Any of you guys in the know that have info into the industry.
They contemplating making one?
Maybe.
Yes.
No.

Lower capped turrets
Bout 60 or 70 total moa
Plex type reticle
Maybe BDC reticle
Lock ring eyepeice


Plenty of us would buy one.

Tell SWFA
We want one!!!!!!
Word gets out they will grab a good chunk in that power/ price range in the market.
500 -550 ish total...

They wouldn't be able to make em fast enough after word got out.

Lot of hunters with larger caliber rifles
Would love to have a super chicken hunting scope.

yep I would love to see it

I would be happy with just a capped windage an no other changes. I know there's a "mod" one can do, but I wouldn't hate a lower wind knob under a cap.

Watch out!!

You are on the verge of heresy or even blasphemy. Most here are in awe and some even worship all things SWFA.

You have been warned, you may be condemned to using nothing but Leupold FOREVER!!!

I'm serious, don't pizz 'em off.

I have made that suggestion to SWFA, so I know it has been brought up.

I do not know if that will go anywhere. If I hear anything back, I'll let you know.

SWFA is not a big company, so they are growing their house brand slowly and carefully. They are, however, definitely growing it. I know about a few things they have in the works and I like the way they are going with them.

One step at a time though.

ILya

Make the 3-9 with a lower profile el knob and capped windage. Modify the reticle to bring the thick bars in some, about 3mil to tip of thick bar.

Drop the big turrets and the stupid ocular and give it a good duplex they might have something

I wish they had better SFP reticles. a SFP version of the 3-9 would be really nice, although the FFP version isn't terrible, I just don't think it need to be FFP for what it is. the 3-15 models, I don't like any of the reticles in those.

Their current 3-9 needs parallax adjustment too.

why? not many 3-9's have that, and if they do its mainly to accommodate rimfire's. I would rather it not have that. more crap to bump out of adjustment.

There are quite a few good SFP 3-9x scopes out there. I think FFP is one of the reasons to go with the SS scope.

Their Ultralight is SFP, but that is a more specialized design.

Ilya

Because the current model has some annoyingly noticeable parallax.

+1

I’ve never had any parallax issues with the 3-9’s... but I’ve only had a couple of them. I think the Standard Mil-Dot, .1 Mil adjustments, is my favorite of all their scopes for a LR type hunting rig.

I’ve also owned several, and none have had parallax issues. I think maybe horse just looked through a bad sample, or something.

I have two 3x9's. There has been no paralax l issue with either one. I also think the mil quad reticle is a very simple, very effective reticle for hunting. There is very little guess work in wind holds with it.

Yep, AlaskaCub gets it. A lower elevation turret, capped windage, keep the Mil-Quad. Maybe add illumination, but that’s not a necessity. It’s a dandy little scope otherwise. Losing an ounce or two would be nice as well, but that may be asking a bit much.

If they could blow up that ultralight design to a standard 40 or 42 mm with better eye relief basically that would be cool.

I see the same exaggerated parallax in every Burris/Pentax and Nikon 3-9 no matter what generation.

I have five SWFA 3-9s, and have been around a couple more. Have not noticed parallax issues with any of the bunch.

A hunting version of the 3-9 should have a low profile capped windage adjustment, zero stop on the elevation, and 3.75” of eye relief on 9x. Keep the reticle and adjustments as is.

Wonder if your vision is particular sensitive, as I haven’t noticed excessive parallax issues with Burris or Nikon 3-9s.

Wish they’d do that.

Me too. Make a good scope damned near perfect for me.

I do have a fair amount of astigmatism but I'm corrected to 20/20 all the time and I'm 20/15 in bright indoor light or pretty much anywhere outside even on dreary days.

I think they would sell a pile of those.

If they made basically a larger version of the 1-4 in a 2.5-10x42mm or 32mm, that would be interesting for a hunting scope. Mil Quad reticle, FFP, possibly illuminated. Having SWFA basically make a version of what all other companies make (3-9x42 with low pro capped turrets, 1” tube, duplex, etc) isn’t as intriguing, IMHO.


Ben

I could get behind that.

I think if they were going to offer that, they would have already. I wouldn't get my hopes up.

Ditto

I'd like that too! Then again, putting a larger objective on the 1-6 would make for a pretty good hunting scope as well. I'd even be fine with saving a few bucks by not having the mag range being smaller.

