Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics How well do your swaro's track?

Ive got a buddy that says Swarovski is the best, but hes a set and forget kind of guy. He talks an awful lot about wanting to shoot long range with his 300 wsm extreme weather/swaro combo. My only experience with Swarovski was a bad 3-9×36 Habricht. It did the opposite of tracking well, but held zero very well. I dont like the goofy color coded turret on my buddies scope. Im wanting to keep a rifle scope package light and handy. But if i have to throw a trusty Nightforce on my new t3, it wont hurt my feelings. What have been your experiences with swaro?

Great piece of glass

Nothing but good for the most part. Great customer service and you can’t beat the glass quality. Maybe Leica s on par, but I’ve always been a Swaro fanboy.

I messed with a Z3 BT that did not track correctly and wouldn’t return to zero. My Z5 is good so far.

I think Swaro sent every defective Z3 they could dig up and made it so I ended up with it . I have returned 3 so far and they come back in a week with a handwritten note from Swaro. I think I will try the Z5 next.

Thats what im worried about. Having had a bad habricht, myself.

I have about a half dozen Z5's and Z6's with Baliistic Turrets. They've all worked well and are excellent scopes.

My z5 tracked okay for awhile then started messing up. The note said they replaced the errector. When it happened the second time and it came back with the same note I put it on the 'net for sale with the reason why.

They might be great for set and forget.

I am not impressed with the glass.

My Z5 with the custom cam on it tracks great.

Ringman, you have had experience with the Bushnell elite 6500. How does the 4.5-30x50 track?

I had a Z6 who would work well when dialing for a further distance, but that would only track back after acouple of shots.

Currently I have 3 Z8s and so far so good. On of them, the new 3.5-28x50, wil move impact by 0,8 cms per click -instead of 1,0- for the first 10-12 clicks.





¨

Dang, you would think you would get better tracking out of the Z6. Thanks for sharing your experience.

I replaced a perfectly good 4.5-14 Leupold LR with a 3.5-18 Z5 on a accurate 270WBY. Went from a consistent 3/4” shooter to a consistent 1-1.25” shooter. Swarovski said it was fine....Put another scope on it and right back to 3/4”.....
Glass is spectacular but I am not going back....

That's what scares me as well. I hate to put 1200+ in a scope and have it do that crap.

There are apparently a LOT of scopes that seem fine but they actually wander slightly, accounting for less that ideal groups. The only scopes that have zero wander are the frozen scopes. Some of the better tactical scope apparently have very little wander. Best way to tell is to mount two scopes on your rifle at the same time and compare them after each shot- not practical in the field but will tell you if your scope is all it is supposed to be.

That, or just buy a Nightforce...

I love Swaro binoculars but not their scopes. They aren't worth any price in my experience.

Z3 and Z5 glass is really good, IMO. Have both and with turrets.

Here's a Z3, yardage Sharpie marked on aluminum discs. Acetone removes the ink. That's cheaper than an Outdoorsman.

Z5 with one of those.

They track well.

DF

I think I would get a SS 3x9, or a Nightforce....... then you don't have to worry.

You and me both. Mine went tits up during a muley hunt, and three of my buddies 1" Swaros did the same thing. Love their binos, not their scopes.