I received my 2.5-10x32 today.

First observation; that thing is tiny!

Low light performance was respectable. It, and a few others such as a Burris FFII, NF 3-10 SHV, Leupold 6x36, SS 3-9 HD, and a Vortex 1.5-8 HD LH would have worked well beyond sunset +30 here, when viewing a few close targets (<100yds) in eastern woods. If there are no real deer to look at (they left today just after sunset), I look at one target in the woods and then come back to an archery hog target. I see how long I can find the hog, identify an aimpoint and place the reticle. It’s a brown hog that blends in pretty well. I usually do this a few different times in different conditions to see any consistent trends. The little SWFA did better than I anticipated.

Eyebox is not very forgiving at all on higher power settings. Glass is ok. Nothing special, but nothing to hinder it as a sight for shooting either.

I’ll mount it on a rifle shortly and shoot with it.

I will keep mine on 6x for the most part and I really liked the eyebox at that magnification.

Received mine yesterday, yes it is tiny! Even sitting next to a 6x36 it looks minuscule. Nice compact scope but the critical eye relief will likely be a deal breaker for me. Short eye relief doesn’t mate well with rifles that have some recoil! I’ll mount it on a rifle just to check it out but likely as not it’ll go back for a refund.

I got mine last week, and first impression out of the box was that it was not very clear on 10X. I spent more time the next 3-4 days with it comparing to an older 3.5-10x40 Leupold, a 3x9 EFR Leupold, and a VX-1 2-7x33. It came in last place for clarity. There's a old brick school a couple hundred yards away, and the brick & mortar stood out better with the other three. Also a kid's green dinosaur ride with a white eyeball that was a good test for clarity. The eyeball seemed to be more blurry with the SWFA.

It did have a huge field of view on 2.5X compared to the other three, and from a practical stand point it would be just fine on the lower powers as dusk settled in from a hunting standpoint.

I laid it on the lower half of the Talleys on a S/A 700 with the front ring turned forward for a better fit with the 3.5-10 Leupold. As I moved the power up only to 3-4 I had to start creeping up the stock, and on 10X I had to move my head up a bunch. So then I switched the front Talley the other way around to get more room to move the scope back. I set the scope as close the the front as I could, with the rear of the scope almost to the turret, but still had to move my head uncomfortably forward enough to get a full field of view.

I tried to like it, but it just didn't work for me. I called them for a return number yesterday & sent it back today.

I really think a VX-1 or 2 in 2-7x33 is a better fit in this class, and only weighs a half ounce more than the SWFA UL at 9.9 ozs.

I stole 275heaven's 700 pic for reference. I had my scope as far back as possible, more so than on his, and it still wasn't enough.

Any reviews from someone who has actually shot thier rifle with this scope? Pretty sure aalfs review is enough for my decision. But i care more about how it was used vs the weight pics. Real wod use wins

Mounting it in a comfortable position is a concern as aalf described. It will definitely have to be as far back as I can get it.

It won’t win a clarity competition but it’s fine as a sight. I like clarity too, but it only matters so much in a scope. We’ll see if I can live with it.

Any indication this scope has the same rugged internals as the SS scopes ? If not it's just an over priced Tasco with short eye relief.

Mine started on a .223 and now sits on my 30-30. No issues being on either, glass is good enough for what I need and the adjustments have been spot on.

How does it compare to the Burris mini/compact/shortmag scopes? I have a 4-12 and a 4.5-14 and other than the eyebox being a little finicky to get behind I like them for an ultralight.

I've got a couple Tasco 3-9x32's from the late '70's I can say the same about. They're still in use and they still work as they should.

No dog in this fight, yet, but I can see a place for this if it proves to be extra reliable. I like/need a lot of ER, so I doubt I'd put one in conventional mounts, but on a rail, on a light kicker should work. The real question is if it's worth the extra dough vs. the other scopes I already have experience with that have better ER, a performance history, and for much less dough. Lots of scopes will work just fine for decades as set and forget on light kickers.

The SWFA UL is meant to spin turrets. Very positive clicks, lower-profile turrets, and caps to keep them in place. I'd love it more if it had more eye relief. The Leupold CDS elevation turret spins way too easy. Tape is cheap, but I'd not trust it to stay put.

The clicks are almost loud to a fault. They remind me of cards in bicycle spokes.

Haha. I agree.

They need to come out with a 3-9x42 version and good eye relief.

If their is a god, please lord let it happen!!!!

How much would you pay for one?

ILya

I would think $400-$450 would be doable, looking at the rest of their offerings? If they made a 3-9x42 that held zero as well as their other scopes, had 3.5" of eye relief and weighed 13-15 ounces, I would definitely be in for several.

^^^^^^This

If they capped windage and elevation on the current 3-9 I'd think they would be close to that 15 oz.

Yeah, with a plain well defined regular old duplex.
Where do I click "Buy it now"?

I shot with the 2.5-10 today on my 6.5 CM Fieldcraft. Only 30 rounds or so at an indoor 100yd range. Honestly not a bad scope. Scope showed no parallax at 100yds. I dialed 11 MOA between shots for 6 3-shot groups. It dialed accurately each time. On the negative side; at 10x it isn’t the most friendly eye box though at ~8 or below it’s just fine. As to the eye relief, it does make me crawl up the stock a bit, but honestly it wasn’t really an issue at all. Plenty of relief for the recoil of a 7lb Creedmoor. One interesting observation is that you barely see any scope at all when looking through it. Just a very thin black circle with a crisp image inside. I had some reservations going in but came away pleased with it. Will I keep it on this rifle? TBD. It’s hard to keep the 3-10 SHV off, but saving nearly 12oz on a rifle I haul around the mountains has an appeal, especially if the lighter one dials just fine. The glass on the SHV is superior, but I’m not using them as spotters. As long as I can see the target and ID the aimpoint the glass will have done its job.

