Get your pocket books ready ladies. $199 6x and 10x mil quads, $300 off 3-15x42 models, $500 off 5-20 HD models.

When does it start.

Friday through Dec 8th

$200 on a 6x MQ is the cheapest I’ve ever seen. Wow.

So many things to buy, not enough money to spend.....am I the only one with this problem?

Anything on the lightweight models?

I'll be buying a gross of 6x, regardless of what Judwoman says.

Welfare check came in?

Is that life experience talking?

I hear swfa will accept your ebt card scott....

Good to know, keep paying your taxes, I need more free shiet.

Is the 6X a viable hunting scope for coyotes and pigs? Thinking about one for 6.5 Grendel. Mainly curious about field of view at ranges around 50 yards?

should work like a champ,

Be interesting to see if the 6xMQ's come with rings and a bubble level this time for $199. If so I'm buying 3 of each.

Don't they know some folks are in the forest hunting on Black Friday? Sheeeesh....

Saweet, the used price just fell to $190!

Not only is it viable; but, in my opinion, it is almost perfect, with one exception. When your eyes start going down hill. Then, you can switch to the 10X and then you're cooking with fire.

Link ?

Doesn't start until Friday.

Insider trading ?

Nah they sent an email yesterday.






Deals include $300 off the SWFA SS 3-15x42, $500 off the SWFA SS 5-20x50 HD, and our famous fixed-power riflescopes at their lowest prices EVER! Plus, look out for deals on select Vortex, Magpul, Bushnell, and Leupold products.


Black Friday is almost here: be ready!

Wonder what the 3-9 will be?????

I’d bet on 20% off, no free accessories on those.

I’m curious to to see as well, hoping for a decent sale on the Ultralights too.

Not only is it viable; but, in my opinion, it is almost perfect, with one exception. When your eyes start going down hill. Then, you can switch to the 10X and then you're cooking with fire.
[/quote

Well unfortunately at almost 46 my eyes are heading that way especially in low light. Would the 10X be better? Having never used a fixed scope the thought process is that it will allow for quick reaction and ranging on coyotes and pigs that are on the move, anywhere from 50-300 yards. I will do some target shooting with it but mostly hunting.

Somehow you edited my quote and the other guy's quote. So, to answer your question and put my answer in contect, here are the two you intended to quote chefcreed:

Having re-posted that, the answer is, yes, the 10X would be and is better for those of us with diminishing eyesight. The subtensions appear larger and thus the reticle is larger and therefore more usable. It is, in essence, the same thing with a larger font to put it in the common vernacular. Field of view is slightly smaller. However, you just don't notice it and you have the same reticle in a more usable and "readable" format. Because of field of view being smaller, it will not be as quick to acquire a moving target as would the 6x; but, it works and works well.

[/quote
The subtensions appear larger and thus the reticle is larger and therefore more usable. It is, in essence, the same thing with a larger font to put it in the common vernacular. Field of view is slightly smaller. However, you just don't notice it and you have the same reticle in a more usable and "readable" format. Because of field of view being smaller, it will not be as quick to acquire a moving target as would the 6x; but, it works and works well.[/quote]

This is interesting. I'm thinking about getting a 6x42 MOA-Quad because I find the reticle in the 10x42 MOA-Quad a little hard to see. I'm hoping the 6x will stand out a little more.

So you think the details in the 10x are a little larger and clearer? Like a FFP scope?

The reticle subtensions SWFA publishes say the fine lines in the 6x are twice as thick and the center dot is 4x larger than in the 10x.

WTF?

This is interesting. I'm thinking about getting a 6x42 MOA-Quad because I find the reticle in the 10x42 MOA-Quad a little hard to see. I'm hoping the 6x will stand out a little more.

So you think the details in the 10x are a little larger and clearer? Like a FFP scope?

The reticle subtensions SWFA publishes say the fine lines in the 6x are twice as thick and the center dot is 4x larger than in the 10x.[/quote]







Swing and a miss

Swing and a miss[/quote]

So I'll take another swing.

I have a 10x42 MOA-Quad. The lines and markings of the reticle are a little finer than I find easy to use. SWFA's information about their reticles indicates that the 6x reticle has bolder lines, so I'm thinking about getting one.

Big Sky seems to be saying he finds the 10x reticle to be "a larger font."

I'd appreciate it if anyone out there with both would comment about how they compare.

Please stop fugging up quotes and get a 6X Mil Quad.


quote=Circles]quote=Girlhunter][quote=Circles
[/quote
The subtensions appear larger and thus the reticle is larger and therefore more usable. It is, in essence, the same thing with a larger font to put it in the common vernacular. Field of view is slightly smaller. However, you just don't notice it and you have the same reticle in a more usable and "readable" format. Because of field of view being smaller, it will not be as quick to acquire a moving target as would the 6x; but, it works and works well.[/quote

This is interesting. I'm thinking about getting a 6x42 MOA-Quad because I find the reticle in the 10x42 MOA-Quad a little hard to see. I'm hoping the 6x will stand out a little more.

So you think the details in the 10x are a little larger and clearer? Like a FFP scope?

The reticle subtensions SWFA publishes say the fine lines in the 6x are twice as thick and the center dot is 4x larger than in the 10x.[/quote







Swing and a miss[/quote

So I'll take another swing.

I have a 10x42 MOA-Quad. The lines and markings of the reticle are a little finer than I find easy to use. SWFA's information about their reticles indicates that the 6x reticle has bolder lines, so I'm thinking about getting one.

Big Sky seems to be saying he finds the 10x reticle to be "a larger font."

I'd appreciate it if anyone out there with both would comment about how they compare.[/quote]

I've almost canned all the Leupolds and SS classics.
the glass in the classics suck. Guess for 22lr and guns that I don’t hunt Big game with they will do in a pinch but I’m almost 100% Nightforce on my hunting rifles.
That said for 200$ I’m tempted to scope a couple 10-22’s and old 30-30’s.

Well, apparently I've over-explained. The 10X Mil Quad reticle is bigger and much easier to see and use than is the 6X Mil Quad reticle. Even a few years ago when I still had better than 20/20 eyesight, that was true.

If you do all of your typing completely outside of the last "[quote]" you won't be a) misquoting people; and b) it will appear as it does when others quote posts. As a matter of fact when you select the "quote" button, your cursor will be located exactly where necessary to type outside of someone else's quote. Just a helpful tip.

An SS on a 30-30 would be like putting 44’s on a Hugo.

Man, your SWFA classics must be quite different from mine, because the glass in mine is quite decent. Not S&B quality, but certainly serviceable.

