I have both of these scopes and need to decide which one to put on my NULA rifle chambered in .338 Win. mag. I am wondering if they will stand up to the recoil of this rifle. Their recoil worthiness has been brought to question in the past. Should I just move on and get a good old Leupold?

Put 70 grains of 4350 under some 250's and do a durability test.

I have a Kodiak brownie hunt coming up and the 250's have me concerned!

I'd stick a 3X or 4X Leupold on it...but that's just me.

Swarovski

As mathman says, mount one and see. Personally I think their recoil-unworthiness is one of those Internet things.

For what it's worth, my 3-10x42 AV was on a .325 WSM Montana launching 200's for several hundred rounds, and is now on a 7WSM Montana for a couple hundred more- no problems. I shot it today out to 500 yds (spinning the stock turret) and then shot it at 100... perfect return-to-zero, as expected, since it's been nothing but reliable so far.

Now, could it fog up, lose zero, have the power ring sieze up, ocular lens fall out, and emit noxious game-scaring fumes on the very next shot?! Well sure. So could a Leupold.

Here's a thought. Buy Leupold or Warne QRW bases and rings and mount up both scopes and sight them in. Keep whichever tickles you on the rifle; bring the other as a spare.

Good luck on your hunt and post pictures!

I've had very good luck with Warne QR rings and return to zero.

BTW, 70 of 4350 under a 250 in a 6 lb. rifle could be a shooter durability test too.

I believe you'd actually trade it for a 270 and THEN stick a Leupy 3 or 4x on it. But that's just you!

Excellent choice.

Yes, I have also had great results as far as RTZ with Leup QRW rings (Warne manufacture)... I used them on a 45/70; currently they are on my AR.

Kills two birds with one stone... alleviates the OP's stress, and provides a second, spare scope for the brownie hunt. And saves money over buying a new scope.

No...it's a "mine broke after 80 or so rounds" kind of thing; it's a "the same things happened to a prominent gunwriter" kind of thing...and it's a "the maker of a very well known light weight rifle guessed which scope crapped on me before I told him" kind of thing"...we both know I'm not the only one it happened to.

I wouldn't plan a woodchuck hunt around a Swaro AV or Z3....let alone a once in a lifetime brown bear hunt.

No. I have hunted up there for brown bears with a 338 and a 375.
Have you?

That was meant to be a light-hearted jab.....AKA....a joke. Sorry if it came across wrong, my friend.

ETA: And no.....never hunted bear and will probably never get the chance to do so.

A bear is large, I'd want a #1 or perhaps #4 reticle, but could do w/a HD - and a 3x or 4x would be enough, a 2-7 or 2.5-8 VX3 would give one a light capable scope.

As to Swaro, good glass....but many things to consider for a 'job specific' rifle for the OP. It would work if dependable, but the reticle's I have seen are not what I'd want if I had to shoot fast and/or in bad light where the reticle might get less contrast on a bear.

Just my preference, any reliable scope that the user can see the crosshairs on 'Bear Hair' should do, but 3-4x would be where I'd want to be on the high side.

Well, sure, and I respect your experience and opinion. But, there's buttloads of us who've had problems with Leupolds, too...

Anyway, the Internet is a tinder-dry and very windy place... grin... and a few experiences can turn into an "everybody says..." like wildfire.

I'll continue to believe what my own experiences tell me about my Swaro. Internet be damned!

Slap the 3-10 on there and go hunting. I would not question the ability of Swaro to withstand recoil. Where is this thinking coming from?

From people who have had them break.Some have posted experiences on here....And from a lot less recoil than the OP's 6# 338 Win Mag.It is no secret.

It may be fine....who knows? Things do seem to break when they break...or not, which leads to these discussions.

But the OP also asked should he consider a Leupold (?).Since there were plenty of knowledgeable Swaro fans showing up, I offered my opinion based on my experience.

