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 ?

Only own the 6x MQ - heard great things about the Ill.

I don't believe there's a wrong answer between the 2.

I'd not concern myself about this particular variable's toughness - Stick ain't killed one yet and he don't baby chit.

I'd prob end up still 6x for me.

The 6x reticle is bolder than the 10x I had. At the price they are asking, get both.

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

Craig,

What are you mounting it on?

BOB ,It would be going on a Tikka T3 Super Lite 270 Winchester.
Why ?

I think it will be top heavy.

Why?

SS 1-4x is what, 14oz? How is that going to be top heavy?

Not concerned with top heaviness !LOL

Just the performance of the scopes ,preferably from those who have used both scopes.

Craig,

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.

Neither is going to be top heavy on the tikka. I run the 3x9 and it has never been an issue.

How bad is the 6x42 in fading light?

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.

Craig,

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

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

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 ?

Thanks

I'm afraid I can't answer that.

I am only interested in the Swfa scopes.
Which is why I worded the post as I did.

I already have a Leupold Variable on the rifle(Leupold VX-1 3-9x40 which weighs less than 12 ounces )
The scope you mentioned weighs 14 ounces according to the website and has a small exit pupil.
I am not interested in this scope or any Variable that Leupold makes .

I am looking for the toughness of the SWFA scope and the windshield and ability to dial.

The rifle weighs less than 7 pounds scoped and loaded so the extra weight is not a huge issue.

I Understand !!

Thanks

I'd look at the 3-9 ss too...

Bb

I have the 3-9 SS on a semi .308 for longer distance shooting. It is a pretty heavy and fairly sizable scope, and might add more heft than needed on a Tikka SL. It is also more money than the 6xMQ or the 1-4 Classic. I think bcraig and I are both on the right track in looking into the two scopes mentioned in his post, we are simply having a hard time getting hard data on the differences between the two as per low light use. My opinion only, bcraig's may vary. For my own use, the 3-9 is more weight than I care to add to a Hawkeye that weighs 7lbs right out of the box with just the rings, no sling, no scope, no ammo.

Same old schit...in that noone shoots anything other than their mouths.

The "data" you seek,is anything but "difficult" to procure. Hint.

Flogged on more than a few,these last few days. Illuminatis,6x MQ Fixed fhuqkers,6x MD Fixed Fhuqkers,10x MQ Fixed Fhuqkers,10x MD Fuxed Fhuqkers,etc,etc,I've got 'em all,along with Reupold 6x42's in all reticles,1" 3.5-10x's and 30mm M1 and M3's. Hint.



Cleaning the last of it up,this morning.



12yds 6x MQ Fixed Fhuqker in poor light,against some vegetation. I'd be curious to know,just who could fhuqk this up?!?



Illuminati at same distance.



Couldn't get my 1D3/17-40 nestled,to shoot good pics,so made do.

The 6x MQ Fixed Fhuqker is THE Utility Glass and I've a hunch that I've prolly had more than a bunch of them in heavy cover,waning ambient light,tough weather and likely some topography too. Hint.

6x42 exit pupil,trumps 10x42 exit pupil and 1-4x 24mm exit pupil. Hint.

Stock fit and trigger time are going to toss the greatest favors and when it's plum fhuqking dark,Illumination obviously STEALS the fhuqking Show.



KHorn Illuminati Porn,from yesterday.



Go 6x MQ for supreme Utility.

Now The Drooling Dumbfhuqks can weigh in with what they've "read about" and "heard about",as "Trump Cards".

Laffin'!..................

It would be really great if someone that has one, could post a good pic of the reticle in dusk conditions. I think that a 6x42 will be my next scope, but I would sure like some more assurance on the reticle thing. Boxer-you're on buddy!

Can you please post the same pictures at 100-120 yards in nearly the same conditions?

For a lousy $300 bucks i think everyone should buy a 6X MQ and find out this stuff for themselves....

Good call Bob! BTW, Black Friday is almost upon us....and if I may, <hint>

300 bucks is not chump change. I probably will buy one, but I am not going to throw $300 away just to find out. Homey don't play dat!

