I'd like to discuss failures and known issues of SS scopes by SWFA, both fixed and variables. Please share any failures or issues you've had with them, such as tracking, failure to hold zero, reticle subtension errors, or even lesser issues. If you must, include pet peeves such as turret height, but that really isn't the point of this discussion.
This thread is somewhat similar to another thread about Leupold tracking and zero retention, which can be found here:
I've owned at least eight SWFA scopes and haven't had a major issue yet, that wasn't a glaring screw up on my part. Since this is still a pretty small sample, I'm hoping the 24HourCampfire community can provide more feedback, just lilke the Leupold thread above.
These are all relatively minor issues, in my mind:
1. Older fixed power SS scopes had built-in sunshades that could unscrew. I have not observed this with recent examples.
2. Fixed power scopes exhibit glare off of exterior ocular lens. Given the price and mechanical performance, I don't have a problem with this. I also subscribe to the belief that a scope is an aiming device, not an observation device and have found this issue manageable.
3. On some 10x scopes, distances on the rear parallax ring are not always correct. Easy to correct this however.
I bought a used 20x fixed power for 250.00. After using it for 6 years , I thought I had a tracking issue with it because of an incident when I moved it to another gun. I sent it in to get looked at and SWFA replaced it for free. Turn around time was 11 days from door to door. Don't even know if there was a problem but my new scope is just as good as the old one was with less scratches on it!!!!!!
I have a bunch and dial them all pretty regular. (10x's, 6x's and a 1-4x)
Sent one 6x back when it started tracking weird. They sent me a new one quick. Pretty sure it was the rear ring being too tight as I've since had another one do that.
No issues other than that.
Screw you! I'm voting for Trump again!
Ecc 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but that of a fool to the 24HCF.
I personally don"t like them....I tried one for a few minutes....Put it in the sink and it filled up with water.....The glass seemed sub par....The finish seemed cheap...To me they just look cheap....The turrets seemed nice and solid...... But to each there own. Different strokes for different folks.
Last edited by KentuckyMountainMan; 09/12/17.
“When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
I have been using two, 6x and one, 10x for awhile now. I had one 6x that was not right, fresh out of the box. It went back and was replaced. That can happen with any scope. Other than that, they have been great scopes. I do not do a lot of turret spinning, but what I have done, they have been spot on. My favorite is the 10x, as my eyes aren't as good as they used to be.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
I personally don"t like them....I tried one for a few minutes....Put it in the sink and it filled up with water.....The glass seemed sub par....The finish seemed cheap...To me they just look cheap....The turrets seemed nice and solid...... But to each there own. Different strokes for different folks.
Six 10x on the rimfire herd: no problems. A 3-15 I just can't warm up to. Pretty sure the reticle is canted pretty good but cannot confirm as I just don't shoot that gun very often. 1-4 done in by a slug gun. It still needs to go back. LOTS of slop in the turrets, and yes the set screws are tight and 242'd. Everything on that gun is locktighted. It survived a couple hundred rounds on an AR prior to 220f duty.
For me they have been dead nuts reliable and with a milquad reticle sight in is a two shot proposition for the most part. I wish they were a touch more compact and I wish I could have a shorty windage knob. Some of my guns go in a eberlestock to and from hunting areas and I don't like worrying about it. And yes I've seen the red cap trick but with my luck it'll be a source of problems.
Got probably a dozen now, had friends buy a few more. No failures. 6x, 10x, 1-4x, 3-9x. Son took a hard fall on rocks 2 weeks ago and bashed the windage turret really hard. Ended up being knocked off 1.5" at 100 yards. Not really a failure but wishing it hadn't moved any.
My boys and I have 4 of them. Two 3x9s and two 3x15s. We dial them hard,and shoot them a lot. No issues. Good glass, excellent mil quad reticle,ALWAYS return to zero.We have killed a lot of critters with them. Absolute best buy for the money.
I killed a 1-4X in less than 30 rounds. First failed to focus. Now it won't focus, flakes of debris on the inside of the lense, and is now roughly a fixed 1.75X magnification ring seized up. This was on a .358 win so not exactly uber magnum recoil.
Not impressed by that. We shall see how well the other SWFA I have hold up as I get to shoot them more.
Got a 10x used from a different forum that had black specs/flakes inside on the lenses (bugs on the windshield). Seller did not mention them at all. I think it may have been an earlier model. They "bugged" me so I sold it, but I disclosed them to the buyer. Had it on a back-up elk rifle for a while, but it lacked features I want in a hunting scope. I found the turrets were too tall to fit my scabbard for horseback use. Just picked up another SS 10x to keep my 3 new Leupold VX-5 HDs honest. Yeah, I read the Leupold tracking thread.
So, as a percentage of random 'fire comments, weighted for a lower sales volume and a fanboy factor, about the same rate of issues as a Leupold.
I believe this qualifies for the stupid comment of the day . I used to dial !eupolds. Liked everything about them except that the erector springs wore out after about 250 rds. (3different times on 2 different scopes) Never again. Swfa scopes may fail once in a while (maybe) but ask people who shoot a lot, and you will find that they are top tier in terms of reliability.
I broke one (a 3-9) when it fell onto concrete with a rifle on top. They replaced it. I've had a lot pass through my hands, other than the obviously abused one (the turret spindle bent) all of them worked correctly. They were head and shoulders more reliable than the Leupold collection they replaced.
I mostly shoot with Bushnell's now, but not because the SWFA SS's don't work well. I've actually stopped being paranoid that my zero has shifted, but it's taken a while!
The reticle alone is worth the price of admission. Seriously. When you get to shooting a lot with a fixed power scope, schidt starts to get intuitive rather quickly in regards to holdovers/hashmarks/target size.
The fact that the turrets track great, have an easily added zero stop and a reputation for being rugged makes them a helluva deal. They are such a perfect fit for me, I kinda wonder what else is better quite honestly. The only improvement would be a smaller, lighter version with a low profile/covered windage.
Pretty sure I aint the only one that sold all his Leupolds by how the classifieds looked two or three years back.
Screw you! I'm voting for Trump again!
Ecc 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but that of a fool to the 24HCF.
I have seen the fixed scopes (one 10x, one 12x) have the set screws loosen on the turret and lose zero on two occasions during competition. Neither were mine. I expect extra set screw torque would solve that issue. I've never had that happen on any of mine despite a few thousand rounds on 10x's, 12x's, and 3-15's using that turret style.
I just sent a 3x9HD in today. It wouldn't track and groups went to heck. As I took stuff apart I checked torque on everything and everything was well within specs, so label me as surprised I think I tore one up on my 7 Mashburn. Still a fan of them though, the 6X's have been nothing but awesome for me.
So, as a percentage of random 'fire comments, weighted for a lower sales volume and a fanboy factor, about the same rate of issues as a Leupold.
I believe this qualifies for the stupid comment of the day . I used to dial !eupolds. Liked everything about them except that the erector springs wore out after about 250 rds. (3different times on 2 different scopes) Never again. Swfa scopes may fail once in a while (maybe) but ask people who shoot a lot, and you will find that they are top tier in terms of reliability.