Actually for me this would not be a question of Swaro vs Leupold, but "variable" vs "fixed".Any scope can break but I would bet the farm on a fixed power over a variable, on a 6# 338 Win Mag.I don't see any real world advantage to a variable on a brown bear hunt.

When the AVs were introduced there were relatively a lot of issues with the reliability particularly the 3-9 version. That is where the bad press came from and it was justified. We were Swaro dealers at that time.

Complicating the reliability issue was the sales structure. Swaro was dealer direct and would take on small dealers for something like a 20 scope order, say. They had a minimum markup that you could not sell under--10%. Those two factors meant a lot of scopes sat on the dealer shelf for a long time. To move against everyone else selling at the same 10%, they went across the counter at less than 10%, but we did not advertise it.

A significant number of 3-9s went back for a fix after puking in the field...and they puked pretty quickly. The 3-10s were better but...

That changed, of course, as they improved the scope but the problem kept popping up from old stock gathering dust sold as "new" from the dealer network. They all looked the same...except for the serial number.

So I'd check the manufacture date of the older unused or lightly used models with the serial number(call to CS) prior to going to Alaska...Swaros CS was great to us, BTW.

The recent Swaros are probably just as reliable as Swaro wants to make them.

I've seen two go down on the first day of a class..... They are one of the last scopes I would put on a rifle.

i was considering both of those for my new 308win but in the end there was too much i liked about the Z6 1.7-10x42 including stouter construction
the other scopes are trimmer than this one but i wouldnt say this one is bulky except on the wad of cash needed to buy it

Install a NightForce 2.5x10x32 on it - you can then beat the living schit out of it & not worry!!

Will he also be beating hell out of his eye brow or the bridge of his nose?

Neither!!

NightForce 2.5-10x32 specs:

3.7" eye relief

12" in length



Swarovski AV 3-10x42 specs:

3.5" eye relief

12.44" in length

now post the weight difference

NightForce = 19 oz

Swarovski AV = 12.7 oz


6.3 oz difference = take 2 less candy bars & you're even !!!!

Sako--what reticle did you buy?

#4

This.

I can believe they had a problem early on. I cannot believe that Swarovski, of all people, would just continue to sell an essentially defective product.

As I've said before, I'm not married to the damn thing and will report any issues I have. It's just that it's been so mechanically reliable, on a pretty hard kicking "platform" no less, that I can't help but defend it when it's called mechanically UNreliable.

From reading your posts the last few years you seem to suffer from either "I saw it once so it has to be true/false" or "I read it once so it has to be true/false" syndrome. You have this tendency to ignore what people with real experience/knowledge say, yet latch on to some really hokey ideas from people without real experience/knowledge.


It's called a sample of one. If yours works, great. But to ignore that there are/were a lot of problems with the AV's when someone asks is setting them up for failure.

Formid, I think you nailed it with JeffO. As for me, I'm one of the "unlucky" SwaroA owners (3-10x42) who had one go south, on a hunt for big mulies. I shot the poor thing to pieces 4 times from 140 yards with a dead rest. Bad erector. Swaro fixed it, I sold it.

Now discontinued, but the old 4x32 Swaro might be a great combo on a rifle like that, for it's purpose.

Never any issues w/the fixed Swaro I ran, it's plex was bolder than the variables I have peered thru fwiw.

"I cannot believe that Swarovski, of all people, would just continue to sell an essentially defective product. "

Well Jeff, I can't believe they didn't issue a recall or something similar...not exactly above board was it?

Admitting an issue and fixing it would have been the way to treat your dealer network and the guys putting their hunts on the line.

I'll be damned, guess you learn something new everyday.

TomK, that is good information and makes a lot of sense as to the poor reputation.
I'd tend to the 3-9x36 all things being equal. HOWEVER, I'd lean to the longest eye relief first. It will be an issue on that 6lb rifle.
I like 4" of eye relief, but I am a chicken at heart when it comes to getting hammered in the face.

