Originally Posted by JGRaider
Originally Posted by screaminweasil
Originally Posted by JGRaider
While I appreciate the virtues of the SWFA's, and all the man-love going on around here for them, in my side by side comparisons the LRHS runs circles around the SWFA in every conceivable way (except for $$$ and weight), although I do prefer the MQ reticle. I'd spend the extra $$$ for the LRTS Doug has on sale every time.



It's nice to have options and I'm looking forward to comparing the 3 LRTS 3-12 models I have more directly with the SWFA HD 3-9.

Are you talking specifically about the 3-12 LRTS to the 3-9 HD SWFA? If so, how old is your SWFA?

You were one who sung praises about the Tract Toric, while I thought it was rubbish..............

Several people told me the Tract Toric, even the mid grade Tekoa was "better" in all regards to a Meopta Meopro................no way in Hell.......not to my eyes.

Doesn't matter, but it's evident some of us clearly have very different eyeballs and preferences.

It also helps to put them on a scope comparing tripod..............or a playground pole with a "c-clamp" down in Utah wink

You can't just look at one and then the other, even minutes apart. That's why the eye doctor flips through lenses back and forth quickly, asking "which one is better, 1 or 2?"

Eyes play tricks and our memories won't allow us to "compare" optics truly, unless we are cycling back and forth between scopes as quickly as possible.

And, I may very well agree the LRTS is better optically, though at this point I'm not convinced. But, "run circles around" is rubbish.............




I always compare glass via tripods when comparing binos, which is what I "sung the praises of".....8x42 binoculars, and they're superb. Only Mr Magoo would agree and call the Toric binos "rubbish".

When using the term "runs circles around" I also refer to the zero stop, low profile turrets, superior glass. My comparisons were done with scopes mounted on rifles about a year and a half ago. As soon as I discovered the LRHS (thanks Clint), the SWFA 3-9's were history. Nothing wrong with them, just my preference.


Good for you. It's nice to find what we prefer. I've never called Toric Binos "Rubbish" in fact I have a pair of 10x42 Toric Black Friday specials arriving tomorrow.
I hope they are not like looking through a Tunnel, like the Toric 2-10x42 riflescope is..........I take it you've never seen a 2-10x42 Toric, or you'd have to agree the field of view and tunneling sucks!!

As far as scopes go, the LRTS is nice, but for me the SWFA 3-9 HD is 8 ounces lighter, has a better reticle, I could care less about a zero stop as 5 Mils per rev is more than enough elevation for a hunting 243, so I'm not bound to "get lost" in the turret......

And the "glass" in my HD SWFA is the superior one, evident in my cell pics to anyone with 20/20 vision. I have no skin in the game here, just facts. I'd like my $650 Bushy to "best" the $449 SWFA, but it doesn't. Field of View is WAY, WAY better in the SWFA as well.

But, who cares. Rock on!!





Last edited by screaminweasil; 12/08/19.