Lighten up. It was a joke...I thought the fanboy factor was enough to convey the sarcasm.
I just had a Leupold sent in for new erector spring. Couple thousand rounds on a rather light and snappy rifle. Also ordered an SWFA 6x to try out.
I get the impression that they are the best "value" scope on the market. I just sent a 1-4 back for loose turrets and group size increase. I had kind of dropped the rifle a few times on the turrets about a year ago, by accident of course... and the problem just kind of showed up after about another 5-600 rounds and moving it to another rifle and rezeroing the turrets to zero...so not indestructible but do not go to crap just from normal use on an AR rifle.
I should be getting my 1-4 back tomorrow. I had debris on the windshielf. They sent me a new one. That scope had not even seen 20 rounds on an AR, so I chalk that up to a manufacturing defect, not a failure. Very different in my book.
I'm surprised to hear about the SWFA 1-4x issues. I knew there were a couple failures here, but there are even more than I expected. Maybe it's actually a Leupold in disguise?! Just kidding.
Just for conversation, the Classix 1-4x is their only scope made in the Philippines. Correct me if I'm wrong.
The HD line is made in Japan, and includes all the other variables (except the 3-15x) and the side focus 10x. The Classic line (fixed powers) and 3-15x are made by another manufacturer in Japan.
Anymore in today's world, it doesn't seem like country of origin makes any difference in terms of quality, to an extent. Even so, I wonder if there is something about the design of the 1-4x, or the manufacturing capability of that Filipino facility.
They have gone from the best thing since fresh bread to a "value" scope?
Debris in a leupold has been cause for some to go apocalyptic.
Slop in turrets, failed to focus, tracking, adjustments not perfect-enough to make a Leupold basher lose it-lacked features that some desire in a hunting scope, the 1-4 seems to suck, glass isn't the best. However, they do seem to have a great warranty. Hmmmm, heard that someplace before.
Stick lets his swim with the fishes. You guys must have got all the bad ones.
Unless I really decide to move up, I'll think I'll stick with Leupold.
I'm surprised to hear about the SWFA 1-4x issues. I knew there were a couple failures here, but there are even more than I expected. Maybe it's actually a Leupold in disguise?! Just kidding.
This is a small sample, and it is a big world out there. 😏 (Who has multiple by 1000's-100,000????-more scopes out there to have potential problems-old and new-Leupold or SWFA?)
The only improvement would be a smaller, lighter version with a low profile/covered windage.
I have 5-6 SWFA now, and used several others from the Classified, including one 10x from Tanner, who probably wasn't the gentlest turret dial-er in his youth.
All have have worked as advertised, no failures. I bought a new 3-15 last year, and ran it from 200-1200 this summer. No issues in tracking, returned back to zero, with repeated dials up in the 40-45 MOA (2-3 full turns) range, and return.
Cons: no zero stop in the variable powers, but an easy fix.
Weight and bulk - I'm with Bean, I'd like to see a SWFA "Lite", but that may be at the risk of losing the current ruggedness of the tubes.
Smaller turrets, and covered on windage, maybe an option with covered with the elevation as well - the reticle worked as expected out to 4-500 without dialing.
I've owned a couple dozen Leupolds in my life.... and I can remember sending 8 or 9 of them back for something or other (some, multiple times for the same thing).
Bought my first SWFA 10x in 2005, and have had another dozen or so (of all flavors). I saw the side-focus knob come completely off a 3-15 once... that's it, and it was replaced in days.
If you're running a piece of mechanical equipment, and you don't think you're going to eventually see it break due to: wear, defect, or pure human error.... then you're just plain stupid.
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
Have to be made of unobtanium too, otherwise it may change zero if bumped and thus increase bench shooting group size by .012" thus rendering it ineffective for elk in the woods. Seriously though, for shooting out to the ranges typically encountered, they are the most dependable solution.
Related note: While I admit there are advantages to scopes, I really want a nice wood stocked, iron sighted, hunting rifle. I saw a Sako Arctos and someday will own one!
Remember the Ron Mexico a/k/a/ Michael Vick hotel register incident? After that hit the news someone made up a Ron Mexico name generator and put it on the internet. Type in your name and it spit out your undercover Ron Mexico name. Well, her name got typed in and the generator output was Maria Antarctica. Too perfect!
I had a 3-9 where the turret caps (part that has the lines that shows how many turns you've made) came loose on the elevation and windage turrets. I bought the unit second hand. Sent it in and got my new one back yesterday. Great customer service. Also, on the new box there's a logo that says "4 Life Warranty".
I look forward to trying the 6x. Anyone used the MIL-Quad reticle in the woods? Easy enough to find center against dark backgrounds?
It can be a little tough to pick up in thick stuff in dimmer light. If the light is good it's not an issue. I've killed several deer, coyotes, and fox with it in woods with no problem as long as there is good light.
Outright failures on mine: 0 Usage of them: Long-range precision rifle competitions, with some plinking and playing around.
Things I'd like to see improved: My 10x had noticeable fish-eye, and I never could get sharp focus across the field of view. My 10x's turrets were mushy enough that I had to switch focus and stare at them to count marks when dialing, because if I tried to just count clicks, I'd often miss one or two right at the start of adjustment. My 3-15's turrets are mushier than they should be at the price, but acceptable once they've been adjusted the first time each day (or stage, if there's been a long delay). My 3-15's adjustments are all too stiff, even after quite a lot of use. All the turrets are too tall and spin-able for anything but competition work (yes, I've had turrets on them turned by accident or without me knowing it until I looked at them).
So, no major gripes with the 3-15 and no outright failures. For a competition scope on a Nat'l Rifle League style gun, I find the 3-15 is the best choice at the price point. For hunting, I find the Weaver Tactical (illum. EMDR) the best choice in FFP scopes at the price point.
I look forward to trying the 6x. Anyone used the MIL-Quad reticle in the woods? Easy enough to find center against dark backgrounds?
Shot a buck 15 min or so after sundown last year in fairly dark woods. No problem seeing the reticle but the hash marks weren't distinguishable, not that they were needed.
Hell...Reloading/Shooting are still my favorite things to do,besides play in the box the kids came in.................
They have gone from the best thing since fresh bread to a "value" scope?
Debris in a leupold has been cause for some to go apocalyptic.
Slop in turrets, failed to focus, tracking, adjustments not perfect-enough to make a Leupold basher lose it-lacked features that some desire in a hunting scope, the 1-4 seems to suck, glass isn't the best. However, they do seem to have a great warranty. Hmmmm, heard that someplace before.
Stick lets his swim with the fishes. You guys must have got all the bad ones.
Unless I really decide to move up, I'll think I'll stick with Leupold.
Had one with 1/4 MOA adjustments that were actually around .2 inch. They still worked consistently.
Now that's interesting! It would be truly extraordinary if that was the only one of all the gears coming off the part manufacturing line that had the wrong pitch. Wonder where all the others went...
They have gone from the best thing since fresh bread to a "value" scope?
Debris in a leupold has been cause for some to go apocalyptic.