Definatley a desire out their for something from them other than the ultralight teaser they came out with for alot of people.

If they get too much going on, then they become like everybody else. Right now, they stick with a few scopes that are good quality at the right price. Every bell and whistle can add on money and then it takes away some of their value. They cannot be beaten for the dollars spent. I would not mind a little heavier reticle, but I do just fine with it the way it is, too. My fixed scopes do everything that I need of them.

I think this is spot on.

I own two 3-9x42 SS scopes. One is an early Mil-Dot model from the very first batch (SN 006) and one from a regular production run later on with Mil-Quad reticle.

For general purpose use, I prefer the Mil-Quad, but both work.

If I were to make changes to this scope (and I am not at all convinced SWFA should or will; this is just what I would want), I would do the following:
-Cover the turrets, so that they are lower profile or cover the windage turret and add zero-stop to the elevation turret
-Add illumination for low light use at low power (center dot only)
-Add a couple of wind holds to the Mil-Quad reticle to make for a very small and unobtrusive tree.

That would make it just about perfect for my purposes.

The basic problem with this is that a 3-9x42 scope is not fashionable right now since so many designs have moved to higher erector ratios. No matter how good the 3-9x42 SS is, marketing it to the general populace is kinda tricky.

The way it is right now, it can soldier on for quite a long time. However, whether it is worthwhile to invest more in it, is not clear to me.

From a business standpoint, the 3-15x42 SS is a better platform to invest into simply because of the configuration. If they make the same changes to that scope as I list above, I would be absolutely overjoyed.

ILya

The 3-15 is neat in that you can adjust the parallax down to 6 m (~20 ft). Great for indoor dry-fire practice. But the 3-9 is a bit lighter, has lower knobs and is usually what I prefer for a hunting scope with the capability to dial in shots out to greater distances. Both are fantastic values in FFP scopes.

This for me too, except thicken the reticle a bit and forget the "tree".

Excellent points, Ilya. In fact, if they just added a ZS to the elevation, put in illumination, and bumped the glass/turrets up to the HD line, I’d buy one today if it was priced right!

I’m another that doesn’t care for the parallax in the 3-9 at distance. At 300+ yds it’s definitely noticeable to me (have had 3 examples).

At least set the parallax at 300yds vs 100yds!

While I would not try to take a long shot in the field, I do practice a fair bit at distance even with a hunting rifle. I find myself needing wind holds of up to 1 mrad quite a bit. Sometimes a little more. If sized right, the tree portion of the reticle should be effectively invisible below 6x.

ILya

HD and Classic scope are made in different factories, so it is not quite the same comparison as HD vs non-HD from the same place. I fine the 3-15x42 SS a very competent scope optically given the price.

I'll keep harassing SWFA and we'll see what happens.

ILya

I'd like it with a tree as you describe as well.

I'd also like to see SWFA change the base magnification on the 3-9x so that the "3x" setting is what 4x is now and actually useful. As it currently is (in my sample anyway) the tunnel vision going from 4x down to 3x makes anything below 4x useless, so I leave it set there. That happens to give about the same magnification as 3x on all my Leupold 3-9x scopes anyway.

I remember the FOV discussion with them a while back when the scope was just introduced. They could have gotten rid of 3x tunneling, but that would sacrifice the FOV at higher magnifications. I probably would have preffered it if it was set as 4-9x, but that makes for tricky marketing I suppose. I definitely would not want to sacrifice the FOV above 4x or depth of field on 9x.

ILya

Harass SWFA about putting in my specs, not the weird illuminated crap and overly complicated reticles. Just need a good solid hunting scope, not a bunch of bells and whistles.

I see the points about the market and a 3-15 vs. a 3-9. However, there are a litany of big, heavy, high zoom scopes on the market. Nearly all of which are unnecessary for 95% of hunters. The first thing would be to identify the market and scenarios which you intending to use this scope. My thought is to make something that is best suited to most hunting. While open for debate, I see that as big game (Whitetails, Elk, Mule deer), carry rifles (vice heavy bench rifles), 0-500 yd shots (but mostly inside 300), well suited for dawn and dusk, simple, durable and reliable.

I personally don’t want illumination or parallax adjustments. A well built 3-9 with a good glass, and a reticle design that works at dawn and dusk does not need illumination or parallax adj. There are plenty of other scopes to choose from that have that.