I think the glass in the SS classics is fine also, I’ve used a 1-4 and 3-15 quite a bit. Recently acquired a 6x and 10x, haven’t used them much but I don’t think the glass quality will be a problem

Given a reticle subtension in the 10x of 0.05 MRAD and 0.07 MRAD for the 6x, the apparent relative reticle size between the two scopes is a simple calculation:

Size10x/Size6x = 10x/6x * 0.05 MRAD/0.07 MRAD = 1.19

So the reticle in the 10x appears 1.19x larger than the reticle in the 6x. But there are other factors involved, like the 10x having hollow diamonds that are solid in the 6x, making the reticle in the 6x appear bolder. All things considered, the reticle in the 10x appears slightly more visible to me in good light, but the reticle in the 6x is a bit easier for me to see in poor light. This could have something to do with the smaller exit pupil in the 10x.

Thanks for the splaination on what TBS was saying. LOL

I hate the glass it’s obviously 1/10th the price of Nightforce but it sucks. It’s gray and cloudy rains like a mfer most of the hunting season.
the first half hr of the day and the last half are lost in my eyes with the crap glass in the classics. Some are less repulsive than others but non are to my standards.
It’s not uncommon to see the elk slip into timber at the first legal minute. I Pursue them in the timber with that type of light and the glass is useless.

Got a single shot 30-30 that I use 165 grain Ballistic tips in and it’s bad to the bone.

😎😎😎😉

I’d offer to sell you my 3-15x40 but with the sales getting better and better the scopes hold very little value. They hit the door step and loose a larger % of Value than a new car.
If a guy buys a SS classic he should plan on keeping it as it’s not going to bring crap for resale.

That said the SS HD 3-9 intrigues me and they seem to hold their value, don’t seem to sale second hand often and sell quickly when offered.

It's not the first time, nor will it be the last time.

We're anonymous, he isn't. LOL

LOL

I like the 3-9 for sure, I have 3 of those at the moment.

You’re right about the sales affecting value, the BF price has dictated used value year round for several years now (at least in the world on online rifle forum classifieds) As long as you buy at sales price you can usually come out fine flipping SS scopes, full retail no way. I actually have it worse than most of you fellas, I have to pay 8.25% sales tax at SWFA. So I’ve bought more of these used on classifieds than new

But it looks like some SS scopes may be priced lower than ever this go around..

Going to have to agree with Fred on that one. Rain/grey don’t do the classics any favors. The 3-9 is much better in my opinion in the grey.

For those that have the 3-9, how you rate the glass and eye relief on 9 power. I also hunt where I need great glass , most of the deer come out and feed 30 mins before dark and bucks come out 15 mins before dark.

It tracks. Who cares ? : )

...[bleep] I know it tracks from reading. Have you used one?

Anonymity has its good points.

I have two, 6x and three, 10x. They are great scopes and this Black Friday deal is hard to beat. I prefer the 10x, due to the higher magnification and my poor eyes. I have used it early and late, near and far and it works for all of my needs..

Don't tell me....

Where is this sale going on exactly?

SWFA.com, tomorrow.

ETA: Or were you being sarcastic?

Gaaaaak!!!

I was planning on getting another 3-9x42MQ as a backup scope/range play for the 7mmRM, which currently has a Conquest 3-9x40mm, and now the Classics are gonna be $199????
I already have a homeless 10x, that was gonna be the load development scope, so HD 3-9 was gonna be it, but I wonder if I should get a 12x too for range play...

Those anonymous being with "insider trading" knowledge - Any potential deals on NV scopes?? That may be the 2nd wrench in the plans

I’m looking for a 1-6 HD in the BF sale. I hope they are included.

In the interest of science, you should try a 3-9 HD.

Roger, thanks

Having run all the SWFA offerings, with the exception of the 1-6.... I’d say the 3-9 is far and away the best scope of the whole lineup.

I’ll be grabbing a couple of the 10x though, one for a .22lr, and the other just to have around Incase a pard needs to be led to water.

I have a 6MQ and a 10MQ, What makes the 3-9 so much better? I've been resisting buying one as I usually set scopes on 6 or 8 anyway. Is the HD glass worth the expense?

My 6x seems better in low light than the 10 but I like the reticle better in the 10. How does the FFP in the 3-9 compare? Does the lack of parallax adjustment cause any issues on the 3-9?

Thanks.

The 3-9 is better optically.... and on par with many “high end” riflescopes. Though, I have no issues with the glass in the Fixed series... and I’ve hunted them in all kinds of light, weather, and terrain. The reticle In the 3-9 is the same design as the 6x, with the solid diamonds rather than the open ones found in the 10x. It seems more bold to me than the 10x.

At 3x the tunneling is pretty bad, but at 4-5x it’s solid and has a nice large field of view.

I’ve never had any parallax related issues with the 3-9.... and have run one out to 1300+ yards.

The scope itself is smaller than the fixed offerings. If it had a zero stop, and low-profile covered windage turret... it would be the ultimate hunting scope as far as I’m concerned.

The 3-9 is visually better than the 6x. The 3-9 is smaller too.

+1

It's not Friday yet?

https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-hd-3-9x42-tactical-30mm-riflescope.html?___SID=U

This isn't the first time it's started Thanksgiving night.

It’s on!

Yep, just dropped too much money but the deals are on. Also everything on Samplelist is additional 15% off. Just scored a demo 1-6 HD for $595. Plus new fixed 6x at $199 is pretty unbeatable

$450 3-9x42 HD, $250 2.5-10x32...dang!

Ok, Used 3-9s need to be $400 now. LOL

I'll stick with the $650 LRTS from Doug.......but have at er boys. More than worth the $200 more.

If any of you guys are buying one of the package deals and don’t need the rings, I could use a set of the lows.

I picked up a 5-20x50 HD SS last year on Black Friday for a substantial savings. This year is proving to be fantastic regarding the 5-20x50 SS. The savings this year is $150.00 more than last year! Great scope(s) at fantastic prices! Thanks Chris!

No. Definitely not! I elected to pick up another 5-20x50 HD SS. Even with the HUGE discount my slush fund was sorely depleted. Gotta save the rest of my meager equipment allowance for Christmas gifts. Merry Christmas early to me!

...and retailers....uh, retailer...should price match used scopes....

I might have tried one of the 5-20 non-illuminated if they had the same discount.....

Hear that... they got me for anther one. SOLID scope....
Was good to see the 1-4x24s in stock. Grabbed another one of those and a few sets of rings.

Stacking up here on the 3-9’s and another 10x classic. Going to try a Burris fast fire for a pistol. The seekins rings come to $109 with the discount.

Ss 3-15 for $400 vs bushy LRTS from Doug for my CTR 6.5...decisions, decisions....

Sure. Free shipping too!

That’s an easy choice call Doug.

