW brass withh CCI 250s and 76-RE-22. These have substantial recoil and, according to E, should have destroyed their pair of Leupy Vari-X III 3.5x10x50 scopes long ago, but, rifles AND scopes are like new.

I would think that BC hunting tests gear as harshly as anywhere and I have not had a problem with any of my variables, Zeiss, Leupold or B&L, except the 4000 Elite that I bent, so, my practical hunting experience does not support E's contention. My olny Leupold that ever went awry was my ancient M8-3x and they fixed it, no problem.

I will only comment on what I have witnessed or done as basing one's opinions on reading a book, or, an internet article is, IMO, a sure way to make serious errors. Each to his own, but, I disagree with much of what E posts on scopes AND I DO know how to focus them!

My comments were directed to the Swaro AV; I have owned (own) a ton of Leup variables, mostly 2-7 and 2.5-8, 1.5-5,1.75-6, etc. Never anything bigger. If I have to trust a variable on a hunt, it's a Leup, not because they are optically superior to others but because they are optically good enough for anything I do with a rifle, and they are pretty trustworthy.

I have owned ONE swaro AV; it broke in about 200 rounds. I have owned gawd knows how many Leup variables, and I remeber i think three that I broke. Any scope will wear down with time and recoil, and I shoot a lot of rounds, so my approach is to replace a variable after it's had a few hundred rounds through it, if it lasts that long. The effects of use are cumulative and if a scope mostly sits around,firing only a few shots between seasons, it'll last forever.

In any event,my experience has been that, AS A RULE a fixed will last through more actual use (shots) than a variable.This is really not tough to ubderstand because the things are more complex and fragile. Even the tec at Swaro said if you want a tough scope, get a fixed power.We'll never get consensus here because people's experience varies so much, ie where they hunt, what conditions,how many rounds you shoot each year.I always thought the worst places to evaluate a scope for ruggedness are Texas and Alabama deer blinds because (let's face it)the conditions are not that adverse, but bright optics matter; neither is much whitetail hunting anywhere in North America.

Toughest places I've seen are in Alaska either inland or the coast, the Rockies on horseback, or on foot, northern New England in November can be tough as well. Weight and portability matter as well; you could not run fast enough to give me a 4-14 scope on a mule deer or elk rifle where I've hunted; who wants to lug it, and since I've killed both critters (more than once)with 4X scopes past 400 yards, who cares about zooming scopes?

Believe me, I LIKE variables, just seems they don't REALLY solve many big-game shooting issues IME.

Sounds like you have been there & have the experience. Nothing like actual experience. How refreshing & not quoting from others & a book.

One of the problems in evaluating optics is that many people tend to group ALL products by a certain company together. Very often there are big differences in certain products by the same company.

I have had three Swarovski AV's fail on me during hunting trips over the years, all zeroing problems. The PH's, however, are mechanically different and apparently much tougher. I say apparently because I've never had one fail, and have rarely heard of them failing.

JB

So right, and often funny: Some years ago an elderly reader sent me a long letter, stating that he can not and will not recommended Zeiss scopes any more because two of it fogged on him during hunting trips to Alaska and Africa.

Very politely I asked "what modell?" and he replied "I have no idea, I got it from my Papa."

His Papa passed away in 1946, I figured out.........

Eremicus, since you only listen to John, please re-read his post below.

Properly built scopes hold up just fine. You can not generalize based on brand, size, etc.

ILya

Come to think of it, I've had a Leupy fail also on a Weatherby .270, which was why I started down the Swaro road to start with. Also, I had the devil of a time with moisture leaking into my Swaro binocs also, now I have Leica. Everything under the sun can fail, that's why one should always have plan B. Another way of saying that is Mr. Murphy is always just around the corner (I think that might have military origins?)....In medicine we say,"there's a snake under every rock". I didn't mean to spark a range war, just kinda curious what folks in the know felt about the sled, as I've been using it since the C5-6 herniation.
Don