AK you want one?

I'm not dumping on $300 bucks....sure its some dough. OTOH there's just some things people can't explain for us and we have to find out for ourselves by shooting.

I was curious enough to order one for myself. Be some fun finding out.

Bob,

I'll probably order a 3-9 for my Tikka .223 and a 6x for a yet-to-be-bought 17 HRM.

But I'll guarantee you I'll have that 17 HRM ready before the first whistle pig pokes its nose out come spring!

They generally sell them at their Black Friday sale for $250. Most any time during the rest of the year that you find you do not like the scope, you can resell it here for that much or more. No risk involved.

Better read this again.You could dial this into the next county.

Actual Magnification:
1.60 x / 4.50 x
Linear Field of View (ft/100 yd):
68.00 ft / 23.80 ft
Linear Field of View (m/100 m):
22.70 m / 7.90 m
Eye Relief (in):
4.40 in / 3.70 in
Eye Relief (mm):
112.00 mm / 94.00 mm
Weight (oz):
9.30 oz
Weight (g):
264.00 g
Objective Clear Aperture (in):
0.80 in
Objective Clear Aperture (mm):
20.00 mm
Elevation Adjustment Range:
117.00 moa
Windage Adjustment Range:
117.00 moa

Like DakotaDeer just said, wait for the sale, try it, if you don't like it, resell it for just a touch under what you paid for it. $20-50 experiment and you can see it with your own eyes.

Thanks ,But again i am looking for a tough scope that I can dial or use the windshield.

This scope will only have an exit pupil of 4.4 when set to 4.5 its highest power.

This scope is not designed for dialing nor does it have the windshield of the SWFA.
Nor do Leupolds have the reputation of toughness of the SWFA

Its not the scope I want.

As long you don't mount the scope you're only out the return shipping if you don't like something from SWFA. Buy both, fondle them, then send the one you like least back.

Returns at SWFA

Regarding the MQ, it's like an upside down #4. It's not hard to find the middle on the 6x. Boxer's pic shows it well but it's understandable if you've got nothing to compare to.

And the outer portions are thicker and easier to see than the 3-9x on 3x or 4x.

No 1-4x in the house but I've had the 6x, 10x, 20x, 3-9x, 3-15x. Tough to beat Boxer's recc on the 6x for utility and 10x for play.

I'm out of work for the next 6+ months because of a shattered ankle. So I'm not spending any money that I don't have to. So forgive me if I ask a few questions.

taylor was not dumping on you for asking anything. I was making a joke.

I didn't really think you were dumping on me in particular, and if they are on sale I'll buy one on black Friday. The rifle I'm probably going to put it on will be more of a plains rifle anyway kind like the terrain flave posted.

Anyway wanted to let you know no offense was taken.

True.

Wish Id known about the sale. Could have saved the money...


Oh well.Ordered mine a week ago.Not here yet! Rifle is waiting.

That's what asking questions gets you. I believe I'll wait...

I feel the previous poster's pain with the money pinch. Not long ago, I fed my family for three years solid on what we grew in the garden and what my rifle brought in. Took all our money to pay the mortgage and other bills only money can pay. The grocery bill was where we could cut. Nobody went hungry, though.

Mine showed up today. An hour later it was mounted on a new 7 Rem Mag. I grabbed what I had loaded,70 RL25-150 BT,and ran to the range.

I bore sighted at 50 yards and adjusted to hit a 1/2" dot at 50.Took 3 shots and tracking was perfect.

Ran right out to 600 yards and used the reticle (3 mils) and fired a 6" 3 shot group,about 10" low.Next group was fired with the reticle holding for 3.5 mils.

Two shots scared the 6" orange dot about 3" apart, third out high/left but it was getting dark by then,and the half mil hash mark was tough to see.Had I dialed, the center of the reticle was much easier to see.