Slop in turrets, failed to focus, tracking, adjustments not perfect-enough to make a Leupold basher lose it-lacked features that some desire in a hunting scope, the 1-4 seems to suck, glass isn't the best. However, they do seem to have a great warranty. Hmmmm, heard that someplace before.
Stick lets his swim with the fishes. You guys must have got all the bad ones.
Unless I really decide to move up, I'll think I'll stick with Leupold.
Thanks for your rant. Hope you feel better.
Jason
Rant? Just reiterating the posted facts and my own current choice for scopes. Anyway, thanks for the thought. Appreciate it.
(Post something I agree with and I'll give you a positive response, since you seem to disperately need reinforcement.)
Rant? Just reiterating the posted facts and my own current choice for scopes. Anyway, thanks for the thought. Appreciate it.
(Post something I agree with and I'll give you a positive response, since you seem to disperately need reinforcement.)
You're welcome. Your feelers seem hurt over Leupold criticism.
Please share your experiences with SWFA failures. Or, tell us about your hard use of SWFA scopes, with no issues. Or, tell us that all scopes suck like Steelie did.
We don't care that you choose Leupold, as it doesn't contribute anything to the discussion. You need to justify that to yourself, not us.
You're the one that asked for a failure report. You're the one that had to reference the Leupold tracking thread which makes you the one who made the original comparison. Following your own thread really shouldn't be all that difficult.
You received a report and I commented on same. After all the previous stellar SWFA posts I almost bought one. Your thread made me most certainly reconsider and remain with Leupold for the present. Throwing out the "my" use of SWFA card is weak when your own thread proves that they have issues. How about that "fish eye" issue that popped up later.
You're the one that needs to complete the feeler report. So sad they became bruised when your little survey didn't work out as you planned. And that is the fun part. Ah, but those things happen sometimes. Cowboy up, worse things will most surely come your way.
Addition: You use the scope of your choice and Steelhead will use irons. You will probably lose as many times as you win. Congratulations????
And just for fun. You should try fun: These are just the ones I have boxes for. Only one has ever gone back and that was a dot that fell out of the reticle. You could have still used the crosshairs it was stuck on.
Look below: Another defect. Defect/failure? Semantics perhaps, but it went back.
I sent a new 3-9x42 back because the elevation turret was excessively hard to turn, beyond the stiffer when new feeling... Defect, not failure. Was quickly replaced with different scope. No complaint on glass. Would love low profile dials.. Did not like seeing something besides Made in Japan nor did I like the triangle on the 1-4 Illumy and sent it away... Favorite part, Chris is still selling them cheap, and they work..
"I can't be canceled, because, I don't give a fuuck!" --- Kid Rock 2022
I look forward to trying the 6x. Anyone used the MIL-Quad reticle in the woods? Easy enough to find center against dark backgrounds?
I have shot several deer, now, at absolute last light, with both my 6x and 10x. I have been very pleased with the reticle, even though my shooting eye is not that great. I can't usually see the hash marks, anyway, so that is irrelevant at last light for me. However, I do not hunt in woods, so can not comment on last light in the woods. I have looked through the scope toward the trees at last light and thought that it would work OK.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
I've got a handful. All track perfectly. Falling on them doesn't help their zero-holding abilities, though the fall was on rougher terrain than most folks will be on.
Personally, I have way more confidence in them than Leupolds.
You're the one that asked for a failure report. You're the one that had to reference the Leupold tracking thread which makes you the one who made the original comparison. Following your own thread really shouldn't be all that difficult.
You received a report and I commented on same. After all the previous stellar SWFA posts I almost bought one. Your thread made me most certainly reconsider and remain with Leupold for the present. Throwing out the "my" use of SWFA card is weak when your own thread proves that they have issues. How about that "fish eye" issue that popped up later.
You're the one that needs to complete the feeler report. So sad they became bruised when your little survey didn't work out as you planned. And that is the fun part. Ah, but those things happen sometimes. Cowboy up, worse things will most surely come your way.
Addition: You use the scope of your choice and Steelhead will use irons. You will probably lose as many times as you win. Congratulations????
And just for fun. You should try fun: These are just the ones I have boxes for. Only one has ever gone back and that was a dot that fell out of the reticle. You could have still used the crosshairs it was stuck on.
Look below: Another defect. Defect/failure? Semantics perhaps, but it went back.
How many of those do you dial consistently, or use more than climbing into your tree stand? Leupold staying zeroed is not the point of the whole Leupold thread, turret consistency is...
- Greg
Success is found at the intersection of planning, hard work, and stubbornness.
Rant? Just reiterating the posted facts and my own current choice for scopes. Anyway, thanks for the thought. Appreciate it.
(Post something I agree with and I'll give you a positive response, since you seem to disperately need reinforcement.)
You're welcome. Your feelers seem hurt over Leupold criticism.
Please share your experiences with SWFA failures. Or, tell us about your hard use of SWFA scopes, with no issues. Or, tell us that all scopes suck like Steelie did.
We don't care that you choose Leupold, as it doesn't contribute anything to the discussion. You need to justify that to yourself, not us.
Did you eat paint chips for breakfast? Oops, my bad, just noticed that you're from Oregon.
How many of those do you dial consistently, or use more than climbing into your tree stand? Leupold staying zeroed is not the point of the whole Leupold thread, turret consistency is...
Dial a couple that have CDS dials at the range frequently. So far they have held up. They are not full bore target scopes, but then again neither are the SS 6x, 10x, etc. Furthest I've had to dial on game was 358 and it worked. My complaint is some are giving the impression close to mid range Leupold hunting scopes are inferior for that range of hunting. Which is pure BS.
You want to have a thread on dedicated LR competition or hunting scopes, have at it, and I'll read and not post because I don't do either.
As far a climbing into a tree stand, I haven't done so in perhaps 15years after a rung on one let go while coming down. Went approx 20 feet and walked away from the event. So another one of your generalizations, you remember the East and North crowd one-funny that, at this time-goes belly up. Keep it up, you are on a roll. Not a great one, but it never hurts to keep trying. Well most times.....
Welcome to the wonderful Deer hunting State of Arizona. Just how often do you get to hunt your first place choice? You get to dial mucho at the range no doubt. I'll take the North, East and South before I'd put up with the Arizoona.
Having never used any SWFA scope, but having read much about them on the internet, and having even visited the manufacturer's website, I feel fully qualified in proclaiming them utter crap.
Those bullet threads have taught me a lot about how to judge equipment performance in the field, and I've saved a lot of time and money in the process.
How many of those do you dial consistently, or use more than climbing into your tree stand? Leupold staying zeroed is not the point of the whole Leupold thread, turret consistency is...
Dial a couple that have CDS dials at the range frequently. So far they have held up. They are not full bore target scopes, but then again neither are the SS 6x, 10x, etc. Furthest I've had to dial on game was 358 and it worked. My complaint is some are giving the impression close to mid range Leupold hunting scopes are inferior for that range of hunting. Which is pure BS.
You have to consider the fact that the average SS scope is used more, and has a much higher round count, than the average Leup, as well.
