Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Swarovski AV 3-10x42 vs Z3 3-9x36 on a NULA .338 Win.

swfa SS isnt a big seller i would guess and has sold exponentially less than swaro and leupold

They are popular with the wish-I-were crowd though and they are very solid.

Of course there aren't as many SS sold as Leupold or Swarovski. But I'll bet there are as many SWFA SS as there are/was AV's sold. But that wasn't the point. I just used examples for JeffO of scopes that break and scopes that don't.

Jeff just likes to hear Jeff talk and any feedback he gets is welcomed.

I always stuck to the general rule that the bigger the cartridge and the lighter the rifle,the smaller the scope.

This generally ended up at about 4X on stuff like 338's and 375's.This,after watching enough variables chewed up on them.

Also the animals you shoot with them are the size of mini-vans with fur coats.On that stuff, variables have been of questionable value and the added reliability factor is worth its' weight in gold

I have owned (and sold - LOL) about every brand of scope out there - to me, for the money, NightForce cannot be beat!!!

Do they have the best glass, no, but they are the most "all around" complete scope made. Their track record of durability is flat out proven. I don't think there is a tougher scope on the market = this includes Schmidt & Bender and US Optics!!

You want proven durability, buy a NightForce, case closed!!

PS - I still love my Schmidt & Bender scopes, but they are getting big-time pricey!!!!!!

And Nightforce isn't?

Yes they are, but only nearly half the cost of S&B.

Mathman, you want several $200 scopes & durability issues or one $1500 scope that will last you a lifetime??

It cracks me up that someone will purchase a $3500 rifle & put a $200 scope on it - WTF???

It cracks me up when somebody feels they have to purchase a variable for $1500+ to shoot animals "the size of mini-vans" (as BobinNH so eloquently put it), when a $300 fixed power will be just as reliable, and the animal will be just as dead.

Will you quit shooting that thing! I don't want to have to retube it when I finally get it.

Bingo!

Thanks JB - never failed to eat when carrying a fixed 4x or 6x, even when using el cheapo 6x40 Bushnell Sportview 'Demo/refurb' that cost me about $20.

Leupold 4x and 6x have NEVER failed for me, nor many other Leupy's - and I agree as others, a fixed vs. a variable is just less likely to fail, proven over decades of use.

As to answer WHY anyone would spend 3500 on a rifle and 200 on their scope?

Maybe simply b/c they work? Never had a Bushnell Elite variable fail...nor Burris...nor Leupold, must not be as hard as others, but I don't use them as hammers like NF does in their demo's at the Shot Show.

No doubt optics are expected to be better, but a $2,000 scope is not 10x better in quality, as a $200 scope, just is not.

I'd rather have a solid 200-400 dollar Leupold, Burris, Conquest, or Bushy Elite and spend my next $1,000 if I wanted, on an Alpha Glass Bino like Leica/Swaro....since I use Bino's for viewing/spotting and scope sights....to plaster crosshairs.

Nothing wrong in spending for the very best/most expensive if it gets the job done and does not sting one's finances. Not all hunters are financially equal when it comes to their wallet thickness.

I can certainly appreciate the finest glass to be had, but they come at a premium often in not only price, but added bulk/weight and that is not always preferable in a rifle's carry weight, bulk, or balance.

Choose what works for you and can afford, many options will work when in the hands of a knowledgable operator.

BINGO!!

I replaced the Tasco 4-16X40 on my .375-.416 only because a fellow shooter got hit by it. It lasted many years of firing loads from 235 grains to 300 grains. All loads were worked up to max. I gave it to a friend who is using it on a light kicker.

Hey! hey!.....What's going on here? ...... Who's buying what from who...er...whom....secret trading here and I had handwerk on the phone and no one said nuthin'!

I smell a big time conspiracy....

Worry not there Bob, it's not going anywhere. Yep Skanes a good man but he'll have to talk my kids out of the 300 H&H as he's not getting it from me!

Not bashing here JeffO. I cal l it stating a fact, from actual use.

Swarovski makes the Z3/AV line and the PV/ Z5/Z6). The fact that you count only the AV Swaros failures is NOT what makes it worse but actually what makes it BETTER. Swaro�s PV and the PV derived scopes are tough and reliable. You cannot extrapolate the AV failures to Swaro�s rest of the lines and if you do it�s WRONG(biased).





Drawing conclusions on stats from google searches is questionable. You search on the AV Swaro models and extrapolate on all. You don�t account for the factors that push hits up the pages. You are also dealing with a colored sample (willingness to report or bitch) and in your your count of 6 users reporting Swaro AV problems you missed E that also reports such problems even though he does not own any AVs(and never did))

Aic

A "Google search" would also show that Swarovski bino's have a long history of fogging even though they don't. One story repeated 1000 times doesn't mean an epidemic. A seeming epidemic started by a person who never owned or used a Swarovski bino. So much for Google searches.

Plus one, you wordy bastid.