The almost eye-watering irony being, of course, that most of the problems reported are a sample of one as well. Like JG. Bought it, had a problem, sold it, now every time there's a thread, there's he and a couple other guys bashing them. Based on a sample of one. And this is why I made this very point earlier in the thread. It doesn't take much to make an "everybody knows..." or "everybody says..." scenario.... Those are just as bad as the "I saw it once" scenario as you describe.

Like I SAID, I'm not married to the phookin' thing. And I'm not claiming expertitude with them. But guys act like they fly to flinders on a rifle that kicks. That may be their experience, but it's not mine, nor that of MANY other people who use them. Yet we are guilty of "sample of one"? Not seeing that. Rather, on the AV threads I see a vast <g> majority of folks report no problems, and the same few detractors.

Shall we talk about the SEVERAL Leup's I've had problems with? There's busted Leup threads all over the place. Guess they are garbage?

Edit: hey, this reads as testy, and I don't mean it that way. No offense intended to anyone; I'm not belittling anybody's experience. I'd be pissed too if my fancypants Swaro scope crapped out on me.

Man, I am JINXING my AV with all this talk!

Always a pleasure gentlemen.

Thanks for all the input guys. I think that I'll roll the dice and throw on the AV since it is bought and paid for. I don't mind taking a few risks as I have bought quite a few Kimbers. If it goes belly up, I will go shopping for a fixed power Schmidt&Bender.

I put an AV3-9 with 4A reticule on my 8lb 338WM close on 3 years ago; fired well over 200 full power rounds.
No complaints, nice scope

My sample of 4 swaros, ( 1 AV and 3 Z 3's) has been problem free. I've a couple respected friends who've had issues with theirs, but for me and many others they've been a great scope.
My 7 3/4 lbs. 300 H&H has got some snap to it, but with 500+ rounds behind it the swaro has been fine; although I'll admit once I've got my load developed I'm not playing with the adjustments like other folks, I pretty much just practice then go huntin'

For your bear hunt I would look at a 3-9 Trijicon Accupoint crosshair with a green dot. Just a suggestion

No. Not a sample of one.





Yes. I am disappointed with most scopes made.

The difference between them is that there are not wide problems with Leupold's being destroyed from just shooting on average BG rifles. The AV's break from just shooting.

If my count is right there are 6 posters on this thread that have or have had Swarovski AV scopes. 3 have had problems. All three have of those have seen multiple AV's have issues. 3 out of 6 isn't a sample of one, it's a clue. What makes it worse is that we are not talking about Swarovski's as a whole like everyone does with Leupold, but one specific product line.

As a curiosity I just did a google search for "problems with___" Leupold, Swarovski AV, Nightforce, and SWFA SS. Note that I only searched for one specific model of Swaro but the entire line of the others. There were 12 links to hunters having actual broken AV's on the first three pages. Each one of those had multiple posters with problems. There were 9 links with actual mechanical problems with every Leupold model ever made on the first three pages. All but one were with tracking issues. hmmm.... how many Leupold scopes do you think are sold for every AV? There was one (1) Nightforce scope in ten (10) pages with a problem. There were zero (0) mechanical problems with SWFA's SS on the first three pages.


So.....

Sworovski AV- 12 links in the first 3 pages.
Leupold- 9 links in the first 3 pages.
Nightforce- 1 scope in TEN pages.
SWFA SS- 0 scopes in the first 3 pages.



We see quite a few Leupold's have issues with tracking in our classes. Probably 20 or 30% of them in a two day hunting class. Always with incorrect or inconsistent tracking. Never with failure to hold zero once set. Every single Swaro AV we have had come through has had problems. Inconsistent and incorrect tracking, failure to hold zero, turrets completely locking up, erector springs breaking, etc.


To be fair, and I have said this before, very few scope brands/models don't have issues when really shot and turrets spun.

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.

That says it all right there. Get a M8 4x33 and you got all you'll ever need.

Is that the preferred scope of Oregon Preppers ?

I won't presume to have your level of google-fu <grin> but I'm sitting here waiting for my 13-yr-old daughter to finish the Eternal Shower so I can take a dump, and I googled both "Swfa Super Sniper Problems" and "Swarovski AV problems" and guess what, SS's DO break. And the AV hardly comes up with tons of stuff.