Nine shots total from finding a zero to "deer killing" groups at 600 yards...keep in mind,I have no frigging clue what I am doing with the scope


BTW, I stayed at the 200 yard line looking back to 600 yds. until after dark.Our 600 yard line is like deer country cut lines.(It IS a deer country cut line; saw two there last night)

You could not use the hash marks past a certain point,but the reticle stayed visible until almost 5 PM,and it was dark here and solid overcast. Anything that stepped out would have been in trouble.To my eye the optics are at least as good as any VX 2 or 3 I've owned.

Seems the scope works like Stick and others say it does.

Now I have to learn to dial but this scope seems very user friendly. I was pretty impressed for the money involved.

Bob,

Thanks for the report. You sure didn't waste any time! 😎

You guys didn't think Larry was lying did ya ?

Bob: Figured I'd just get right to it. I gotta shoot to learn!

RD: Nope!

Biggest downside is the zero stop will run you around 36 cents. But hey, it can't all be good.

Pretty much the same way both my 6x's, my 3-9x42 and my 3-15x42 have been for me - stupid easy! The 3-9x42 has a slightly fatter, easier to see reticle.

David

David "stupid easy" is a good description.

It was nice to see bullet holes move predictably in line with adjustments.I knew the rifle was "good" so no groups at intermediate distances were fired in advance,and I was done with 3 shots at the 50 yard line.

(BTW, I have never taken a scope from 50 yards straight to 600 with any confidence,but this thing made it easy to do).

Another thing that's nice is that the reticle is in sync with the adjustments. Larry told me that with a 162 Amax at 3050 fps (7 rem Mag),the reticle ALONE will get you to over 1200 yards.....without touching the turret.I can see that now. I'll never tap the full potential of this scope.

With a good rifle and this scope,you could blow a 400 yard shot at a bull elk; but if you do it's your own fault!

Thanks Bob, like I said to I'll probably buy one soon. What rings and bases did you use to mount it? I have a .243 I think I want to mount it on.

Thanks, Bob. I think that was what some here wanted to hear.

Taylor I used Leupold DD bases with the 30mm medium Leupold rings. The scope has plenty of tube length (mounting space) to easily span a M70 action,and there is plenty of bolt handle clearance. You can also move the scope back and forth enough to catch your eye relief.

A common BlackFriday offering has been a Fixed SS with a set of Picatinny rings, with your choice of height, and a bubble level all for the $250 or $260. The rings are hefty but workable, aluminum and just about the same as the Burris XTRs. The lows, since they are 30MM are .25" high... If you buy either of the SWFA scopes mentioned here at discount and wish to later get rid of it, I'll take 'em from you. It's a heck of a deal and hoping they'll do the same this year...

Bob, Did you need the mediums or would lows work? Plan on a set of those on a rem 700 with a #2 contour and curious about height. Thank you

30338: To tell the truth the "lows" looked real low to me,more like 1" Extra Low" and shaved real this on the bottom. I am not all that familiar with the 30mm rings.

So I never even opened the package on the lows and just went to the mediums,which to me looked like 1" "lows".

The lows are sitting on my bench unopened.

Is that confusing enough?

But it worked out well as I found the mediums to work pretty much perfectly. The scope is real easy to get behind.

Which thread was it that discussed putting the zero stop on the 6x42? I forgot to copy it.

I did just that buddy!

I may stick with buying another of the 1-4. Most deer Are shot under 100 yards and some are shot at 20-29 minutes after sunset. I really want to try the fixed 6 or 3-9 but the reticle may be a bust for me. Curious about the comment that the 3-9 reticle is "thicker". That is tempting.

The little 1-4 is amazing for the money.

SWFA SS 6x on a Tikka SL. Yeaterday.






SWFA SS 1-4x Classic on a work gun.







It always makes me chuckle to see personally purchased $300 SWFA 1-4's on high end military guns instead of the multiple $2k optics that are issued.... However, for general hunting the 6x SS is the way to go. There are no issues with seeing the crosshairs in any legal light.

thanks

What is wrong with the little 1-4 for general hunting?