Having used various Leup's a bunch, and various SS scopes a bunch, I know that I have way more confidence in SS functioning correctly, as well as holding zero even if used as a set-and-forget scope, than Leup.
Welcome to the wonderful Deer hunting State of Arizona. Just how often do you get to hunt your first place choice? You get to dial mucho at the range no doubt. I'll take the North, East and South before I'd put up with the Arizoona.
I'll consider it, but when it comes to the average hunter and his SS 6x I'm not so sure I agree with it. As mentioned previously guys like you shoot a lot. Me? I may on average shoot a couple thousand rounds a year of CF. And at least that with a .22lR. So far Leupolds have held up for what I do.
Welcome to the wonderful Deer hunting State of Arizona. Just how often do you get to hunt your first place choice? You get to dial mucho at the range no doubt. I'll take the North, East and South before I'd put up with the Arizoona.
You don't want me to post the % of applicants that get their first choice location. It's most certainly not funny. It's so sad, I don't want to even take the time to find it again.
I think the misalignment of lenses causes it to be too dim.
I have seen one other poster on forums with the same problem with his 20X.
I have a 1995 Bausch and Lomb elite 4x12x40 AO with the same problem, too dim above 8X for any use at all.
SWFA has offered to take the SS 20X back in trade in. I am not sending it back if they might resell it. I would only send it back if they throw it away.
So my SS 20X lives in a box full of broken Weaver El Paso K-4 take off scopes.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
I'll consider it, but when it comes to the average hunter and his SS 6x I'm not so sure I agree with it. As mentioned previously guys like you shoot a lot. Me? I may on average shoot a couple thousand rounds a year of CF. And at least that with a .22lR. So far Leupolds have held up for what I do.
I'm not trying to convince you that Leup's are crap, or that you should stop using them. If they work for you, then carry on.
But if we're comparing failure rates of SS scopes versus Leupold's, the average SS gets used and shot a lot more than the average Leup. You mention the average hunter and his SS 6x, but it's my impression that the average hunter doesn't use a SS 6x. The vast majority of guys that have and use SS scopes, tend to shoot much more than the average hunter. The average hunter probably has a Leup VX2 3-9x40 on his hunting rifle, and shoots 100 rounds a year, or less
Quick look on this thread tells me most posts were made re 1-4, 6x and 10x.
I will agree that the average hunter probably shoots less than 100 per year. And Mr Average will probably shoot the same with his SS 6x or 10x because many of these threads are causing Mr Average to think his Leupold sucks for his usually on average under 200yard opportunity.
I think the misalignment of lenses causes it to be too dim.
I have seen one other poster on forums with the same problem with his 20X.
I have a 1995 Bausch and Lomb elite 4x12x40 AO with the same problem, too dim above 8X for any use at all.
SWFA has offered to take the SS 20X back in trade in. I am not sending it back if they might resell it. I would only send it back if they throw it away.
So my SS 20X lives in a box full of broken Weaver El Paso K-4 take off scopes.
My guess is they aren't going to resell a 10 year old used 20X. I think you're safe to send it back.
Welcome to the wonderful Deer hunting State of Arizona. Just how often do you get to hunt your first place choice? You get to dial mucho at the range no doubt. I'll take the North, East and South before I'd put up with the Arizoona.
You don't want me to post the % of applicants that get their first choice location. It's most certainly not funny. It's so sad, I don't want to even take the time to find it again.
I'm not laughing at that, I'm laughing at you.
- Greg
Success is found at the intersection of planning, hard work, and stubbornness.
[quote=battue]Off topic, but since you are good at it.
Welcome to the wonderful Deer hunting State of Arizona. Just how often do you get to hunt your first place choice? You get to dial mucho at the range no doubt. I'll take the North, East and South before I'd put up with the Arizoona.
You don't want me to post the % of applicants that get their first choice location. It's most certainly not funny. It's so sad, I don't want to even take the time to find it again.
Do you have half a clue how the draw system works anywhere in the west or are you trying to distance further discussion from you using your Leupolds in tough conditions? Laffin...
The former I know you don't, the latter is a good call on your part...
- Greg
Success is found at the intersection of planning, hard work, and stubbornness.
[quote=battue]Off topic, but since you are good at it.
Welcome to the wonderful Deer hunting State of Arizona. Just how often do you get to hunt your first place choice? You get to dial mucho at the range no doubt. I'll take the North, East and South before I'd put up with the Arizoona.
You don't want me to post the % of applicants that get their first choice location. It's most certainly not funny. It's so sad, I don't want to even take the time to find it again.
Do you have half a clue how the draw system works anywhere in the west or are you trying to distance further discussion from you using your Leupolds in tough conditions? Laffin...
The former I know you don't, the latter is a good call on your part...
You would be the one that started with the north-east crap and made a SA crack our hard hunting is out of tree stands. Leave that out and we wouldn't be where we are. Always funny when those who start it get pissy when they have a tit pinched.
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
- Greg
Success is found at the intersection of planning, hard work, and stubbornness.
I'll consider it, but when it comes to the average hunter and his SS 6x I'm not so sure I agree with it. As mentioned previously guys like you shoot a lot. Me? I may on average shoot a couple thousand rounds a year of CF. And at least that with a .22lR. So far Leupolds have held up for what I do.
Your yearly round count is similar to mine; I’ve had multiple Leupold failures and seen more on other folks’ rifles.
As far as SWFA failures, I’ve had ten of their scopes and the only issue wasn’t much of an issue - I bought a 3-9 from Tanner which had the numbers on the dial come loose. Tanner glued it back on, and it has worked fine for a few thousand rounds on one of my rifles which sees a lot of dialing.
The round count concept reminds me of me trying to tell a guy how to operate a power screwdriver in house framing. He kept screwing up and I kept yelling instructions about force and axial alignment.
Then I realized that despite all my expert knowledge, I was no better than him when I used my left hand.
Some of the things that make us good, we got from practice without realizing what they are.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
I think the misalignment of lenses causes it to be too dim.
I have seen one other poster on forums with the same problem with his 20X.
I have a 1995 Bausch and Lomb elite 4x12x40 AO with the same problem, too dim above 8X for any use at all.
SWFA has offered to take the SS 20X back in trade in. I am not sending it back if they might resell it. I would only send it back if they throw it away.
So my SS 20X lives in a box full of broken Weaver El Paso K-4 take off scopes.
It should be obvious that a 20x42 can't be very bright, regardless of what magic coatings they slop on the lenses.
I think the misalignment of lenses causes it to be too dim.
I have seen one other poster on forums with the same problem with his 20X.
I have a 1995 Bausch and Lomb elite 4x12x40 AO with the same problem, too dim above 8X for any use at all.
SWFA has offered to take the SS 20X back in trade in. I am not sending it back if they might resell it. I would only send it back if they throw it away.
So my SS 20X lives in a box full of broken Weaver El Paso K-4 take off scopes.
It should be obvious that a 20x42 can't be very bright, regardless of what magic coatings they slop on the lenses.
