All I have are 6x42's. How is the eyebox/relief of the 10x and the 1-4x(mostly set at 4x) in comparison.

Thanks??

I was thinking about the 10x42 version for my 260 Rem and would like to know as well. Might go with the 6x42 though. The 3-9x42 looks really good but for 1/2 the money the fixed powers are appealing at this stage of my life.

The 10x MQ is a great scope for what it is, but the box is more finicky than the 6x or 4-9x.

The 10x is still plenty good. Honestly after the 1-4 I had breaking in less than 30 rounds on top of a 358 win I wouldn’t go that route again.

All of the above are easy to use. None of them have stood out to me as difficult or critical to use, so being unnoteworthy is a good thing in this case.

Agreed. Same for the 6x.

The 6x is hard to not like, still thinking on the 10x for a 6.5-06

The only thing that gives me pause on a hunting gun like my 260 is deer at very close range. I have successfully used a fixed 8 X scope on that gun under those conditions but not sure how the 10 X would be in that regard. Worst case I guess would be if it didn't work it could be put on a 223 or something like that.

I love the 10x. Have a couple of them. Eye box and eye relief haven't been an issue on my 7 mag.

Also had good luck so far with the 1-4, but haven't used it nearly as much as the 10x.

I’ve got 6 of the 6X SS’s at this point and need a couple more. Hard to beat them for a BG hunting rifle. In good mounts they are a rock.

I hear you and the 6.5/06 would only be toted out for those places where I ain't hunting in the timber. Tough to beat the 6x for all around, that's for sure.

I find the 10x a bit more finicky that the 6x but not a lot.
I've only got 1 1-4 and it stays on 4x on my 6x45. It's a nice scope and I don't feel like it's hard to get behind but it's moving to an AR and my 6x45 is getting a 6x come the tax day sale

When the 3-9 is $459, I like 'em best.... Have 3 of them, two 6X, one each 10X and 12X. All excellent and ridiculous bargains.

Possibly didn't give it enough time, but I hated the diamond of the 1-4 on a 243, although friendly eyebox and compact... Don't think I desire knobs on a 1-4 either.

I have no issues with the eye box on either the 10x or the 10x HD. As you would expect, the glass on the HD is better, but I can’t say it’s $500 better. The 10x is just a heck of a bargain.

John

Are the 3-9s as solid as the SS fixed?

Personally, I never could warm up to the 1-4 on my AR. Replaced with their 1-6 and it's the shizzle.

Same with fixed 10x. Fine on a .22lr dedicated to playing and practicing long range, but couldn't warm up to it on a centerfire.

The fixed 6x is very good. IMHO hands down the best bang for your $$. I'd love to see SWFA come out with an illuminated version. A red dot right smack in the center. I'd buy one or two!

I got a 3-9 not long ago, and haven't had enough time to play with it. My initial concern was the ER, but have read and been told by those that have run them for quite sometime that's it's not an issue. My limited and initial time behind the scope bears this out.

The consensus is yes, with a bit smaller footprint, albeit sans parallax adjustment, which I don't mind. HD too but they all seem perfectly functional to my eye. I really like the additional field of view....

It's wild to hear guys that could mount up any damned scope on the market sing their praise whether 6, 10 or 3-9.

I have both the SWFA SS 6x and 10x. The 6x is on a 7mm-08 and the 10x is on my 300 Win Mag. I personally don't see much, if any difference in eye relief. If there is a difference, it is certainly not noticeable to me. For a durable hunting scope, I can't image a better fixed power scope for the money especially, if you like dialing for distance. If the 3-9x is even close, it would be an excellent scope as well.

I have the 12x bought on black friday. On a 243 Howa, mostly paper tiger gun. Have an antelope hunt planned for next fall, will shoot the 243 or a 7x57, whatever seems right at the time. Great scope, tracks precisely, accurately. Eye relief is ok for this rifle. I heard great things about the 10x here, got the extra 2x just because my eyes need it.