I’d go LRHS over the 3-15... but on a hunting rig, the 3-9 is easily the best choice there.

No zero stop I’m not interested. Get to excited to worry about finding zero in the heat of a good deer chase.

went ahead and got a 5-20 on the way here. When it shows up, I'll send the XRTII back to burris to get fixed

There are scope specific shims available for the fixed Xs and each variable, and they ain’t water hose gaskets. Even you could make them work Furd....grin...

With that being said.... the 3-15 is my least favorite of the variable power SWFAs. I’ve been running another one the last 3-4 weeks on the 6.5 PRC and while it’s performed with ZERO issues it doesn’t offer up what I can get in the SHV, LRHS, or ATACR in similar Xs. The SWFA just loses me at 11/12 power...granted it’s less coin.

3-9 is a PEACH.

All this damn praise for the 3-9 cost me $450..... thanks bastids...

I'll buy all the 3-15's for cheap if any of you guys wanna sell..grin ..

I liked Greg’s 3–15 , I’ve used a lot of scopes in a lot of shiit conditions and and never failed to kill due to glass quality

All this rifle and scope talk, I think folks need to know about your brothers rifle/scope combo!! Haha 🤣🤣

I have a 3-9 on said rifle right now,, am considering whether I need (want) something with more Xs to use for fun next spring. $400 is pretty dang cheap for an SS 3-15 ffp.

But last time I tried the 3-15 I did have brass deflection Off the windage knob problems on a tikka with low mounts, so not sold on one just yet
I like the 3-9 quite a bit, especially for $450.

Did you have any difficulty getting accustomed to that reticle?

Thanks for the heads-up. I got a Leupold VX-3i cds 3.5-10x40 coming.

Yes, I purchased a 10X SS mil-quad a few years ago. It is mounted on a Ruger Mk II with a 26 inch heavy Kreiger in 260 loaded with 123 Sierra MK.

It is okay, decent optics, heavy as hell on a tank of a rifle. But I have never done anything with it yet, that I could not have done with my first old Weaver V7.

But now, I have to figure out what I want to buy for to mount the new Leupie upon. Perhaps I can score an old Kimber Montana in 260. Or find another 700 SA ADL donor.

I’m not so lucky had several bulls slip away due to glass not being able to catch the third point and knowing that their were several spikes in the group.

Also had a bobcat come in to a call one evening. I could clearly see it with my am Swarovski el’s, but when I went to the Leupold rifleman on the 223. I could not find that cat no how no way. Back to the binos there he is, then to the rifle and nope, notta. then dark sat in and I learned a thing or to as I walked the two miles back to the truck. Bought the best glass I could afford every sense.

Greg W talks so high of the meopta binos, I’m gonna give a meopta scope a try.

What do you call cheap I have two that I’d let go.
Hell you buy a 3-9 SS hd and a hundred pieces of Lapua 7-08 brass and ship it to my house and I will send you both of the 3-15’s I have they are moa moa SF and used but completely serviceable. Just not pretty.

With the Swfa sale that’s less than 300$ each.
😉😉😎🤜🏻🤜🏻🤜🏻🤜🏻🤜🏻🤜🏻

I’ve ran meopta for a couple years from Greg’s recommendation, from a 20+ year Swarovski user, and I love em... and for my eyes, I liked Swaro better than lieca or ziess...

Lotsa a Varmint, coyotes and coons killed with cheap glass over the years by shep and I, bobcats included, and it used to be our hobby.. different strokes for different folks, but glass quality in a scope is my last concern... holding zero and shiit gettin ghosted is my first.

Ya different strokes. as I can’t get a Leupold to hold zero for fûck and you Jman have won the Leupold lottery so many times I and thinking about having you purchase all my scopes for me.
But you also draw tags like you have a leprechaun in your front pocket.

I wish I could draw waaaay more, goat and sheep come to mind!!! 🤣🤣

I’ve also been buying and applying for a long time.... oryx in New Mexico first year I applied pissed alotta folks off !!! Haha

Been huntin Idaho for 20 years, fuuckers have never showed me any love!!! I’m due!!!

I’m praying for a sheep before I’m to old to hike

$999.00 is a heckuva deal on the SS 5-20x50 HD illuminated reticle.

Add me to the club of pissed.

20+ years without my OIL.

Nah, he's just glad to see you.....grin

Dayum? 20 years?

Knew that was coming 😂😂🤣. Guess rubbing his belly for luck makes it my fault. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤜🏻

Greg passed anyone need two 3-15 classics, for the same deal.
MOA moa sf. Used!

Ah hell..............

Ordered a couple set of crappy 30mm Talley's for the Fieldcrafts and crap lousy SWFA 3-9x.

Having never looked through the 3-9x SWFA, I'll be reporting my drivel as compared directly to the bushy LRTS 3-12x models I have.

Hope the glass is much better than a fixed SWFA, doubt it will be, but for $449 I'm willing to try and I'll bet in 6 months I can "make money" on the unused scope if the glass sucks as bad as I think it's gonna.

After I compare optics on "the tripod", I may have to send it down to Utah for a full on "playground performance perspective" before I decide if it's worthy of mounting

Since you think it is so bad, why buy it? I think the glass in the SWFA scopes is pretty darn good. They aren't binoculars.

I already have a 6X, 10X, and 3-9. Some talk about how much better the 3-9 glass is but I don't think it is THAT much better. The 6X and 10 X are absolute steals at $199. I do wish the cross hairs were a bit heavier on all the scopes.

Going to order either another 3-9 or maybe try the 2-10 Ultralight. I just wish I could see it in person to see how the eye box is if the eye relief is an issue for me.

BTW, can anyone explain why the SWFA scopes are all designed with such a long eye piece? Seems the scopes could be much trimmer/shorter unless this portion is the reason for their strength.

Send me your addy. I’ll send you a couple of these and you can run your own test - and forego the scope’s trip to Utah.

Send me your addy. I’ll send you a couple of these and you can run your own test - and forego the scope’s trip to Utah.

https://www



.123rf.com/photo_19047247_toy-construction-tools-vise-green-and-yellow.html[/quote



Holy shït that’s funny

[/quote]

Since you think it is so bad, why buy it? I think the glass in the SWFA scopes is pretty darn good. They aren't binoculars.[/quote]


? What binos do you run that are better than SS classic glass.

Since you think it is so bad, why buy it? I think the glass in the SWFA scopes is pretty darn good. They aren't binoculars.[/quote]


? What binos do you run that are better than SS classic glass. [/quote]

Correct answer would be any! Any thing even the blister pack Bushnell’s are better. 😉

a lot of that has to do with the parallax adjustment being in the "back" of the scope rather than the front

this also cuts manufacturing costs considerably

We need tresmon to do a sticky called “How to quote others so they can understand what the fugg you’re talking about.”