I have an old 1985 40mm objective Leupold vari iii boosted from 6.5x20x40 to 13x40x40 by precision reticle that is plenty bright, and I have tested many rifles with it and shot some rodents. Been screwing on those turrets for 32 years. Obviously on dim days the exit pupil is too small, but my SS 20X is totally defective and always unusable by anyone.... from the factory, so there was no final inspection of looking through it.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
I live in NY and haven't hunted out of a stand in at least 15 years. In that time I've killed over 50 deer and only two were over 100 yards away.. The vast majority of my shots have been between 25 and 75 yards and I can't think of any sighting device I'd have less use for than one with any kind of range finding, mil dot or multi distance aiming points/crosshairs unless it's mounted on a crossbow.
You're the one that needs to complete the feeler report. So sad they became bruised when your little survey didn't work out as you planned. And that is the fun part. Ah, but those things happen sometimes. Cowboy up, worse things will most surely come your way.
Contrary to your delusions, the whole point is to discuss the failures and issues of SWFA scopes. Read the first post. There's no agenda, no excuses being made, and no request by me to compare to Leupold. Mentioning the Leupold thread isn't the same as asking for comparison.
This is an opportunity to share information. Among users of SWFA scopes. This might be useful for others, especially those considering buying an SWFA.
I just took delivery of a used SS 10x42. Looks to be in good shape and of fairly current issue. I was expecting the turrets to turn somewhat firm and with positive ( for lack of a better term) "clicks". Surprisingly, they turned much easier than I figured, and very much approached the feel of a friction style adjustment. Only upon really tuning in the touch and getting close with my ear could I discern something that resembled a detent, or click. If one was behind the rifle and turning at the range there would be no way to come to a main visible number on the dial and count a couple clicks to get to an in between setting. I believe you would have to visually get to a smaller hash mark. As easy as the turrets turn I would be leery of using it in the field. And yes, the elevation turret turns about the same as it's windage counterpart. Does this match what you other SS owners have, or does this scope have an issue?
You're the one that needs to complete the feeler report. So sad they became bruised when your little survey didn't work out as you planned. And that is the fun part. Ah, but those things happen sometimes. Cowboy up, worse things will most surely come your way.
Contrary to your delusions, the whole point is to discuss the failures and issues of SWFA scopes. Read the first post. There's no agenda, no excuses being made, and no request by me to compare to Leupold. Mentioning the Leupold thread isn't the same as asking for comparison.
This is an opportunity to share information. Among users of SWFA scopes. This might be useful for others, especially those considering buying an SWFA.
Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?
Gosh it is funny you would accuse me of having the comprehension issues. You post your thread to discuss SWFA failures and issues. I read and after seeing the posts on issues, respond with listing some of them and say, for now I'll stick with Leupold. You reply and say thanks for your rant.
Originally Posted by 4th_point
Originally Posted by battue
They have gone from the best thing since fresh bread to a "value" scope?
Debris in a leupold has been cause for some to go apocalyptic.
Slop in turrets, failed to focus, tracking, adjustments not perfect-enough to make a Leupold basher lose it-lacked features that some desire in a hunting scope, the 1-4 seems to suck, glass isn't the best. However, they do seem to have a great warranty. Hmmmm, heard that someplace before.
Stick lets his swim with the fishes. You guys must have got all the bad ones.
Unless I really decide to move up, I'll think I'll stick with Leupold.
Thanks for your rant. Hope you feel better.
Jason
Rant: "speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way": I think you have a comprehension problem in the definition of rant.
I also post later I was considering buying a SWFA. You know one of those people you wanted your post to be useful for. And it was useful, for the negatives became reason enough to decide to stick with Leupold. But you have a comprehension problem in understanding that. And I have the comprehension problem? What's so hard to understand? Nothing. I don't like the negatives, but for some reason, that is hard for you to comprehend. Maybe you just posted the thread as an exclusive for SWFA users and didn't comprehend that others with differing views would join in. Again and for obvious reasons, I'm not the one with the comprehension issues.
By the way, just for kicks while I was posting another turret negative came to light. Ahh....It seems as if they have a turret problem. No all, but for those that do tough deal when you are spinning.
You use what you desire, for now I'll stick with Leupold. I'll make it easy, that was a response, it didn't even border on a rant.
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
I live in NY and haven't hunted out of a stand in at least 15 years. In that time I've killed over 50 deer and only two were over 100 yards away.. The vast majority of my shots have been between 25 and 75 yards and I can't think of any sighting device I'd have less use for than one with any kind of range finding, mil dot or multi distance aiming points/crosshairs unless it's mounted on a crossbow.
So why comment on an SWFA thread when you have no use for one and no desire to use one?
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
I live in NY and haven't hunted out of a stand in at least 15 years. In that time I've killed over 50 deer and only two were over 100 yards away.. The vast majority of my shots have been between 25 and 75 yards and I can't think of any sighting device I'd have less use for than one with any kind of range finding, mil dot or multi distance aiming points/crosshairs unless it's mounted on a crossbow.
So why comment on an SWFA thread when you have no use for one and no desire to use one?
Quick look on this thread tells me most posts were made re 1-4, 6x and 10x.
I will agree that the average hunter probably shoots less than 100 per year. And Mr Average will probably shoot the same with his SS 6x or 10x because many of these threads are causing Mr Average to think his Leupold sucks for his usually on average under 200yard opportunity.
there are so many different levels of expectation and so many different models and year models under consideration it stands to reason that there is a lot of disagreement. If we eliminate all older than 7-10 year ago models, all friction turret models all fixed models and just look at variables produced in the last 4-5 years, then we look at how much people shoot I think its safe to say that a person that fires more than 1000 rounds of ammunition per year will find more problems with zero retention and adjustment accuracy with a recently made variable Leupold than with a variable SWFA, NF, Bushell LRHS, etc. I have a recently purchased 1-6 VX6, its my last Leupold, new from the factory with firedot at 1000 bucks, it failed less than a year into owning it. They fixed it and I leave it alone for now on a light kicking rifle. I really like the reticle, the eye relief, it works very well in low light, its just not robust.
There are people who shoot more than 2000 rounds a year and people who shoot about 20 rounds a year and both will kill their deer. There are people who can find excuses (barrel cleaning, wrong hold, hot barrel, wrong bullets, wrong powder for things that could be explained a lot simpler by saying "the rifle scope has a problem and I am chasing my tail". I have been there and done that. two NF scopes and two SWFA scopes latter I am wiser. If the gun don't shoot to the same POA at each outing with all other factors being the same, you then have your answer. However trying to tell the shooting world that there is no problem while the shooting world is sure there is a problem indicates a state of denial. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but none of us is entitled to our own facts.
It has been a little eye opening for me. More problems with the SS's have been reported than I expected based on my experience with them. Great thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience......terrible thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience.....
It has been a little eye opening for me. More problems with the SS's have been reported than I expected based on my experience with them. Great thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience......terrible thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience.....