I do like the moa quad reticle. Before the mil guys get started I'm used to working in minutes of angle from long range match shooting. MOA or MIL, it's a unit of measure.

IME, yes.

I have the 1-4 on a 10/22, the 6x on a 77/22 in 22 mag, a 10x on a CZ527 .221 fireball, and another 10x on a CZ527 .223. I use them a fair amount for cottontail and jack rabbit hunting. The cottontails call for precision head shots while sunning themselves on cold days and the jacks are running like hell at distance. I've rotated the scopes around on the rifles in an effort to get best combination and think I've come close.

I share the rigs with youth and amateurs and have noticed they can struggle a bit with the eyebox on the 10's. I don't have problem with it, but partly because the rigs are set up to fit my cheek weld and length of pull. We hunt rabbits almost every Saturday through the winter and I feel comfortable with these combinations. If I had a 6.5 x 06 I would be very comfortable with a SWFA 10x on it. If I were sharing it with less experienced hunters I'd probably go with the 6x.

I have 1x4's on two AR's and a muzzleloader and two 6X and a 10X on Montana 84M's. The AR's and Montana's have the same bases and rings so the intent is to make it quick and easy to swap scopes for range work or hunting. I need one more 6X for a Montana and have a 16X on the way despite that almost everyone recommends avoiding any SS over 10X, I want to try it myself.

Shooting the 6X and 10X side by side I prefer the 6X, I can't quite say why it's just a better image to me.

Just looked through two SWFA scopes in early pre-sunrise light yesterday. Area is a desert landscape with dark patches similar to my coues wt hunting areas. Compared the 10x to the SFP 3-15 x 42 set on 10x. The 3-15 did a much better job at seeing things at 200-250 yds away.

That SFP 3-15 x 42 is on sale https://swfa.com/swfa-ss-3-15x42-tactical-rifle-scope-12.html:

Have a 1-4 on a lightweight 338 RCM which is perfect for the elk hunting I do.

. :

On the week of April 15 I will be buying a 3-9

I also have a couple match 54 Anschutz with the 3-15x42 ffp on them for precision work. They are pretty awesome combinations, but I gotta admit I would be served almost as good with fixed 10's on them. Once the power ring is dialed above 12x the eye box starts going to hell and not as practical unless I have a good rest and things are just right. That's for my eyes and ymmv.

Steelhead, you might as well try the 10x because the resale value is good on it if you don't like it. Not too bad of a risk to see if you like it.

I forgot they typically do a tax day sale. I'll wait till then.

I am not overly fond of the SWFA 1-4 anymore, I have a 1-6 vx6 which is light, easy to use but I test fire it weekly when hunting with it and a 1-8 trijicon which does not exhibit any random behavior despite it being a heavy optic this has become my go to device.

Good thread. After thinking about it I'm going to take advantage of one of their sales and get a 6x42 and then save up and do the same and spring for one of the 3-9x42 models.

If you don't mind the weight, I think you'll like them. Everytime I have gotten something else I wished I would have just bought another 6X SS MQ..

What's the general opinion on the 3-15 x 42? I know the fixed powers and the 3-9's are held in high regard but I haven't seem much commentary on the 3-15 x 42.

I have one. No complaints. But I haven’t put enough rounds through it to say it will hold up like the fixed powers or the 3-9. But if I were betting, I’d bet it would.

I have used mine hard since they came out about 3 or 4 years ago. Great scopes,and have been rock solid in dialing, and rtz. The cross hairs are finer than the 3x9, but I really like it. I have about 700 rds on it.

That is the 3x15x42 by the way.

I have a pair of 3-15x42 sitting on 22 lr match rifles and I've run extensive ladder, rtz, and box tests on them. Mine dial flawlessly and do not vary when magnification or focus is changed. I can't vouch for durability because they've only been on rimfire rifles, but they have thousands of rounds on them.

