Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Swaro Z5 or S&B classic

Swaro Z5 3.5-18x44 or 3-12x42 classic? going on 280 AI M70.

Is the Swar a FFP?



dave

Having compared four z5's with other scopes costing much less and not being the least bit impressed I would go with the S&B.

Vital....

I've had both, sold the S&B. I didn't care for the reticle getting thicker as magnification increased. (I have a mental block if that's a FFP or SFP).

I'm currently running the Swaro you mentioned on a 7mm Dakota, and I like it a great deal.

I will say this though, both scopes are fairly heavy. If you're scoping a lightweight rifle I'd look elsewhere....

That's FFP, and it doesn't get thicker. What it does is not get thinner.

Thanks for the clarification.

I still don't care for it.

Same here.

I feel that the S&B Classic is outdated zoom ratio wise. It may appear to be a 4x power range scope but depending on the model you barely get 3x effective zoom. Beyond 3x you get tunnel vision that shrinks the image size without increasing the field of view. All S&Bs have good resolution and as very solid but you pay for it in weight and these days also in $$$.

The Swaro is a true 5x zoom scope making it very versatile. Unless you want a FFP scope, I see no reason going for the S&B classic.

Aic

I would buy Nikon 'Monarch' or something similar. The only time it pays to spend big money on top end Euro optics is when one needs scope with large objective like x56 to shoot in low light conditions like boar feeding in cabbage patch off high seat by moonlight. For most Americans buying insanely expensive scopes which they do not need is like wearing that overpriced watch with little crown on the dial.

Or if one wants to see better than another similarly sized scope will allow in low light. My z5 with a 52mm is no better than my Bushnell 6500 with a 50mm during the day but come low light and it is definitely better.



Good thing you posted "most". But let's not confuse "need" with want. We could all get by with a Tasco 4-16X40 and I have used them a lot. But I want one that is better in low light and am willing to pay for it. The z5 does it.

What's wrong the the little crown on the dial?

I'd have one of those before replacing my M8 6x with a $2k rifle scope for the hunting I do.

But we're all different .... Its just I'm unique and you're [bleep]-up!! (see smiles below!)

Pretty hard to beat a 1.5-6x42 S&B Zenith Flash Dot.
From point blank to running and jumping to the standing 500 yard shot to that black pig, eating your corn at 11 PM on a moonless night.
dave

I questioned the sanity of laying down the coin for a S&B 4-16 PMII, but my gunsmith, a builder of extremely accurate long range hunting rifles, insisted they are simply the best. Do I need this scope for 1K yard marmots, probably not, there are other capable scopes for half what I have into this, but I have never looked through a scope that shows the incredible clarity and detail that this S&B does. I am suitably impressed for my money. I will say however, that unless I was shooting the little targets at the long ranges I am shooting at, it's capabilities could not be appreciated.

Not sure which 4-16 you have.
I have a 4-16x50 PMII.
Only scopes that will hang with it when the light gets low is another S&B.
dave

When Hartmann & Weiss magazine rifle comes in I will look at them. I kinda like Nickel AG 3-12x56 with L1 reticle.

Guess again........

dave7mm, I have the same scope you have with Hollands' ART reticle.
I have not looked through the Zeiss Hensoldt or Premier Reticles, but they each have a following that believe they are best. From what I can tell, these 3 seem to be the best scopes on the planet and I would expect similar qualities in all of them.
If S&B had the scope I was looking for, with MOA instead of MIL turrets, instead of the Nightforce I would have another S&B on my light weight rifle as well.

no guessing required


....


dave

Guess they don't have Zeiss Victory's where you live......

Guess they don't have S&B Zenith's where you live......