Yes, truly "optic" indeed. I don't have a dog in this fight, but it does seem there are some problems with the SS's with such a small sample size. Mule Deer even chimed in that the clicks on one of his were not .250 MOA as advertised. I don't think this should be surprising based on the price of the optic. You do have to give up some things to come in at a lower price. It also seems that Leupold is not bullet proof either. I guess it comes down to preference, features, and how much someone is willing to pay.
I had a conversation with a Leupold employee who used to live in my hometown. He said many of the scopes which were returned they could not find anything wrong with them. Many times they would replace parts or send someone a new one even though they felt there was nothing mechanically wrong with their scope. Maybe a little food for thought. I don't know if it is lack of trouble shooting on their part or user error. Possibly a little bit of both. Interesting nonetheless.
It has been a little eye opening for me. More problems with the SS's have been reported than I expected based on my experience with them. Great thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience......terrible thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience.....
Ha! So true. It seems that people develop and emotional attachment to the stuff they buy. I believe it's true with hunting gear too in that people's stuff is usually the best stuff and they are willing to defend it to the end. I guess I'm an oddball in that my gear, including optics, rifles, bullets, etc are ONLY tools. They are not my identity, they are nothing more than a tool to get a job/task done. If they don't work, I'll report it. If they fail to do the task I bought them for, I'll gladly admit it and post about it. I could give a crap about the logo on my stuff. I do give a crap about my stuff working properly...... to do what I want it to do, that's it, period. Like my awesome Dad used to say......If you don't want to know, don't ask (he was brutally honest, one of the many things I respect about him) because the answer will never be sugar-coated.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
lol....yeah, sometimes knowing hurts....but IMHO it doesn't hurt as much as not knowing. I know I'll always weigh what I know more than what someone else knows but it don't hurt my feelings to know more than only what I know. ...at least so said Ralphie boy and Norton as they discussed the .270...
It has been a little eye opening for me. More problems with the SS's have been reported than I expected based on my experience with them. Great thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience......terrible thing about a forum is the ability to get feedback and input from more than just my experience.....
Ha! So true. It seems that people develop and emotional attachment to the stuff they buy. I believe it's true with hunting gear too in that people's stuff is usually the best stuff and they are willing to defend it to the end. I guess I'm an oddball in that my gear, including optics, rifles, bullets, etc are ONLY tools. They are not my identity, they are nothing more than a tool to get a job/task done. If they don't work, I'll report it. If they fail to do the task I bought them for, I'll gladly admit it and post about it. I could give a crap about the logo on my stuff. I do give a crap about my stuff working properly...... to do what I want it to do, that's it, period. Like my awesome Dad used to say......If you don't want to know, don't ask (he was brutally honest, one of the many things I respect about him) because the answer will never be sugar-coated.
+1 Equipment is something that I own, not something that owns me
If stuff doesn't work for me, I'm going to say so, and describe how it fails to meet my expectations. If it works properly, I'm happy to report that, too.
I own a pile of Leupold scopes and have never had an issue with them. I don't do any shooting for which I need to dial though. I have read a ton about SWFA scopes and must admit if I ever need a scope to dial it will be an SWFA. They are obviously doing something very right.
I was almost floored when I saw this thread pop up. If there's one thing I've been led to believe here on the 'Fire, that is that SWFA's are the shizzle.
I never thought I'd grow up to be a grumpy old man, but I did, and I'm killin' it.
I have since removed all iron sights from my rifles and am now practicing instinctive shooting, sighting along the top of the barrel. Much like shooting a bow back when the deer and the antelope played.
I have since removed all iron sights from my rifles and am now practicing instinctive shooting, sighting along the top of the barrel. Much like shooting a bow back when the deer and the antelope played.
Eventually the 500yd steel will be a piece of cake.
Accounting for the difference between two people's descriptions, yes, that is how my 10x worked.
Originally Posted by WYcoyote
I just took delivery of a used SS 10x42. Looks to be in good shape and of fairly current issue. I was expecting the turrets to turn somewhat firm and with positive ( for lack of a better term) "clicks". Surprisingly, they turned much easier than I figured, and very much approached the feel of a friction style adjustment. Only upon really tuning in the touch and getting close with my ear could I discern something that resembled a detent, or click. If one was behind the rifle and turning at the range there would be no way to come to a main visible number on the dial and count a couple clicks to get to an in between setting. I believe you would have to visually get to a smaller hash mark. As easy as the turrets turn I would be leery of using it in the field. And yes, the elevation turret turns about the same as it's windage counterpart. Does this match what you other SS owners have, or does this scope have an issue?
Accounting for the difference between two people's descriptions, yes, that is how my 10x worked.
Originally Posted by WYcoyote
I just took delivery of a used SS 10x42. Looks to be in good shape and of fairly current issue. I was expecting the turrets to turn somewhat firm and with positive ( for lack of a better term) "clicks". Surprisingly, they turned much easier than I figured, and very much approached the feel of a friction style adjustment. Only upon really tuning in the touch and getting close with my ear could I discern something that resembled a detent, or click. If one was behind the rifle and turning at the range there would be no way to come to a main visible number on the dial and count a couple clicks to get to an in between setting. I believe you would have to visually get to a smaller hash mark. As easy as the turrets turn I would be leery of using it in the field. And yes, the elevation turret turns about the same as it's windage counterpart. Does this match what you other SS owners have, or does this scope have an issue?
None of my fixed or 3-9x SS scopes have turrets that I would describe as easy to turn, or mushy. They all take deliberate effort to twist, and the clicks are very tactile.
My 4-9x SS are similar. Not easy to turn or mushy. Have never had one turn unintentionally, unlike the fixed Classics which have moved unintentionally. The windage on my current 4-9x is very stiff, however I don't dial wind and don't mind it a bit.
None of my fixed or 3-9x SS scopes have turrets that I would describe as easy to turn, or mushy. They all take deliberate effort to twist, and the clicks are very tactile.
That's the way my one and only SS 3-9 is. It is a very impressive piece of equipment, and It has done great on that .243 it's sitting on. Only thing I'd wish for is a zero stop (tried all the washer tricks, didn't work very well).
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
I have since removed all iron sights from my rifles and am now practicing instinctive shooting, sighting along the top of the barrel. Much like shooting a bow back when the deer and the antelope played.
I had one of the older 10X42's and it didn't track properly. 1 MOA did not equal 1 MOA.
I sent it back to SWFA and they sent me a brand new one that ran great. I had purchased it used and they were aware of that fact. Sent me a new one regardless. The replacement was 100%. I think I still have it.
Travis
Originally Posted by Geno67
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual.
Originally Posted by Judman
Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit.
Originally Posted by KSMITH
My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
I have since removed all iron sights from my rifles and am now practicing instinctive shooting, sighting along the top of the barrel. Much like shooting a bow back when the deer and the antelope played.
Gotta measure your come-ups to be sure though! Your barrel might be bent, the crown might be dinged, and the light might reflect differently each time.
Some have said that instinctive shooters are really unconscious gap shooters, but the only way to tell is to put them in complete darkness and have the target lit.
Some, like me, don't give a rat's ass as long as the arrow hits the target.