I like the fine reticle because it lends itself well to tiny aiming points. Mine are ffp with the MQ reticle and I've been happy with this configuration for rimfire precision shooting. I'll concede I would probably be just as pleased with the fixed 10x which I've also used a fair amount. I especially prefer the paralax adjustment on the fixed model over the 3-15x42.

Thanks, just back ordered a SFF 3-15 for $399. Hopefully it doesn't take forever to ship.

I have shot quite a few deer with two 10x, Suuper Chickens. I REALLY like them close or far and even at fading light.

That is a good deal for 399

I don't doubt it can be done. A buddy of mine picked up a 10X SS and I've spent some time with it. Personally, for our deer I would prefer the 6X greatly over the 10X. Most of my moving deer have been shot using 1.5X or 2X power over the last 20 years. Some of them were moving very fast and it was difficult to get on them even at 1.5X. I wouldn't have wanted a fixed 10X to try to shoot those deer. The 10X would work fine unless the deer was running or moving fairly fast,which most of ours are, most of the time.

How do you deal with the parallax adjustment for hunting, since it also changes the focus? Do you just ignore it and look through a fuzzy scope, or do you have it pre-set for whatever distance you think deer will show up?

Can always just leave it at 100 or 150 yards like most scopes that don’t have a parallax adjustment.

I have the 10x on my 50, wouldn’t be my personal first choice for a hunting rifle. I hunt heavy cover and open ground, vary from 3x - 9x a lot. But it is decent glass, tracks, and is a tank of a scope.

If you are worried about that, then buy something else. I leave mine on 200 and have zero problems. If it is long distance and you have time to screw with it, then fine, but the deer don't seem to notice. I have never seen it as a "fuzzy scope", but maybe I am not splitting hairs. I just kill stuff. I have killed deer from close, out to 430 yards with it and never needed to take the time to adjust the scope. I started buying fixed-power because I got tired of having to dick with it all the time to be on the "right" power. Now, with the 6x and 10x, I just shoot!

Have you ever used a parallax adjustable scope? With all the ones I've had,you don't have to set them to a specific yardage for them to be clear. The adjustment will help if you are looking at a very close object with a high power. Just like a non parallax adjustable 2-10 wouldn't be real clear on 10 power at 10 yards,the fixed 10X wouldn't be perfectly clear at 10 yards unless you adjusted the parallax, but it would be fine at about 30-40 out to beyond 200 if you just left it set at 100.

Hopefully you wouldn't hunt tight spots with a fixed 10X, but if you did ,you could set the parallax at 25 or 50 and be fine at any close distance.

You could get maximum clarity by adjusting for a specific yardage,but it wouldn't be like it would be fuzzy fifty yards farther or shorter from what you set it. I doubt you could tell the difference without using an eye chart,and only then if you had really good vision.With the SWFA SS 10X if you expected a shot from 50 to 200 just set the parallax at 100 and leave it alone. If you expected a longer shot you could set the parallax longer and for a really long shot the adjustment would actually help you to correct any errors due to parallax,so it would help in more than focus at very long range.

With my 3 x15 x42, I set the parallax on 100 and don't touch it from 50 yds to 600 yds. It stays clear for it all. Likely just my eyes,but once set and clear, I don't mess with it.

Clarity aside, how's the parallax at 400 with it set to 100?

I’ve 2x SS 3-15x SFP scopes on my T3 SLs. They hold zero and are repeatable so far. Both of them I bought used in the classified section. One has slightly loose paralex. I’ve been thinking about sending it in for repair because it’s pretty loose and appears to be off. The other one is a lot tighter and spot on.

Have you ever used this particular 10X SS scope? I asked the question because mine is very sensitive to parallax adjustment. If I leave it set for 150 or 200 yards, it's a bit fuzzy at 100, and very out of focus at 50. Same going the other direction. Maybe I got one that's worse somehow, I don't know as this is my only fixed SS scope. That's why I asked what other people do with theirs.