Maybe do it in four seperate installments....

🤪

Lol👍

Sorry was distracted between wrestling matches and hurrying.

You can call me FRUD

[quote=fredIIWe need tresmon to do a sticky called “How to quote others so they can understand what the fugg you’re talking about.”

Maybe do it in four seperate installments....

🤪[/quot

Sorry was distracted between wrestling matches and hurrying.

You can call me FRUD [/quote]

Hahaha!

Wanna buy some Whites boots?

💩💩💩

Haha........

Because for two years now I've heard how much better the glass is in the "hd" 3-9x vs the fixed fuggers. Also, because I can. Also, because I'll make money when I sell it.

Also, because it's going on a "medium" to "long range" bad weather deer rifle......AKA Barrett Fieldcraft 1-7 Twist 243 and the scope has been proven to be "bomb proof".

If the glass is 1/3 Better than the fixed 6x I still have, I'll probably keep it.

Mostly, out of curiosity is why I bought it. I like to actually experience and use things for myself, which is why I often laugh when others say this scope is more clear than that one. Or this one tracks and this one doesn't. You can't compare scopes unless you have them side by side on a tripod, or at the range on the guns shooting on the same day, in the same conditions.

One last note, evidently if your in the land of mormons you can't compare or test them unless C-clamped to a cold beam in a playground.

The glass in the 3-9 is significantly better than the 6x. By ‘significant’ I mean you can look through them and immediately tell which is which. The 6x is plenty good for a sight though.

Just mounted one on my 30-378 BEE KCR

We'll see what I think. Yep, the 6x works just fine on my "plinking rifle".



https://youtu.be/0-uXXMOqzAI






Rock measures close to 1/2 Mil wide (about 17" at 940 yards)...........less than 1/2 mil tall (probably close to 12" high)
First shot held 5 Mil wind, not enough, 2nd shot I flubbed and it went low, 3rd and 4th round impacts and 5th kicked some dust up on it right at the base. I had been banging rocks at 702 yards earlier, but this was my FIRST attempt at the rock at 940. Pretty cool getting a 3rd round impact with this setup.........."Lobbing" them in there.

940 yards
15MPH quartering tail wind
Ruger American Ranch rifle in 7.62x39

yes that is good. Especially as the bullet went subsonic about 650 yds.

Yes sir!

Thanks,
Long poke for that cartridge indeed.
approximately.....
885 FPS impact velocity
215 ft/lbs energy
2.2 sec flight time
700 inches or 58 FEET of drop

It wasn't windy at all either.....haha

Glass in the 6x is obviously adequate......coke bottle ish and "fishbowly" on the edges............but the bastids track like lazers

I'm excited to look through the 3-9x..............no need for "testing" other than whether I'm happy enough with the optics for deer hunting. I already know they "work"

Hahaha!

Wanna buy some Whites boots?

Whites of my color! 😎

💩💩💩
[/quote]

[/quote]

Wonder why the 2.5-10x32 ultralight rimfire version is not included in the sale?

Fairly obvious they are great no one wants them at nearly half the sale price.

I was disappointed in that too but you still get 11% off when you add it to your cart. Wasn’t enough to send me over the edge on one.

Me neither.

? What binos do you run that are better than SS classic glass. [/quote]

Correct answer would be any! Any thing even the blister pack Bushnell’s are better. 😉[/quote]

Hey Fred,

Probably because yours are MOA and SFP, I think they only offer the 3-15 in FFP now with either mil or MOA.

Whoa..... THAT was fast...

Don, I am anxious to hear your thoughts on the Super chicken... I have my eye on that exact scope.

Quick, grab one(some). Like it better than the 4-20 XTRII, and its a little easier to get behind than the 4.5-18 LRHS. Mounted, and 3 rounds to sight in .5 high at 100. I'll take it long tomorrow if the wind is down. First thought is great for the price, should have grabbed another. But I blew it on a rangefinder from Doug and a couple AR triggers. Have a zerostop shim kit coming.....

Yeah - it's a great scope Don...

Sale goes till Sunday the 8th!

Took the new 5-20 out to 800 after chores. Wind let off before dark. Same rings and inserts as the LRHS, same dope too. Elevation was spot on to 800. Missed the only poke I tried at 900. Mag was empty then, and I wasn't going to be able to go up and grab more ammo and take it all the way before it got too dark anyway.

Beav has one I looked over and agreed it’s a good optic. The classics still suck. 1175 for a Nightforce NXS and every single time I’m gonna take the Nightforce. I’m really starting to love the compact nxs’s.

Again the classics are terrible at best.

Thanks Don, you bastards cost me a fortune.......

Ok. Terrible at best is dramatic. Maybe in your conditions but the classic's are plenty good for mine on average, even real late and early....

+1

FFP and the MQ reticle push me to SWFA every time over the NXS. Different strokes...

So you like it better than the Bushnells don?

No sir. The bushy's are lighter, zero stopped, and I prefer the lower, easier to read ele turrets But I DO like it more than the XTRII.

Copy that

Jordan I’m not a fan of the FFP have tried just don’t love them.
I’m a prs setting it’s the only way I would go. Hunting give me a SFP and moar and I’ll kill time and again.

Works for me. You can keep all the SFP stuff, and pass the FFP scopes along this way...

Sprung for two 3-9's and selling a few Leica's. I pay the penalty in TX - ended up costing me $490 apiece.

Have the Leica’s given you any problems?
Seem they would be great set and forget scopes with above average glass.
Wish the 3-9 SS hd came in moa.
But I ended up with a NXS milR gonna give it a try maybe it will pave the way for a HD SS 3-9.

I just got the SWFA SS 2.5-10x32 and the eye relief is fine, it looks to be the same as the Leupold VX-II 3-9x33 Ultra Light.

The BDC recital and adjustments are assume!

So far I am very pleased with this scope

Tracy

Nimrod on!

No problems....they are great scopes. I just figured I needed better turrets and have had quite a few SWFA 3-9's and like them. I'm trying to standardize to Nightforce and SWFA. Got rid of most of my Leupolds. I still have 4 of the 1" tacticals with turrets and can't make myself get rid of those.

I understand completely I have three old friction adjustment Leupolds left, trying meopta for set and forget and working towards Nightforce NXS or better for everything that gets dialed and is expected to work reliably.

I need to stop procrastinating and try a SS HD 3-9 but dang I wish they would make a moa-moa model and an actual ZERO stop.

I hear that!! Actual zero stop and capped windage so I don't gotta go with electrical tape and shims....then again I likely wouldn't be $450 anytime soon.