Approaching 12,000 rounds through 3 SWFA SS scopes since Monday. They were zeroed Monday morning, and dialed conservatively 50% of the rounds out to 600m. Tracking and RTZ was checked first thing. The zero on them is still perfect.
Approaching 12,000 rounds through 3 SWFA SS scopes since Monday. They were zeroed Monday morning, and dialed conservatively 50% of the rounds out to 600m. Tracking and RTZ was checked first thing. The zero on them is still perfect.
So maybe when swfa sells a quarter amount of of leupold has, in say, 10 years, you might be onto sumthin....
Ping pong balls for the win. Once you've wrestled everything else in life is easy. Dan Gable I keep my circle small, I’d rather have 4 quarters than 100 pennies.
So maybe when swfa sells a quarter amount of of leupold has, in say, 10 years, you might be onto sumthin....
You mean when SWFA SS scopes start having a 70-80% failure rate...?
Thumbs up!
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
Funny, I never had a pet rock either, but others thought they were cool.
That's the old campfire you haven't done/used line of BS. Would a BP hunter have to have used every pack, boot, jacket, rangefinder, binos, etc in order to post an opinion or preference?
That being said, if they would make a reticle I was interested in I might take a chance.
Originally Posted by Formidilosus
Doing a drive by.....
Approaching 12,000 rounds through 3 SWFA SS scopes since Monday. They were zeroed Monday morning, and dialed conservatively 50% of the rounds out to 600m. Tracking and RTZ was checked first thing. The zero on them is still perfect.
From what you've seen at your range over the last 2-3 years or so, what would you estimate the Leupold, Vortex & Eotech failure rates at & what are the major failure modes?
Approaching 12,000 rounds through 3 SWFA SS scopes since Monday. They were zeroed Monday morning, and dialed conservatively 50% of the rounds out to 600m. Tracking and RTZ was checked first thing. The zero on them is still perfect.
The work just like the last several dozen SS's.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
Some shoot as if their lives depend on it. Literally, not figuratively...
I'd shoot a couple thousand a day if I had the free time and the wife let me.
To what benefit ? I placed in the top 3 every year at the state chamionships on less than 500 rounds per week practice. I had the highset offhand and kneeling averages in the local league matches, of which there were 144 competitors. Did pretty well in the Northeastern States championships and Empire State Games too, Well enough that I was invited to the olympic tryouts several times over the years. I think if anybody had a need to shoot 200 rounds per day it would be a waste of time and ammunition. In short, if you NEED that much practice you might just suck at it.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
Some shoot as if their lives depend on it. Literally, not figuratively...
We weren't training for competition... guess it was a waste of time though
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
I live in NY and haven't hunted out of a stand in at least 15 years. In that time I've killed over 50 deer and only two were over 100 yards away.. The vast majority of my shots have been between 25 and 75 yards and I can't think of any sighting device I'd have less use for than one with any kind of range finding, mil dot or multi distance aiming points/crosshairs unless it's mounted on a crossbow.
So why comment on an SWFA thread when you have no use for one and no desire to use one?
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
Some shoot as if their lives depend on it. Literally, not figuratively...
We weren't training for competition... guess it was a waste of time though
What are you training for ? I've known a bunch of people who are or were in the armed services. None of them ever shot that much.
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
I live in NY and haven't hunted out of a stand in at least 15 years. In that time I've killed over 50 deer and only two were over 100 yards away.. The vast majority of my shots have been between 25 and 75 yards and I can't think of any sighting device I'd have less use for than one with any kind of range finding, mil dot or multi distance aiming points/crosshairs unless it's mounted on a crossbow.
So why comment on an SWFA thread when you have no use for one and no desire to use one?
It was no insult. I grew up hunting in stands. Funny you took it as such. It was to demonstrate the variety of optics needs, rifle needs, etc. depending on locale. You proved my whole point in that for your needs, Leupold would work just fine as you never run the heck out of the erector as you don't have a need because of your location. Which is why you haven't had a failure. Have fun this deer season.
I live in NY and haven't hunted out of a stand in at least 15 years. In that time I've killed over 50 deer and only two were over 100 yards away.. The vast majority of my shots have been between 25 and 75 yards and I can't think of any sighting device I'd have less use for than one with any kind of range finding, mil dot or multi distance aiming points/crosshairs unless it's mounted on a crossbow.
So why comment on an SWFA thread when you have no use for one and no desire to use one?
Hey Blackheart....
Hey Starsky. GFY.
So you haven't owned one, used one, or probably even seen one, but you'll comment on them. Got it.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
Some shoot as if their lives depend on it. Literally, not figuratively...
We weren't training for competition... guess it was a waste of time though
What are you training for ? I've known a bunch of people who are or were in the armed services. None of them ever shot that much.
I've known people that were lawyers but I don't pretend to know their job.. just because folks are in the service, doesn't mean they were combatant trained. 100's of 1000's of soldiers, Marines, etc don't shoot a ton other than yearly quals, those that are expected to fight shoot 1000's of rounds a day during shooting exercises.
1x- SWFA SS 1-4x Classic (approx. 800 rounds) 2x- Trijicon 1-8x's (approx. 1,200 and 900 rounds) 1x- 2.5-10x NF (approx. 600 rounds) 1x each- 3.5-15x and 4-16x NF (300 rounds apiece) 1x- Leupold MK 6 (around 600 rounds) Multiple Aimpoints and two EoTechs.
I'll give you two guesses at which three optics had to be pulled due to loss of zero/failure to RTZ....
Thanks for chiming in, Formi. Always appreciate the feedback, especially given the test environment.
If I had to wager, I'd say Leupo was definitely one of them. Previous track record would seem to make this a no brainer. The other two I'm guessing were Triji scopes.
Approaching 12,000 rounds through 3 SWFA SS scopes since Monday. They were zeroed Monday morning, and dialed conservatively 50% of the rounds out to 600m. Tracking and RTZ was checked first thing. The zero on them is still perfect.
The work just like the last several dozen SS's.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
Those guys are not doing it for fun-unless you consider consistent head shots at long distance, fun. Well, I guess is kinda would be!
Last edited by sbhooper; 09/17/17.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
1x- SWFA SS 1-4x Classic (approx. 800 rounds) 2x- Trijicon 1-8x's (approx. 1,200 and 900 rounds) 1x- 2.5-10x NF (approx. 600 rounds) 1x each- 3.5-15x and 4-16x NF (300 rounds apiece) 1x- Leupold MK 6 (around 600 rounds) Multiple Aimpoints and two EoTechs.
I'll give you two guesses at which three optics had to be pulled due to loss of zero/failure to RTZ....
Thanks for chiming in, Formi. Always appreciate the feedback, especially given the test environment.
If I had to wager, I'd say Leupo was definitely one of them. Previous track record would seem to make this a no brainer. The other two I'm guessing were Triji scopes.
Jason
I'd put my money on the Leupy and the two EOTechs.
John 8:12 "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
That was three shooters, and we're not shooting "4 position smallbore". Competition is excellent for practice, though positional less so, however some have a job that requires more than positional shooting and often at high round counts.
wareagle has it. The Leupold and EoTechs. The Trijicon 1-8's are actually doing well.