To answer your question, yes, I have used other parallax adjustable scopes. This is the first one I've had that has to be set at a specific distance for a clear image.

No problems. I shot three days ago out to 600 yds and never touched the parallax. Once in a while if there is mirage, I might make a minor adjustment, but not much. I have found that I get the least parallax( none) with it set on the 100mark. That is why I don't mess with it much. When initially adjusting the scope, I found more parallax,the higher I went on the parallax knob. It still wasn't that much though.

I'm still interested in feedback on this parallax/focus thing on the 10X MQ SS. Did I get a scope that acts differently than others, or is this a "feature" of these scopes that the SS fans just don't talk about? I expected clarity at all ranges (other than up close) regardless of parallax setting, but that's not what my 10x does.

I have a 12x, not 10x but the following has been my experience. At under 40-50, I need to adjust the scope to get a clear image. Beyond that distance, as long as I have the scope set at above 50 and below infinity, I have a reasonably clear image. Setting the parallax to the appropriate range does also sharpen the image a very tiny bit more. Basically, if I leave it between 100 and 200 it is going to be in focus for anything over 50 yards. 50 yards and in I will need to focus it. Everything else, I can use as is or adjust for parallax and it will get a little bit sharper.

Yep, all my 10x's are the same way.

I would pretty much agree with that for the 10X I've shot. If I was looking at close targets,I just set it at 50 yards. It didn't have to be anywhere real close to exact yardage to be clear.

Set parallax to infinity, then use the actual scope focus to make the image look how you want it. Then leave it set that way forever.

If going to go under 50 yards or so, that won't work well however.

Thanks for the responses.

Some of these comments have me thinking folks aren't clear about what parallax is.

Yeah,seems a bunch of folks think that adjusting the focus on a scope is the same thing focusing with a binocular. Focus is for the reticle, not the image.

You likely ain't gonna always have a perfect image when adjusting the parallax. You should only have to adjust the focus once to get the reticle crisp and adjust parallax as needed.


People worry way too much about image focus/clarity, whatever.

I'm not the most knowledgeable concerning parallax. Majority of my scopes were not parallax adjustable until I started using the 6x SWFA...previously it was mainly a few different rimfire scopes.

My simple understanding of parallax is that its aligning the focal plane of the scope (what you're looking at) with the focal plane of the reticle so that regardless of head position, the reticle isn't going to appear in a different location on the object of focus.

In the past couple of months I've seen that parallax adjustment in different scopes can REALLY change the focus of the image as well...to very different degrees across different scope brands/models. I wasn't expecting it and it's something I'm going to pay a lot more attention to in shooting this year.

The only thing that needs to stay focused is the reticle.

Focus/clarity became a good bit more important to me this year when I was trying to pick an opening between twigs and everything was fuzzy. I'd not had that problem (at least not to a noticeable degree) until this year.

How close/far, how did you set focus/parallax

If you have the reticle sharply focused then it's because the eyepiece is doing a good job of getting it right for your eye. That's its job.

When the parallax adjustment affects what you see as the image focus it means it is optically moving it away from the reticle. Since your eye is properly focused on the reticle, and your eye can't simultaneously focus at two distances, the image looks out of focus. It's the parallax adjustment's job to move the image to the same optical spot as the reticle.

So first look at a non target, like a clear sky. Focus the reticle using the eyepiece. Leave that alone. Now when you aim at a target you minimize parallax by using the adjustable objective, side focus, or whatever the parallax adjustment mechanism is for your scope.

Yes. I point at a wall in the house, I don't care about the image, just the reticle and focus the reticle and I have the parallax set at infinity. Once the reticle is CRISP, I set the parallax to a setting that meets what I'm, but say for around here, it's at 100.

Everything is clear as a bell, but not as much further away. If I have the parallax set for infinity at aim at something 70 yards away, the object is out of focus, but the reticle is still sharp.