The zero stop would be nice. Athlon has a great one, that I doubt costs too much to make. I have always kind of wondered if SWFA made the big windage turrets just to standardize and save money. They only have to make one turret that way.

One would think there would be a way to drill and tap a big cap and loctite a set screw in place for a zero stop. Dunno, will have to look at one of my SS closer one day.

Any of y'all use that 2.5-10x32 ultralight rifle scope?

I might could find a use for one if it was worth a hoot.

**************************************************************

Looks like I shoulda read closer. Question answered a few posts up.

I am over trying to figure out how to add features to scopes that they should come with.

Waiting to hear your opinion of the 3-9HD. Is it better than the standard scopes and if so, how much?

I'll find out on Monday, which is the day after the sale ends. SWFA shipping takes forever to get to me, so my first ordered 3-9 won't arrive until then.
I went ahead and took a chance and grabbed another.
If they dont impress me, I'll sell them. But, many claim VX3 quality glass, so that's good enough for big game hunting for me. I'll report my initial thoughts Monday.

Just checked tracking and looks like Saturday is now the expected delivery date.....I'm excited to see what I think.

Scope came today actually and I was able to compare it directly with a 6x SWFA and a Bushnell LRTS 3-12x44 LRTS. I had the LRTS on a brand new Barrett Fieldcraft 243. The 6x mounted on my old (my dads new) Howa Alpine 243 and the SWFA 3-9x42 HD on a tripod.

Here's a quick rundown...........first I'll say the 3-9x42 SWFA is awesome in all regards, so much so that I just ordered my third based off todays 3 hour evaluation alone.



Comparing to the fixed 6 tonight. 3-9x has Zero notable edge distortion, 6x has quite a bit. Both bright and clear in the center of picture during good light conditions. 3-9x glass really shines in low light. Reticle is "better"/bolder in the 3-9x. 3-9x looks like a much nicer scope "if that matters" on the outside. The glass has notably better depth of field when viewing, things appear a bit more "3D" than the fixed 6x. Resolution in the center of the scope is as good in the 6x as the 3-9x when both set on 6x. 9x View in the HD is amazing. Slight tunneling at 3x.......didn't bother me. 4x and it is gone.

Conclusions of my first impression............3-9x is AWESOME for a rugged hunting scope with glass better than a Leupold VX3 and not at all far away from the Bushnell Elite 3-12 LRTS.
The fixed 6x for $199 is absolutely unbeatable at that price. Being a bit "glass snobby", I much prefer the 3-9x although the glass in the 6x is more than adequate, sans a bit of "fishbowl" and edge distortion. Resolution where it counts is Excellent in the fixed 6x as is the field of view.

Comparing directly to a 3-12x Bushnell LRTS, the SWFA 3-9x was VERY close in all regards. In some ways, I prefer the SWFA 3-9 HD. Guess, that's why I just bought a third one having only peered through my first ever just this afternoon for several hours of comparison......up until dark.


This comes from my 36 year old opinion and my Dads 60 year old opinion. He is keeping the 6x that i mounted on his new to him (my old) Howa Alpine 243. He is also ordering another Fixed 6x tonight for his other hunting rifle........Kimber 84m Classic 308 to replace a 3-9 VX Freedom CDS Leupold. Bottom line, the glass is "good enough for him" in the 6x. I agree, it's good enough to kill up until legal light is past. He is also Not a glass snob and only cares that it tracks correctly and is rugged, which the SWFA 6x checks those boxes perfectly.

Hope that helps.......

Anyone dissapointed in the "fixed classic series" glass...............the 3-9x is pretty great. I don't think you can beat the overall scope, glass included for $449.

Buy them up boys.............SWFA 3-9x42 HD for the win. (I know others like them a bunch and have for years, but I'm a slow learner evidently) For big game rifles, your wasting your money on anything else in my opinion.

Glass is notably "nicer" in the 3-9x than the classic series...........bottom line. However, only if you care about those things. It's not "knock your socks" off better, nor is it $250 better............but it's a nicer overall scope in general asthetics, turrets, glass quality, size, etc.

Thanks. If only those god awful turrets were gone.

Excellent report. I think you just cost me some money.

Thank you, I think.

That jives with my experiences. Good review.

Glad to help.
Thanks to Jordan and many others who had the LRTS bushy and 3-9x SWFA long before I have, I'm able to experience how "good" they both are.
With the current prices on those two particular models, hard to buy anything else for a dialing/hunting scope.

Already have a 3-15 and a 3-9; just ordered a 6x for my .22. I always thought a fixed 6 would be too much for “in the woods.” I spent some time looking at squirrels and birds through my 3-9 set at 6x at 10-20 yards while deer hunting, and I think the fixed 6 should work pretty good.

If you’re on the fence about buying any of these scopes, grab one before the sale is over. If you don’t like it, you can sell it here easily.

Rolled the dice on a 2.5X10 UL for a RAR 243.....reckon we’ll see what fuss is all about.

I bought an Ultralight too, going to try it one a 527, or alternately put it on an AR.

I did the same for a model 7 7-08 the Plex should match the 162 eld x with in a half moa to 500 which is way better than minute of deer.

I went plain Jane for $249...

Great prices on SWFA scopes and soon to be over. I plan to purchase another 6x or 10x for my 22 rimfire.

3-9x42's are on backorder. But you can still order one.

After comparing the 3-9x42 HD to several other "higher end/mid grade" scopes I have laying around the last few days on my scope comparing tripod...............for my eyes, the 3-9x42 SWFA punches WAY, WAY, above it's price. Even at the original $599 it's a H#LL of a scope.

If your on the fence and like a scope with great depth of field or "contrast", this scope will NOT dissappoint.

So, I now will have 4 of these 3-9x42 HD SWFA scopes. I need to do some more comparing with the LRTS 3-12's I have, however, I think I like the 3-9x42 HD better.

My eyes really appreciate depth of field/contrast, I don't particularly care for a "flat image", even if it's crystal clear..............that's probably why I wasn't impressed with the Tract Toric 2-10(not to mention the tunnel vision/tiny field of view in the TRACT).

I compared the SWFA HD 3-9x42 to my "old favorite" 4.5-14x44 Meopro, and prefer the SWFA. It has the same depth of field/contrast as the Vortex Viper HD LH 1.5-8x32 scopes that I love (directly compared on a rainy day this morning). The SWFA is "brighter" with white colors (looking at a picket fence)...........the Vortex Razor HD LH and SWFA 3-9 are virtually indestiguishable from each other, except white colors "popped" more with the SWFA.

Incredible scopes.............but, everyone has different eyes, and different preference for what they prefer to view......resolution vs contrast. The SWFA is excellent in both regards. My eyes prefer contrast/depth of field............guess that's why the sightron Big Sky models, Meopros, Razor HD LH, and now this SWFA HD really make me smile.