To all,
I'm not saying that SWFA scopes never break or have any issues. I am saying that they are extremely reliable, very durable scopes and maybe second only to NF from that perspective.
I wonder if 1,000 rounds a week would have got him into the Olympics or if he was just lacking in natural talent?
Not quite you stupid fuuck. I had the ability for sure. Just not the desire or finances to go halfway across the country to try out nor the equipment to really compete at that level. I'm still amazed at how well I did competing against others with Anschutz match rifles while using an old Winchester 52 c myself. I doubt you or anyone else here could have done better or even as well.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
That was three shooters, and we're not shooting "4 position smallbore". Competition is excellent for practice, though positional less so, however some have a job that requires more than positional shooting and often at high round counts.
6 days, 5 guns/uppers (with a bit of pistol).
What is your job ? I've never seen you or anyone else say on here. Mine is building, troubleshooting, repairing 1911 pistols.
I wonder if 1,000 rounds a week would have got him into the Olympics or if he was just lacking in natural talent?
Not quite you stupid fuuck. I had the ability for sure. Just not the desire or finances to go halfway across the country to try out nor the equipment to really compete at that level. I'm still amazed at how well I did competing against others with Anschutz match rifles while using an old Winchester 52 c myself. I doubt you or anyone else here could have done better or even as well.
Screw you! I'm voting for Trump again!
Ecc 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but that of a fool to the 24HCF.
I think the Leupold he indicated was a Mark 6, not VX-6. But I'm sure either would have failed. Of course who could mix up Leupold scope designations.
Yeah, I screwed that up. Seems even worse, being a Mark series scope, but it seems like this has been the story for years. Formi, Frank Galli, and others have stated this for awhile.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
That was three shooters, and we're not shooting "4 position smallbore". Competition is excellent for practice, though positional less so, however some have a job that requires more than positional shooting and often at high round counts.
6 days, 5 guns/uppers (with a bit of pistol).
What is your job ? I've never seen you or anyone else say on here. Mine is building, troubleshooting, repairing 1911 pistols.
You build them, then you troubleshoot them, then you repair them, repeat.
Why does anybody go through 12,000 rounds per week ? Is that among a bunch of shooters ? I went through all the local league matches, to the state championships, to the empire state games and on to the Northeast states championships and never went through more than 500 rounds per week in practice the whole time. This in registered 4 position smallbore which is very demanding of precision.
That was three shooters, and we're not shooting "4 position smallbore". Competition is excellent for practice, though positional less so, however some have a job that requires more than positional shooting and often at high round counts.
6 days, 5 guns/uppers (with a bit of pistol).
What is your job ? I've never seen you or anyone else say on here. Mine is building, troubleshooting, repairing 1911 pistols.
You build them, then you troubleshoot them, then you repair them, repeat.
Blackfart, Carry on. you're dumbfucktitude is off the scales. Tell us more about your "job" building 1911's. Sounds very demanding.... Were your mom and dad brother and sister or just first cousins?
I just built my 4th kraken and coke....probably took as much skill as assembling a 1911 you dumbfuck. *Edit to add- that's a mixed drink. Thought I'd clarify since you're obviously too dimwitted to perceive the obvious.
I doubt like hell you can even make a mixed drink without help.Killing more brain cells with alcohol is the last thing you should be doing when you've only got one or two left you pitifully stupid piece of shyt..
back on topic...if SWFA would put a #4 in the SFP for their 3-9 they would put Leupold out of business. Hell I love the view through a Leupold, love the damn reticle, nothing to dislike about the appearances of the scope, its just sad the things fail for no reason. I would buy Leupold first everytime if they actually ever did produce a product where 100% of their scopes would be trouble free from a wandering zero, and incorrect dialing say for just 4000 rounds of normal use on something no bigger than an 8 pound 30-06. I will say however that the most entertaining and enlightening conversations on the optics forum always occur in the evening after everyone has had a few drinks. Reminds me of the story of why the brain surgeon had a few before his next operation to keep his hands steady.
I have not. I'm currently looking at options to my Leup VX3 with CDS. I'm a pretty simple guy, and in the small minority - I'd prefer a simpler reticle.
For me a 3-15x42 SFP with low profile pop-up locking turrets, bold post #4 lit dot reticle, and NF or SWFA tracking would be my dream hunting scope. Makers take note.
I just put a SS 6X on my 84M. Spent quite a bit of time at dusk comparing to my VX2 3-9. Optically, it tough to distinguish. Looking into darker sections of the woods there seemed to be times where either would appear a tiny bit better than the other. Bottom line, that's awash. I do prefer the duplex reticle on the Leupold. I have to move the SS around a bit to find the center when looking into darker woods or against a darker hide. I had a few deer in the woods who cooperated for my comparisons. A darker doe was a little harder to see where the lighter fawns were easy with either. The SS reticle is not ideal for my tastes, but I think it will be usable.
I have not. I'm currently looking at options to my Leup VX3 with CDS. I'm a pretty simple guy, and in the small minority - I'd prefer a simpler reticle.
The 3x9 is a very very good hunting scope, and the mil quad, or moa quad reticle is quite simple. Either hold over , or dial. The reticle is not too busy, like some reticles.
A 3x9 with lower turrets and a mildot reticle would be hard for me to pass up.
I be happy with a 3-9 with a standard duplex reticle...........
Have either of you two tried the current 3-9?
I don't need to.
I think in yards and inches and don't plan on shooting over 5 or 6 hundred yards.
There's a couple of reasons I don't like the tall exposed turrets. One is they are too inviting to the prankster's I run around with.
So neither of you have ever actually used the product at hand, nor even looked through one.... yet you feel obligated to comment about them on a thread that's clearly asking for actual experience...... AND making suggestions on how it could be improved.... classic.
Thinking in yards and inches has nothing to do with using a Mil-based reticle.... but you probably knew that too.... since you've never done that either.
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
A 3x9 with lower turrets and a mildot reticle would be hard for me to pass up.
I be happy with a 3-9 with a standard duplex reticle...........
Have either of you two tried the current 3-9?
I don't need to.
I think in yards and inches and don't plan on shooting over 5 or 6 hundred yards.
There's a couple of reasons I don't like the tall exposed turrets. One is they are too inviting to the prankster's I run around with.
So neither of you have ever actually used the product at hand, nor even looked through one.... yet you feel obligated to comment about them on a thread that's clearly asking for actual experience...... AND making suggestions on how it could be improved.... classic.
Thinking in yards and inches has nothing to do with using a Mil-based reticle.... but you probably knew that too.... since you've never done that either.
It would be nice if people only commented on what they used. Think I will go opine on vortex scopes since I have never owned one.....
I think the 1-4X or the 1-6X reticle in the 3-9 or the fixed 6X, with the illumination, and a capped low profile windage turret would make a very, very good hunting scope.
![[Linked Image]](https://s26.postimg.org/xu13uj49l/IMG_1486.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i.imgur.com/B2NPbGz.jpg)