I find pointing at a wall works a little better than the sky, YMMV.

Rough estimate, buck was about 65-70 yard (+/-). I'd set the parallax at what I thought was about 125 yards (parallax adjustment has no yardage markings - I need to tape some on it). Power was set at 6x. Little twisting on the parallax and the image sharped up so that twigs could be picked out.

Did quite a bit of playing with it after that and found that scope's image focus to be very sensitive to the parallax setting. All I had done with it previously was 100 yard zero/set stop, dialed/adjusted parallax and shot 200, dialed/adjusted parallax and shot 300....so I'd not spent much time with it.

I should add that the reticle was focused with parallax set to infinity. The reticle never lost focus, only the image.

I think you're hunting like me, mostly and I have them set at 100 yards or a tick under and everything is in focus under that, within the parameters of scope power.

You know, some sheit is gonna be out of focus, no matter what, with a 6x at 15 feet...

I just walked outside the my 6x SWAF, parallax set at 100 and everything was fine for seeing through the trees at 40 yards.

What scope?

Yep, I'd never had the issue with SWFA 6x's I have and was expecting the same with this scope...but it's noticeably different. Kinda like the difference in depth of field that I've seen in some binoculars. Maybe this scope is more exact/precise...but I'd prefer it not be so finicky.

Nightforce NSX 2.5-10x42

So the parallax adjustment has no yardage marks. I guess look look at something at 70 yards away and adjust it and mark it as you said.

I guess people killing scopes have a little different set of parameters than for shooting deer at 70 yards.

No people killing for me but I do think it could be used to beat someone to death.

I thought the lack of yardage markings was odd but I'll get a temporary tattoo set up for it in the off season.

Let's say you wanted to 6x MO-MO Fixed Fhuqker a HW97 this mornin',just to give it a fair shake(MQ's rule) and timed it with a fresh Lot of pellets to coincide the shift. The astute will savvy from the get-go,that it ain't gonna get a 250yd zero...but if only to stay the course,all parallax is scribed to jive with said platform's zero. Such things tend to correlate in their hasty extrapolations and connect more than a few dots. Hint.

Firstly,simply focus reticle against good light and a nicely contrasting background. Simply pin said setting in place,with Whiner Tape(3M adds 27fps to the equation). This is a (1) time setting adjustment,until one's eyes change in their relative acuity.

Nextly,pin the 'shade into place,if only to keep a long running inside joke rollin'. Then simply scribe the parallax in accords to said platform's zero. Hint.



Only move remaining,is to snug up the works,gun zero,set zero stop and install No Fret. Hint.



Of course zero/parallax scribed setting will differ,even in like chamberings,though differing twist rates/BC's...but constants is constants. A few getting ready to make the leap to the crummy this morning. Hint.





Magnification very much plays a role in requisite Parallax Jugglin',as a 6x Fixed Fhuqker is farrrrrrrrrrrr more forgiving than a 10,12 or 16x(unfortunately I shoot 'em all). With a 6x and a shred of sense,one will likely never haveta' dabble/chase parallax on a centerfire,until in Beaver Dope range. The rear focus is fast,finite,forgiving and fhuqking handy +P+. Hint.

6X MQ for Utility and if you must...10x MQ for Play. Never "forget",that ALL erector travel below zero,is 100% fhuqking useless. 27MOA on a unitized Springer Mount is nice,but I prefer 75MOA rails and the like. Hint.

But NEVER MO-MO a Grayboe...as that is bad JUJU! Hint. Laffin'!





I should prolly shoot some Mind Fhuqk Footage for The Windowlickers this mornin',stretchin' more than a few 6x MQ's welllllllllllll beyond "wayyyyyy out there".

You've been led to water.

Just sayin'.

Hint.

Film at 11:00.

Not the first time I've heard that the NXS 2.5-10x42 has finicky parallax adjustment...