Get One..............or MORE!!

I ordered my 4th yesterday afternoon before they showed "Backorder"..........I don't like waiting for things, so I hope I snuck in before they went out of stock. SWFA's inventory/website hasn't always been the most accurate in my experience.
I have 30mm Fieldcraft rings that are supposedly backordered, even though they say in stock.

While I appreciate the virtues of the SWFA's, and all the man-love going on around here for them, in my side by side comparisons the LRHS runs circles around the SWFA in every conceivable way (except for $$$ and weight), although I do prefer the MQ reticle. I'd spend the extra $$$ for the LRTS Doug has on sale every time.

The 2.5-10 ultra lite with the bdc reticle has disappeared. Not even down at the bottom with the backordered scopes. 25 offerings of SS's this morning, now only 24. ??

I picked up another 3-9 HD to replace a 6X SS on a Tikka 6.5 creed. When carrying a rifle one-handed those fixed SS windage turrets get pretty darned annoying, but on range toys the standard fixed SS scope are hard to beat.

I'm real interested in hearing more opinions of the UL on hunting rifles.

I still wish they would bring out a 3-9 HD w/o the windage knob, couple ozs lighter, and standard duplex reticle.

I would agree, except that there are a couple of attributes where "runs circles" would be an exaggeration IMO; the SWFA 3-9x is pretty close optically to the LRHS, and the mechanics of both seem to be pretty much on par.

It's better except money, weight and reticle. LOL

I actually prefer the reticle in the LRHS to the MQ, though both are great.

Straight to the f a g talk.

I hate to be too much in the dark. However, since this exchange was clearly "necessary" (otherwise, why would you post it, right?), what was the cause of this? Did this JGRaider guy kill one of Girlhunter's family members? Cost him his job? Steal something from him? Burn his house down? Someone please fill me in. Thanks.

It's nice to have options and I'm looking forward to comparing the 3 LRTS 3-12 models I have more directly with the SWFA HD 3-9.

Are you talking specifically about the 3-12 LRTS to the 3-9 HD SWFA? If so, how old is your SWFA?

You were one who sung praises about the Tract Toric, while I thought it was rubbish..............

Several people told me the Tract Toric, even the mid grade Tekoa was "better" in all regards to a Meopta Meopro................no way in Hell.......not to my eyes.

Doesn't matter, but it's evident some of us clearly have very different eyeballs and preferences.

It also helps to put them on a scope comparing tripod..............or a playground pole with a "c-clamp" down in Utah

You can't just look at one and then the other, even minutes apart. That's why the eye doctor flips through lenses back and forth quickly, asking "which one is better, 1 or 2?"

Eyes play tricks and our memories won't allow us to "compare" optics truly, unless we are cycling back and forth between scopes as quickly as possible.

And, I may very well agree the LRTS is better optically, though at this point I'm not convinced. But, "run circles around" is rubbish.............

Nobody likes to get beat with a $200 scope.

True that.........though the classics are pretty good. The 3-9 HD is WAY better.

I just pulled the LRTS 3-12 off this...............................



So I could do this...............



The only circles ran weren't by the LRTS 3-12...............Field of view, depth of view, contrast, lack of tunneling all went to the SWFA.

Not the best view through a camera lense, but you'll see neither one is really any different than the other optically. Except, if you were here with me looking, you'd say SWFA is the winner.

Both scopes set on 4x and then on 9x.............Blue Toyota is about 150 yards away......


LRTS on 4x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/NHfi6T5.jpg?1[/img]


SWFA on 4x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/cBhkP8d.jpg?1[/img]


LRTS on 9x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/WNWf86A.jpg?1[/img]


SWFA on 9x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/iKGRduY.jpg?1[/img]

3rd street is about 70 yards away

LRTS on 4x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/2wMlpI0.jpg?1[/img]

SWFA on 4x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/0dxRoMs.jpg?1[/img]


LRTS on 9x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/bRFqmSn.jpg?1[/img]


SWFA on 9x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/DRJ58zc.jpg?1[/img]



I either got a really good SWFA or all 3 of my LRTS 3-12 are sub par, if the SWFA HD 3-9 is lacking behing the LRTS.

I don't see it.

Obviously the pics suck, but even through crappy pixels..........you can see neither one is running circles over the other. But, field of fiew is WAY better in the SWFA, as is the overall package and image view to me anyway.

SWFA 3-9 just earned it's place on top the 243 Fieldcraft..........glad I took the LRTS off it now. I'll lose 8 ounces and get a better "hunting" scope atop anyway. I gotta lap those Talleys now........later

For sure. Those pictures definitely look in favor of the SS. Good show. Thank you

Your testing platform needs more C-clamps

Your welcome.............I used to bash SWFA, I still think the classics are lacking. But, this HD 3-9 is amazing and I'd be the first to say otherwise if it wasn't true.

Better get one for the sale price, even though they are backordered now, for good reason.

So I am thinking about ordering a 10x. What model for the beginner, MIL.....?

Mil Quad for sure...........forget the math. 1/10 mil clicks .5 Mil holds in the ret. .5 mil or 1/2 mill=5 clicks...........simple.

Ok thanks.

Free rings too. I might buy a CTR in 260, the price is right. What ring height do y’all recommend?

Yeah, but it's all about them "pink pool noodles" on my $12 amazon tripod...............still gets the job done.

SWFA free rings are all pretty "high"

Get the LOWS.........

Lows, ok.

I think someone needs a girlfriend.

Ha.

I got two of them at the door a couple days ago. I think that’s 5-6 of them devils. I like em.

I’ll send him some when I get them back. They are currently in Utah (and they may need to head to Cali for their silver screen debut first) but we’ll make it happen.

Got any pink ones

You should try "eharmony"

One...............

Two...........

Three.........

Not a bad place to be............21" Fieldcraft 243

I always compare glass via tripods when comparing binos, which is what I "sung the praises of".....8x42 binoculars, and they're superb. Only Mr Magoo would agree and call the Toric binos "rubbish".

When using the term "runs circles around" I also refer to the zero stop, low profile turrets, superior glass. My comparisons were done with scopes mounted on rifles about a year and a half ago. As soon as I discovered the LRHS (thanks Clint), the SWFA 3-9's were history. Nothing wrong with them, just my preference.

Good for you. It's nice to find what we prefer. I've never called Toric Binos "Rubbish" in fact I have a pair of 10x42 Toric Black Friday specials arriving tomorrow.
I hope they are not like looking through a Tunnel, like the Toric 2-10x42 riflescope is..........I take it you've never seen a 2-10x42 Toric, or you'd have to agree the field of view and tunneling sucks!!