Running ballistics on something like a 180 Partition out of a 30-06 shows that the vast majority of shots don’t need much more than 2 mil of windage, or about 8 MOA. That would be a full value 20 MPH wind at 500yds. Even that is a low likelihood. A small tick at .5mil, a larger one at 1 (edit: and a small one at 1.5) and then a thicker bar at at 2mil would be plenty. Perhaps a couple elevation dots like the Leupold LR Duplex. I could take or leave that. I actually think MOA would be better for most shooters, but it doesn’t matter to me.

The 3-9 starts $100 less than the 3-15 and has the HD glass. I’d rather they make a less expensive scope.

Decent glass, good reticle, tough, reliable, simple.

its always funny how many people want so many different things. I think we can only agree on capped windage. surprised no one has tried to come in and compete on the tuff mechanically/economical area in scopes. The mechanicals are really the only reason to buy these. I also agree the 3x9, isn't a cool or trendy mag power range. although I personally love it for general field use. it can also be used to make some very long shots if needed. I shot a coyote years ago with a zeiss conquest 3x9 with turret added at 666 yards. lack of magnification was never an issue.

This. For hunting I much prefer a simple, tight, bold reticle that's visible in low light to a multitude of tiny marks. The basic mildot could be marked as prm described (though I'd go with one at 1.5 mil as well) and be all good.

The only certainty I see in this is that there will not be a consensus. Some think a 6x is bliss, others a 5-25 with all the bells and whistles, and everywhere in between. I just don’t see, and perhaps it’s just my perception, any simple, rugged variable scopes at a decent price. The SHV is kind of there, but even that has things I’d change, and it is a bit more coin.

You must have better (or younger) eyes than I do.
As I was aiming at my bighorn sheep at 570 yards with a 3x9 VX-R w/CDS, I vividly remember wishing for a bit more magnification.
Yeah I got him, but my rifles have 3x15's on them now.

But how many hunters are shooting at 570 yds? For those that are, there are a plethora of scopes to choose from. In fact, why not just use the current 3-15 SWFA? The whole point is a scope that is durable, reliable, and not designed for the long range crowd.

Not sure why one would think a 3x9 scope could not be used in long range hunting shots if needed. It is essentially a 10x scope on the top end, and a deer or elk look plenty big on 10x at 500 or 600 yds. I was shooting a steel at about 620yds today on 10x and had no problem what so ever. A deer would have been bigger than that.

If I can’t get on target with a good quality scope in the range of 2x to 10x etc, I don’t need to be shooting at a live target that far away. I shoot steel at the range out to 400 yards and 500 if I’m feeling froggy. The super heavy scopes are more prone to failure under recoil anyway. Another consideration when selecting optics. Happy Trails

It’s just not fashionable sound like the scope on dads huntin rifle. 3x9 is probably my favorite all a rounder

And not to forget adequate eye relief. I'd like a touch more than even the current 3-9 to use on my 338 Win Mag

use a lesser gun

Understood. I was just trying to point out that if they added a 3-15x42 to the HD line w/ zero stop turrets, I’d have bought two of them and still had money left over instead of the S&B 4-16x42 PMII I went with instead!

To be honest with you, so would I. However, that scope would be more expensive and face different kind of competition, so it is not clear how it would fair overall. The 3-9x42 SS for $600 and 3-15x42 SS for $700 are still quite compelling products years after introduction.

Now, there is a fair bit more competition in that price range from Chinese and Phillipino OEMs (Athlon Cronus, Hawke Frontier, Sightron S-Tac, etc), but you want a FFP Japanese scopes, your options are still quite slim.

Crimson Trace is stepping into that same marker with a FFP scopes starting around $500, so it will be interesting to see how they do.

Either way, SWFA should probably make some updates and I am sure they are considering a few options, but what will finally be implemented and when remains to be seen.

ILya

Excellent points again. The market IS getting fairly saturated, and we have an overwhelming number of options to choose from. The fact that the SWFA SS line remains as popular and as viable as they do this many years on speaks volumes to their genius. They've been a "gateway" scope for untold thousands of shooters, and continue to be well sought after year after year, both new and used.

If anything, I think a "Hunter" version of the 3-9x would be the most popular change/update. A slight upgrade to a 3-10x would be nice to consider as well, but we could go on and on about what we'd change. Your list seems the simplest and the most useful, however. Time will tell what SWFA does with the line, but I just hope they continue to make them, even if unchanged!