For the application you described, Swfa 1-4x24 classic with Illuminated reticle

Nothing if it fits your needs. My general big game hunting does not require multiple shots on multiple targets at muzzle to 50m, and therefore the 1x is not needed. It would live on 4x on a bolt gun and I find the 6x SS to be superior for general hunting which for me 90% of shots are from 25-600 yards and the 6x or 3-9x is superior for that use. If I absolutely required illumination then it may be different, however the 6x and 3-9x SSs take one we'll past legal light.

The 3-9 reticle is thicker. SWFA used to have the specs on their site so you could compare. The 6x specs are there, but the 3-9 aren't there right now (that I can find). Regardless, the 3-9 reticle is thicker, compared 6x to 6x and of course as you turn the magnification up the reticle gets thicker. I like the 3-9x42 reticle better.

David

David, someone posted that the 3-9's lower powers were not usable or not as usable for some reason, the 3-9 if you could get a good 4X view would be fine for my uses. What do you think?

FormD I shot a doe last week at 20-25 feet, I would not hunt with it on 1X it would stay on 3 or 4X all the time. I have a 6X Meopta, a bright scope with a #4, not totally warming up to 6X for some reason.

I'm buying a 1-4X on African Friday.





Travis

Jimmy,

That was probably my post about the lower magnifications. At 3x the scope has tunnel vision, there's really no point in turning it lower than 4x. 4-5x the reticle is thin. Personally I have no problem using a fixed 6 at close ranges on moving game, so I don't see the need to go below 6x. For me it's a 6-9x scope.

David

I like the 6X the more I use it. Only had 3 rounds of 7 mag ammo left but at 300 yards with the 6X the rifle shot a group of about 1.5". It's easy to be precise with that MQ reticle,and even at 600 yards there's enough precision.

A couple of deer moved out into the range so I counted coup on them at 200 yards. Obviously not a problem. I've been impressed with the optics. The scope is brighter and sharper, easier to focus than my 2.5-8X Leupold with nice resolution. I ma frankly surprised at the optics for the money involved.

Loaded up some 162 Amax for the rifle and will start to run turrets. Based on what I've seen so far, I know what to expect. Not sure I will get a 3-9 since so far the 6X does all I need from it.

truth I may just get the fixed 6X MQ, but the 1-4 is just a phenom for the money, maybe both...

We can hunt 30 minutes before and 30 minutes after sunset.
The 6x42 will be easy to see the reticle in the woods under these conditions? ?
If so sign me up !!

Thanks

I'm in my late 40's and my eyesight isn't what it used to be. I find the 6x reticle a little lacking in those conditions. Not unusable, just not "easy"...

David

which is why the 1-4 illuminated makes good sense to me.

I know what you mean,I am 55

The 3-9x does tunnel a bit from 3-4x,from 4x it works perfectly. I never noticed it until someone mentioned it last year.



bcraig,

I don't know what "easy" to see is, either I can see the reticle intersection and kill or I cannot. I have never seen a deer that was legal to kill and not been able to place the reticle on it. I do not hunt over food plots or out of tree stands. Everything is spot and stalk or still hunting through timber. I watched a stud of a buck to well past legal light this afternoon against a brown thicket at just over 200 yards and could have killed him up to about 40-45 minutes past legal light (30mins before and after sunrise/sunset).


Don't over think it. Buy one and sell it if you don't like it. Or send me your address and I'll send you a 3-9x SS to beat on for a while.

I don't see any 3-9's on the web site. Have they discontinued them in favor of the 3-15?

No, the 3-9 is listed under the HD priced @ $599.95.


Here you go:

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-HD-3-9x42-Tactical-30mm-Riflescope-P50716.aspx

SD

How old are you?

That's NOT an experience question - It's an old eyes question. Until I hit 42 or 43 being able to see something was pretty much a black or white issue for me too. Now, not so much.

David

The point was that one will not know unless they hunt with it.

Thanks for the information and thanks for the offer to send me your scope to try,a very nice gesture that I appreciate.

I guess for $299.00 I will try one. I really like the 1-4 and trust it more than a 1-6VX6 I currently own.