Yep, she be a picky hussy....usable, but picky. I do love the illumination at first and last light that NF did with the IHR. I've got a Calendar Buck I'm a little infatuated with that is a shy guy. I keep hoping he'll mess up at first or last and the NF illumination could be the difference. Only 1 week left for him to make a mistake......

As Stick alluded, my zero and parallax default setting is short and the 6x SWFA has been a nice fit for that use with a lot of leeway on parallax from near to far. I shouldn't have jumped into the NF (even with it set at the same 6x) with the SWFA preconceptions in mind...they ain't all the same, at some point I'll remember that. Should have ironed things out with it ahead of time and that's nobody's fault but mine.

Gotcha

Is it 6 times better than the SWFA?

Not in my opinion. Several things I really like about it and several that irk me for my use, same things may not be an issue for someone else.

Just came in from using it and the SWFA reticle wouldn't have shown up at last legal time for a 200 yard shot across a field to a woodline in the background. Out in the field the SWFA would probably have been usable but the broken woodline in the background kills the SWFA. The NF illumination is perfection for that. Pros/cons like everything....

Understood.

Do 'we' need a $2000 scope to kill deer at 70 yards?

Nope.

In several ways it's not as good as what I've been using for years, especially for 70 yard shots in decent light. In other ways, like this evening where I expected to be dialing from 200 to 325 at last light, it's better because of the great job NF did on the illumination...so far that's the only big + for it that others can't match.

If the one I'm waiting on had stepped out (and I did my part) I'd consider it worth the price of admission, so far it's just been an expensive monocular to watch does and "not the one" bucks....

After the season ends I've got several I'm going to spend time switching between killing steel, chasing 'yotes, and sorting out the +/-'s on for my use.

Boxer, what are you using to cap the windage knobs?

Scott, you ever get the thing apart AND back together?

It's tomorrow's project

I finally ran through enough random attempts and got the reassembly tool to do it's trick. A couple things to follow.

This is THEEE tool needed or at least very helpful to put the mag release lever and spring back in place on the AI version.

Here's an old rotary 223 on the left (with scope attached) and new AI 6.5 CM right.

The receiver opening on the old one is 0.80" front to back and about 3.22" long.. You can see the difference on the new AI, it's about 1.14" front and 1.17" back, 3.25" long. Width measured to the widest outermost location.

What are the 2 there?

I'm feeling as though installing that lever back in is gonna be a PIA

I stuck the new action in the old stock and I am betting it'd work as the rotary mag is center feed...

See edit above.

Using the tool will be the bane of the model. There were no direction specific to the AI version in the manual.

Basically - set the spring and lever in the tool and put a punch in it to hold everything in place. Then cram it into place on the plastique trigger guard while withdrawing the punch and then drive the pin home. I could not do it without the tool, which I assumed was a tool when I first opened the box and f'd with it a fair amount before this TOOL figured out THEEE tool.

My only other AI style mag, a five rounder from Magpul fits. Both it and the Ruger one fit very snug.

Adjusted trigger weight down. Lots of creep. A bargain for what it was shipped. I hate the forearm as usual.

Be a while before I shoot it.

Yeah, there's a pin that goes with the tool that goes in the hole. A short pin of course, so when you get everything in place, you drive out the slave pin with the permanent pin.

The instructions are online but they sent me the new instructions, along with the tool, another lever and the slave pin.

I intend to get it apart, clean sheit up and loctite that screw in place.

I will look for the short pin! That'd help. Rail was swimming in oil and loose.


Yep - sure 'nough, there's a short pin in the bolt and lock box. lol


With the heavier Predator barrel, wearing a SWFA 6X, the balance is just ahead of the magazine roughly. Cool.

https://www.stockcap.com/store/0.937-x-1.000-Red-Short-Cap-200-Bag.html

Yeah, the balance is fine. I have the same scope on mine with TPS lows and a 5 round mag