I did run across this, on the OpticsTalk forum:

"FWIW -- Custom rifle builder Jim Borden recommends Swaro AV scopes on his superlight mountain rifles, which includes some heavy kickers.� I'm sure if you do an exhaustive enough search on any brand of scope, you'll find someone who's had one fail.��A couple years ago,�my rifle topped with a Swaro AV slipped off my shoulder while I was climbing into an elevated blind and fell�about 10 feet, landing scope first�onto a large rock.� It was a very violent impact that bent the eyepiece, yet when I checked zero later that morning, it hadn't shifted at all!� "

In point of fact, the overwhelming majority of AV owners have had great luck. I ran a thread over on that forum and at least one thread here asking about them, and in that case as well, many many people with no problems.

Since that dovetails nicely with my personal experience, on a sharp kicker no less, that's the lens I see the data set through. A rosy one.

I was afraid to google "Leupold problems". Thought my iPhone might blow up.

It may be that the Wizened Ones have decreed that AV's crumble in the hand, and it may be pissing against the wind to report otherwise, but I'm a stout-hearted man of Viking stock. I shall stand firm.








<grin>

Do ya'll just like to argue?


Aicman, there will be less failures in just one product line then there will by in all product lines combined. In any case please point out where I said all Swaro's have issues? I didn't. I said the AV line of scopes have known, common problems. That is a fact. Any dealer that has had to deal with them will tell you that. We had one post here about it. If you have one that works, great! I hope it lasts you a lifetime. Every single AV someone has brought to a course with my company has went down in under two days. It's to the point now where we bring extra scopes just so people can finish the class when their scope goes down.




Here is what I know. I see more then 100,000 rounds a year get shot in training. Most of that in long range shooting. Scopes fail at an unbelievable rate. If you want a scope that will work period get one of these-

1) Leupold fixed powers. Specifically 4x and 6x models.
2) SWFA Super Snipers. Especially the 3-9x42.
3) Nightforce NXS. Most bombproof scopes made. That includes S&B.
4) Hensoldt.



There are certainly other scopes that are good to great, however these scopes are the ones I/we use because they are durable, reliable, and track consistently.

Maybe you should talk with djpaintless about Swaro AV's...

Bet there's a Bushy 3200 or 4200 pic out there like that... just sayin'...

Feel free to knock yourself out trying to find a thread here regarding broken 4200's from recoil. Matter of fact, I am looking to buy a 6500 for my 300 WM and was doing some google surfing and came across this quote from David Petzal.

"The Bushnell Elite 4200 is, very possibly, the toughest scope on the market, and the 6500 is claimed to be its equal. It has a second-generation Rainguard coating on its lenses (which works, and which I have found to be a hunt-saver), good adjustments, and turret-mounted parallax adjustment"...

Not that I'm putting a halo on this writer, but I bet you won't find similar claims about a Swaro AV........great glass yes.

Formidilosus, what you said implied an increased Swaro failure rate if you would broad your search criteria to all Swaros. I disagree with that extrapolation and I actually argue the exact opposite.

No one here will argue with 100,000 rounds a year seen fired. All credability bets are off though if you recycle posts from the Internet, some from people that never used the scope but still re-report problems that happened 10 years ago.

Aic

You got very possibly the toughest, plus you are saving hunts 'n chit.

My google-fu is not worthy.

Does your 338 have a brake ? That gun is going to get your attention when you shoot it I have the same gun in 300WM and it will come back and kiss yah if your to close ! I would go with the fixed power leupold..

Another day of dialing my 3-10x42 AV using the very slick stock turret. Only shot to 475 yds. Great tracking, repeatability, and RTZ. About 25 rounds of 162's at 3100 fps from a featherweight 7WSM.

Will get used this way again tomorrow and/or Thursday.

Jeff_O,

Will the showers bother you? I saw there is a 100% chance tomorrow.

