Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Swarovski revisited

Here's why I could not be a Swarovski salesman. Over an hour I fired four groups at 300 yards. Each time I let the barrel cool between groups. The first three groups are numbered in the photo. I was firing at the upper two red dots. After group #1 I moved the windage four clicks left; which should be about three inches. After the barrel cooled I fired group #2. The four clicks of windage moved the impact clear across the target paper. Group #3 was fired after moving the windage two clicks back to the right.

Finally I moved it back two more clicks; or theoretically back to the original setting and fired at the "X". My Tascos are definitely better than this for sighting it.

At least it is ready to go for Oregon's deer opener next Saturday.

I can't speak for the scope, but I am sure the manufacturer of the gun is glad you didn't post it. There is nothing like blaming equipment for bad shooting...

If those are 1" squares, then the 300 yd shooting isn't so terrible...MOA at least.

shrapnel

Does bad shooting explain why Swarovski had to replace the vertical spring after about 200 rounds? Does bad shooting explain why the little hawk logo came off and Swarovski installed a new one when they replaced the spring?

selmer,

They are 1" squares. The barrel has a muzzle diameter right at 1/2" and is 26" long on an ultralight 24" contour. The whole rifle with the z5 5-25X52 weighs 6lb 13oz. I call it a one minute rifle. If I wanted a tack driver I would opt for a heavier contour barrel.

The silver chicken taking a dive is for sure, not a positive sign...

I've had great luck with Swaros. Maybe there's a black cloud, or worse, the shadow of a giant chicken hawk circling over your place, just scared the glue off the back side of that poor little Swaro bird...

Just guessing, of course...

DF

What scope is it and how much so you want for that junker?

shrapnel,

The scope is a Swarovski z5 5-25X52. It is not for sale because it took four of them before I kept this one. Everyone, except one guy, who looked through both agree it is not as good as my Bushnell 6500 for brightness or resolving detail in bright light, but it is better in low light.

The first three z5's were not as good as the 6500 in bright day light or low light. I don't want to start over looking for a good low light scope with lots of magnification that comes in at about 18 ounces or less.

The 6500 is a 4 1/2-30X50 and when set on 13X lasted two minutes longer than my Minox 13X56 on my eye chart at 127 yards. The z5 lasts about six minutes longer than the 6500. The Nightforce last an additional seven minutes more than the z5, but it weighs two pounds!

The ONLY reason (other than the so called prestige) to buy expensive European scope is x56mm one for shooting off high seat in low light conditions. I do not understand why Americans buy them. I guess it's like buying a Hummer for city driving or $5000+ wristwatch just to see what time it is.

JFC, will it ever end..

Or it could be because the purchaser wants the best low light performance he can afford due to personal poor low light vision. There have been three incidences when I could not fire because I could not verify the antlers were a fork or not in less than ideal light. With this scope I no longer have that problem.

Last year when I saw a buck, I could not determine if it had four points on both sides with my binoculars. I put the scope on it and discovered it had four on both sides.

By the way this scope is not 56mm, but 52mm.

Some people can afford those items.

If I needed low light performance I would buy scope with illuminated aiming device. Fine illumination adjustment ability being crucial at low light conditions I would run toward Schmidt & Bender 'Stratos'. The amount of money is no object helps a great deal. I do hate to offer good vintage Rothschild when guests can't tell difference from locally available fine $30 offering.

Seeing the reticle is not the problem.

When I searched the web for weight and magnification the only one to meet the criteria were the Swarovski z5 3 1/2-18X and 5-25X. There is only one ounce difference so I went with the higher magnification. The S&B were too heavy.

I know nothing about this particular line of S&B scopes, but being bored on recent flight I read Mauser M12 review in Sporting Rifle where Stratos with programable illumination control was mentioned. I know Europeans who shoot from high seats at low light conditions almost always recommend Zeiss, Swarovski or S&B.
When looking for new scope I found the biggest problem is finding one with suitable reticle for intended use.

All this proves is that "you can't fix stupid"

I don't go for high powered glass, especially on a 6# rifle.

I have the 6500 2.5-16x42, the Z5 3.5-18x44 BT and the Z3 4-12x50 BT.

To me the Z5 is the brightest, the Z3 a close second and the 6500 is last. The 6500 sorta runs out of gas at higher power settings, both with light and the eyebox, which gets pretty critical around 14X-16X. It's OK at 12X or below and is a very nice scope overall. I got it on EBay for $400 used, delivered to my door. I feel it's worth every bit of that.

DF

I am a fussy customer. The first 6500 I received was blurry above 25X. I sent it into customer service. When it was returned it was crystal clear all the way to 30X. When I turned it down it was blurry below 10X. I returned it for a full refund. After several months I ordered another, the one I have now. It is what the engineer had in mind: Crystal clear from 4 1/2 through 30 power. So far the only other rifle scope to be brighter or clearer than this 6500 was two Nightforces. Nothing else beats it. The z3's are not even close.

I don't understand keeping a scope, or anything for that matter, that does not do what I expect.

I bet Swaro/Bushnell have thick office files on you...

When they start suggesting you buy Zeiss or Leupold, you'll know you have arrived...

DF

Interesting of the half dozen Tasco World Class I purchased I sent one in for repair when my son-in-law fired some reloads I found in the barn. Several were fine and then one was WAY loud. The action was locked up and the scope was bent. It came back repaired and even had their newest lenses.

Here is a little info compared to a Weaver 6-24X which cost about $300. The only one I really noticed I was looking through a tube was the Weaver. I could read line �5� on the "Can you read this?" chart 127 yards away. I could not make out anything on line �6�. The Tasco 6-24X40 was no surprised when I could read all of line "5" and "Can" in line "6".

By the way we don't fire reloads we don't know anymore.