As far as scopes go, the LRTS is nice, but for me the SWFA 3-9 HD is 8 ounces lighter, has a better reticle, I could care less about a zero stop as 5 Mils per rev is more than enough elevation for a hunting 243, so I'm not bound to "get lost" in the turret......

And the "glass" in my HD SWFA is the superior one, evident in my cell pics to anyone with 20/20 vision. I have no skin in the game here, just facts. I'd like my $650 Bushy to "best" the $449 SWFA, but it doesn't. Field of View is WAY, WAY better in the SWFA as well.

But, who cares. Rock on!!

Raider..........which model rifle scope were you referring to here?

The 2-10x42 or 3-15?

Here's your quote from the Toric Riflescope Opinions thread..............

"I've had a Toric UHD for two years now and it is excellent optically, holds zero, and tracks true. Lots to like about it IMO. My experience is a complete opposite of screamer above."

Well, my first SWFA 3-9x42 HD showed up yesterday. You bunch of enablers....

After mounting it and goofing around with some other scopes / rifles for 24hrs or so, I just clicked the button to backorder a second before the sale ends.

My holiday cash has taken a big hit this year.

Well, my first SWFA 3-9x42 HD showed up yesterday. You bunch of enablers....

After mounting it and goofing around with some other scopes / rifles for 24hrs or so, I just clicked the button to backorder a second before the sale ends.

My holiday cash has taken a big hit this year.

Aren’t they a bunch of enabler, geez

3-15. You were the lone dissenter in that Toric scope thread IIRC.

Cool. I figured it must have been that model. The field of view must be much better in that one than the 2-10x. Or, maybe I just hate a big black ring around my scope image. In my opinion, the Bushnell LRTS is a bit "tunnel" vision as well. You can see it in the pictures I took compared to the SWFA 3-9x.

A lot of guys like Nikon glass too, I'm not saying the glass was horrid in the Tract, but the 2-10x42 Toric I had was pathetic for tunnel view on all powers.......much like the old Nikon Monarchs from the early 2000's. Glass quality was clear/bright, just the overall picture through the scope in my opinion was like looking through a paper towel roll.

Glass is fine in both, i just prefer the overall image in the SWFA and I'm happy that your happy with the LRTS/LRHS. They are great scopes as well.



And, yep, most guys in that thread praised the Toric............they evidently haven't had the 2-10x42 on a tripod side by side with other scopes. Or, they don't care about tunneling or black rings around what they are viewing. A Meopro 4.5-14x44 was WAY nicer than the Toric in overall image quality............meaning field of view, depth of view, contrast. The Toric scopes have danged fine brightness and resolution, but the image was "flat" and tunneling horrific. I had 3 people agree with me who were looking with me. Amazing what you'll find when you start comparing rifle scopes on a tripod (much like you compare binos).


Have a great evening J...........

By the way, your praises of the Toric Binos are one of the reasons I decided to try them out. I'm looking forward to getting them tomorrow.

Same to you screamin......I am seriously glad you like that 3-9, and honestly I could happily hunt that scope. It is a great package for the $$$ and a steal at that Black Friday price. I'll be anxious to hear what you think about those Toric binos. I've never seen the 10x version.

He sucks that way. I've got some coming because of him, too....grin

Thanks J......

I'll be sure to comment on them. I'm sure I'll love them. Binos are way different than riflescopes as you know, I'm looking forward to getting them.

This place is hectic on a guys wallet eh?

Very cool, I hope we both are blown away by the Toric Binos, I've heard nothing but GOOD!!

uh oh...... For some reason I don't think you'll like them because of the field of view. Me on the other hand, don't mind it a bit narrower than some others. But I've spent years using 9x25 leup compacts

I’m having a hell of a time trying to decide on a decent tactical variable with somewhat high magnification capability for benchrest rimfire out to 200yds.

I’d like to stay under $450 if possible. Looking at Vortex Vipers 4-16 and 6.5-20 (Icannget them pretty heavily discounted) but the SWFA’s in that range can be had for about the same price, and now I’m reading good things about the Meopta’s as well. So many choices, Whats a poor boy to do?

Well, this thread happens to be about SWFA's....

We shall see. They have a no hassle 30 day return, so no loss either way.

And a bit narrow field of view in binos won't bug me, long as they don't have a 1/2" Black ring surrounding the view.........

Is it morning yet??

I fail to see what your point is. Everyone has been discussing the merits of one brand over another. That’s what I’m trying to decide on as well.

Just ordered three more of the 6x MQ. I keep going back to that model.

While I agree they are both great scopes, a 8 ounce heavier 3-12 LRHS/LRTS would be well above any weight difference in any samples I've personally used or seen. Usually more like 4 ounces, 5 max.

The ret and ZS is definitely personal preference. I like all the ret options- MQ/G2H/G3- and will hunt any of them. And while I can get by without one, a ZS is a big plus to me.

27.4 ounces with sunshade and throw lever............




SWFA weighs 19

Have you tried weighing without the sunshade and throw lever? So it's setup more like the SS 3-9?

If the SS had a sunshade, I'd run it too. I like them as they help keep the dust off the objective lense.

Out of curiousity sake, I just weighed the sunshade at 1 ounce

[img]https://i.imgur.com/FRP0UPa.jpg?1[/img]

Throw lever is probably 1 ounce...or less.

So, were close to what you've experienced in weight difference.

In all reality, I don't care about 6 to 8 extra ounces.

However, on a Fieldcraft it's an added bonus of losing weight. And in my opinion, gaining performance in the optic for hunting. I really think the Milquad in the 3-9 from 4x to 9x is better than the G3 Bushnell in the LRTS at any power for "big game" hunting. Just a preference I see..........losing a few ounces on the top and in my eyes, not losing any performance is a good thing.

Both great scopes. I have an LRTS 3-12 on a Kimber Montana .223 that I've been having fun shooting rocks out to 900 yards with this past fall.

Good call here, by the way. I wasn't thinking of sunshade/throw lever when I originally commented losing 8 ounces. Not exactly a fair comparision there.

I like to keep it real, so thanks for that heads up.

Like I said, both are excellent scopes. I agree, zero stop certainly isn't a bad thing as well. I have no issue with the added features the LRTS has over the SWFA. I'm just surprised at how much I like the SWFA HD and how great it is optically. I didn't expect what I got with it.

H*LL of a deal at $449

Gotta respect that. 'Keeping it real' is all too rare these days. Especially on the Innanet!

I agree with most of the comments you'd made, the weight thing just jumped out at me a little is all. I've thought about it a little more since my earlier posts- almost all of my experience with the 3-12 Bushys is with the LRHS line. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the LRTS- with its larger windage knob and maybe mag ring- is a few ounces heavier than the LRHS, even with the sunshade, etc removed. So somewhere in the middle of the ranges we were both saying.