You could do the rain/bullet research for us!

I got rained on a little today. Helps cool the barrel!

If it's raining for real tomorrow I'll just go up on Thursday. Got PT at 2:30 tomorrow which kinda blows a hole in the afternoon anyway. But all I need is a couple hours of decent weather in the a.m. and I'm there! My spot is only about 20 minutes away.

Jeff_O,

I will take care of the out doors in the afternoon. There are a couple under twelve year old boys I know who I'm taking fishing. Their dad told me he will dress them appropriately. When you posted 2:30 it reminded me that I going to pick them up at 2:30.

Enjoy the morning.

Nice! Great job. Trout? Bass? Crappie?

SALMON?!

There are bass, catfish and trout where I'm taking them. Their dad was happy about me taking them. Their grandfather doesn't do anything with them so I get to be a substitute.

Good job, man. Good job.

I'd like to report another session where my AV on a very light magnum rifle not only held zero, but tracked perfectly to ~500 yards, several points in between, and then right back to zero (verified). Only fired about 20 rounds from that rifle as it was quite stormy. But-- as usual-- it worked like a champ.

FWIW.

That's a good thing you're doing with those kids. Nice work Rimgman!

Thought I'd update this.

I've been shooting my 3-10x42 AV equipped featherweight 7WSM a bunch lately, dialing out to 600 yds (though more commonly 450-500) and then of course back. It has tracked beautifully and held zero like a rock.

Well my current 338 Winchester has a 3 x to 9x Zeiss Conquest on it. Been on the rifle since I bought it in 1997. Zeroed it it and well I just check zero, then go shoot stuff. When and if it should give up the ghost, I would not think twice about a fixed 4x since 98% of the time that is were the power ring is when I shoot something. I think a 1.5 -5 or a 1.75 to 6 Leupold would work well on your NULA and your bear hunt.

The 3-9x40 Conquest is what's on my .338, too. GREAT scope for a .338 in my opinion.

Howdy folks.

Another update. Stretched the Swaro out further today. First shot hits at 650 & 725 yards. Perfect tracking. Hasn't flown to flinders yet on my light magnum.

I've been continuing to shoot the rifle & scope (Swaro 3-10x42) and it's held zero perfectly and tracked exactly.

What prompted me to post was that a few days ago I slipped on a steep hillside and whacked the rifle and SCOPE pretty good. Scope definitely got a whack. Anyway held zero perfectly.

I think I'd have a chat with the guy that built your rifle. I understand he's had lots of them come back with accuracy complaints which were really busted scope complaints.
Or you can talk to D'Arcy Echols abouty his recomendations for such a light rifle. E

Kimber built my rifle; Pac-Nor rebarreled it.

I get that what you say is the standard line, the conventional wisdom, with these scopes. They fly to flinders on sharp kickers.

My experience, however, could not be more contrary to the party line... so, I post it.

That is a dandy scope . Its also tougher than the 'standard line' that gets repeated, by a pile.

My sample of one has been stellar.

I'm sure it will fail someday-- that whole moth & rust shall decay thing-- but at this point it's been nice and durable.

I don't doubt they had a problem early on; there's too many credible voices reporting that to not be true. On the other hand I DO doubt that Swaro just kept selling junk scopes and in fact even restyled them as Z3's and CONTINUED to do so. Transferable lifetime warranty and all. Makes zero sense.

(now I've gone and jinxed the scope... lol)

Mine did too for a while. Then a couple of years ago, while looking through my SwaroA at a 190" muley buck, I shot the buck in the guts....dead rest at 140 yds. I tracked it about 250 yds, shot again and hit it high shoulder from 50 yards. I finally killed it dead at 5 yards with shot #3. I took the rifle and a target that afternoon and it was hitting 13"high/right at 100yds. I adjusted it, shot it, and it was back at 3" high at 100. Shot again, it was 9 1/2" low left. That would leave a sour taste in anyone's mouth I'd think, especially when this is at stake.........