Edit: if I move the front Tally mount back and use the rear most position of the front mounts I could likely eliminate any stock crawling. It’s not enough of an issue to bother with though.

375-425

Rock solid hunting scope.
I want a super chicken on my model 70ot6
But it needs to be a slimmer capped profile turret wise
Good eye relief is a must
Rtz , hold zero , adjust to stated value.
Every time ,all the time

If they would make a big brother version of that 2.5-10×32
It would dominate the market in that power range and price.


But I'm also happy with my 3 Sightron SII 3-9x42,s on my scoped rifles also.
The SII is GTG for a solid dependable hunting scope also.

Yep!!!

And the lock ring ocular is a plus in my way of thinking also.
Dont care for fast focus ocular,s myself, they equal more moving parts and issues in the way I think.

If it had the same turrets as the ultralight and 4" eye relief, I would think it should sell for the same or not much more than their 3-9X42 HD SS. Less without HD glass.

3-9x42 capped turrets, plex reticle, eye relief


SWFA does it, they wont regret it.

I've said it for a while... Cap the turrets on the current 3-9HD and they would have a real winner. I have heard others say to make it s SFP... I wouldn't be opposed to that - if it is 10x or less, I don't mind SFP. I will gladly carry a few extra ounces for the reliability that the HD offers.

I've had one for a month! Thoughts have been much of what has already been said.

The scope seemed good in low light tested on 3 power in fact slightly better than my SWFA fixed 6

Clarity was acceptable below 8 power but blurry at 9 and 10. The SWFA fixed 6 beats it hands down in this regard IMO

Mounted on a tikka T3 with factory rings I set the scope as far back as possible and its ok on lower power but have to stock crawl a bit on high power

Clicks were crisp and rather audible.

The turret was a bit hard to read and the dot for lining up the numbers rather small, nothing like the other SWFA scopes. Going to get some white paint and make a more definitive line rather than the small tiny dot

Overall I am pleased with the scope so far but need more time to really tell. I've put 70 rounds through the Tikka 223 its mounted on but haven't twisted the turrets yet


Trystan

Me 2

It would piss my UPS driver off, for sure.

They gotta have thought, or are thinking about, or actually doing it.
Tested the waters kinda with the initial one offering.
3-9x42 would cover alot of wants and needs for a broad spectrum of the hunting comunity.

I'm yanking a brand new never been zeroed sightron sII 3-9×42 off my mod70ot6.
Putting it on a savage 220F.

In the hope SWFA releases a 3-9×42 hunting scope with low capped turrets and lines that blend well with hunting rifles

I wanna put a super chicken on my model 70.
But the current offering with dailing turrets just dont mesh well appearance wise at all.

Performance wise for the money
SWFA wins.......

SWFA needs to make a 3-9x42 hunting scope for gawds sakes!!!!!
They will dominate the market in the 400-500 price range.
I tried to call yesterday, touch tone # 3 for tech support
to try and pick anyone's brain about future lineup
15 mins
No one
Hung up
I bet many others have called about the same stuff.
They gotta be aware hunters are chomping at the bits to see
them make a 3-9×42 low capped plex reticle hunting scope.
That 2.5-10×32 is a teaser to many of us.

Hell, I'd settle for a 2.5-10x38 with decent eye relief and capped turrets. Prob be on every rifle I own

I agree! And the 30mm is a plus!

Cap the windage, build a decent low profile elevation turret and throw in more modern, SCR like reticle, and life is good. Illumination wouldn't hurt...

Had 3 SWFA 2.5 X 10 X 32 Like the recticle on the BDC better than the Duplex model. Sold one the other 2 are mounted on Tikka T3X 223 and Tikka T1x 17 HMR
tried one on a Forbes 7-08 was doing load work up with it and prefered a full sized 1" scope for that. Overall I like the scope and its adjustments work.

What works for you may not work for others and as we age things change, wish I had my 20 year old eyesight again!

If 10x was usable the package works with the Bdc for a hiking around, shoot a critter kind of rifle

Problem is most shots that require any range tend to be in the evening and morning and that 10x view is rubbish.

Mine works just fine on 10x. Perhaps you have a defective one.

The one I have is extremely poor above about 8x and others have complained about it here on this forum. Think of it as a 2.5-8x32

Mine is very bad above 8 power as well Eye relief gets much shorter and more critical above 8 as well. At least in my sample of one. If they had just made this a 2.5-8 and adjusted the bdc accordingly for 8 power it would be wonderful for backpacking rifles.

I really need to sale mine as it frustrates me everytime I use it because I can just see what it could have been

I have one of there 3-9x42’s and am very impressed with it. I certainly would prefer a capped option if it ever comes available

I really like the 3-9 HD, but a 2.5-8 classic with a milquad in A ffp wouldn’t suck at all.

Just put my second SWFA ultralight on a model 7 KS in 358 win. It is far better than the Leupold 2.5 compact that came off. The other one is on a Volquartsen superlight 17 HMR. Agree that 10X isn't the best but this light weight scope works well with both rifles 2.5-8 power.

Have many SWFAs. Had a 3-9 HD but moved it along. Reticle is too fine on low powers for my old eyes. Now if they could illuminate the crosshairs with a dot like the 5-20 HD I would have several.

Looking forward to any new scopes SWFA will produce.

as long as it focuses above 8 power. Mine would not at least to my eyes.