The difference in consistent dialing scopes is basically tougher springs, and far fewer plastic or soft-metal parts in the turrets, erector tube, etc. Which is why effective dialing scopes typically weigh a lot more than typical "hunting" scopes: They're beefed up in the right areas.
That said, one reason the SWFA scopes are so reliable yet cost relatively little is they're sold directly to buyers on the Internet, rather than through the typical layers of wholesalers/distributors/retailers. Each of those layers needs to make a profit, so adds to the price to consumers. Plus, SWFA offers a number of fixed-power scopes, which can be made for less money than variables. Not nearly as many scope companies offer fixed scopes anymore.
It's my experience that more typical 1" hunting scopes are failing to retain zero these days, for a couple of reasons. First, there's increased competition in the marketplace. More of today's shooters own far more rifles that they used to in the decades after WWII, when scopes started becoming common on rifles. Back then most hunters had one big game rifle and, maybe a varmint rifle. Nowadays it's common for some hunters (especially the ones who frequent the Campfire) to own several rifles, and maybe several dozen. I've even seen posts where guys essentially brag about only having 4-5 rifles.
Most people think every rifle needs a scope these days, so they also buy more scopes. Many of these shooters spendd the same time shooting all of their many rifles that our grandfathers might have spent shooting 2 rifles, so many of their multiple rifles don't get shot all that much. This isn't because we don't want to shoot more, but many of us can't. Today about 85% of Americans live in urban areas, where just getting to a shooting range takes considerable effort.
Plus, we're often using smaller cartridges than our grandfathers used. Instead of one all-around .30-06, we have rifles for cartridges from, say, the .223 Remington to the 7mm-08, with maybe one .300 magnum. There's a big difference in recoil's effect on a scope between those smaller rounds and a .300 magnum, or even a .30-06 or 7mm magnum. Often we have these because another modern American trend is spending more time fiddling with our outdoor gear (including dreaming about buying more) than actually going out and using it, because of where we live.
Consequently, most scope manufacturers (or importers, which is far more often the case these days, when most optics companies order scopes instead of building them) know the vast majority of their scopes will go on relatively mild-recoiling rifles that won't shot all that much. This is why most claim even sub-$100 scopes are "recoil and shock proof." On the average deer rifle, shot a few times a year, they probably are--and even if they fail, so what? Replacing 3-5% of their scopes is cheaper than building truly recoil-proof scopes--and with so many optics companies out there today, price is a big competitive point. This also applies to "dialing scopes," because most shooters aren't going to dial them much.
Because most shooters don't really shoot much, especially hunters, they don't have much trouble with these scopes. But those who do shoot a lot have more scopes fail, especially on rifles that kick more than a .223, .243 or 7-08, particularly if they dial them a lot.
Right now I've had 17 different brands of scopes fail mechanically on rifles, some on relatively mild kickers. That's brands, not scopes; some brands have failed multiple times. This has happened far more in the past 20 years than before then.