As you mentioned tho, an ounce or two hardly matters with scopes like these. Any of them are a great choice, and fantastic value. The SWFA SS line is pretty hard to beat, especially for what they sell them for. I really like the MQ, prefer it over the G3 for a hunting rifle, but like the G2H more than either of them in a FFP hunting scope. However, with the LRHS discontinued, my next rifle will very likely have a SS 3-9 on top.

10-4.....
It's nice to have a few scopes that actually can be trusted to work everytime with hard use. I'm pretty easy on my gear, but nice to know it's up for abuse.
Shot the fieldcraft 243 tonight with some fed blue box 100gr and the SWFA 3-9x on top. Now that its mounted on a rifle, rather than a tripod, I like the scope even more.
Fieldcraft is a keeper too.....

Not bad for only having two boxes shells through it so far. 1/2 MOA with factory loads when I can keep it from "bucking" too much. I've not gotten a group over MOA yet. Great rifle here.

You guys make a lovely couple....

"Thanks Bro"..........haha

And, hey, did you see I finally tried a SWFA 3-9 HD.....................Why didn't you tell me how good they were?

Cheers! Hey, those 3-9s are great. Congrats.

Thanks man, beats a Konus.

Did you score any blackfriday optical goodies?

No. I bought a flashlight and a shirt!
Did you do a low light side by side yet, SWFA 3-9 and LRTS?

Havent... I wanna have them on the tripod for that and my first SWFA was mounted on the 243 Fieldcraft last night.
My 2nd SWFA is suppose to he here tomorrow.......the other two late this week or Sat.

But, I'll have a chance tomorrow to throw a 3-9 HD on the tripod if it shows up as scheduled to compare with an LRTS.
I have 3 LRTS, but one is new in sealed box, the other is on a Montana 223 and I've got one floating around, unmounted.
Tomorrow I'll do a low light comparison
I'll try and remember to remove the LRTS sunshade so it's a more fair comparison as well.

And nothing wrong with a flashlight and T shirt......your wallets fatter than mine currently, I went off the "deepend"

Looking forward to your comparison...

How about a review of that fleshlight when you get a chance

I ordered (backordered) one of the 3-9X42 HDs for my SPR AR. I took the 3-15X42 SFP Super-Chicken off of it and put it on my Ruger Hawkeye. I then put the Nightforce 3-10X42 Forceplex SHV on my Howa Lightweight, which put my VX-3i 2.5-8X38 CDS out of a job....for now.

I have one Leupold (a 2-10X42 VX-5HD CDS) on a rifle that I'd shoot at something more than 200 yards away, I feel pretty good about that scope, but another SHV is in the back of my mind.

That's why I'm waiting for a 3-9X42 HD......(grin)

Sure. It's coming Mid next week. I am waiting for optimal darkness. LOL.

IT'S coming?? I think you're doing it wrong.

..........zinger!

Damn! Que the Rodney Dangerfield video!

Back on track...........

You decide Boomer........

LRTS on 4x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/nWoYkEt.jpg?1[/img]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/mF9nQ5R.jpg?1[/img]


SWFA 3-9HD on 4x
[img]https://i.imgur.com/gMI6f3t.jpg?1[/img]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/79VH3CQ.jpg?2[/img]


Not the best test, got home later than expected due to this................


It really was "lucky number Tuesday" at the big "swings both ways Mart"...........

[img]https://i.imgur.com/TJXv20W.jpg?1[/img]

When there giving them away, I just can't help myself...............

Not a bad place to be......I don't like plastic, but I do have a six year old, "thinking ahead and all that"

Back in the day I won some kitchen towels. It's an exclusive club for sure.


When you get your pics sorted out.....

Blame Imgur....click the linky... pics look fine

Gotta like that Mil Quad! Thanks for posting.

Certainly

Agreed....no brainer for low light....not to mention the image was "brighter" in the SWFA.
Even if the LRTS had shed more light...the ret sucks for poor light shooting.
Milquad is much better for "hunting".
Plinking and varminting, I prefer bushnells G3
And yes, I took the sunshade off the LRTS

My guess is they weren't counting correctly when I ordered on the 2'nd. Noticed the next day the BDC 2x10 ultralights weren't available. They'll come eventually, stuff from SWFA always has.

I just hope it isn't as long as the Nikon Monarch 6x and the Sightron Big Sky 6x took to come in.

Good luck, hope they come in quick. Waiting is no fun.
Evidently I squeaked by with my last two 3-9HDs......they have shipped. Got mine just hours before they said they were on backorder.

I'm still trying to figure why they backordered my 2nd set of barret fieldcraft Talleys, when they have said in stock, and still do.
No communication yet from SWFA after sending two emails asking about it....since last week.
They are probably busy shipping scopes, I can wait......
In my experience, they are not the best at keeping inventory or communicating.

Santa just dropped off a Baby Chicken...dainty little scope. Dial does sound like baseball cards in spokes for sure.

Saturday for me what’s your first impression. I’m nervous as I hate the classics and probably shouldn’t have f’ed around and just grabbed another used NXS compact.

I think I could hammer nails with it, seems solid as hell. Just messing around glass looks plenty decent. No way of getting around the eye relief. It’s going on a 243 for now....then maybe a 6CM if Tikka gets around to it.

Model 7. 7-08 eyes live👍 or ouch 👎🏻

what's the reticle like?

Just get it over with and do this instead.

Or this. Your choice.

Which is better.......#1 or #2? #1........or #2.

I’m thinking 5-6x is going to be the spot. Reticle clear and crisp, but I’m just monkeying around with it right now...

I've had 2 for awhile and love them. No problem with eye relief on a 25-204 and a 6x45. Here's a fence post pic of the 6x45 I got from Steelhead.



And a closer pic to show how far back the scope is for proper eye relief for me.

Unless of course the medium or high line up for you better. Generally, the lower the better; but, nobody here knows your anatomy.

That is where most of my scopes sit, anyway. Not bad.

Baby Chikka. Gotta creep on it a little, but not bad.

I totally missed this whole sale!
The SWFA site shows on my iPad as “Unsecure”, any problems with cc security?

Waffling over SS 6x or the 3x9 HD, for a Kimber Hunter 7-08....
Maybe another sale somewhere down the road?

Yes there will be other sales but they won't be as good as the Black Friday sale on the SWFA scopes.

July 4th and Black Friday, typically.

Tax day too, but as whitetail says, won’t be as significant a discount.

I bought some extra 6x MQ scopes. Supposed to arrive tomorrow. If you make it up to Portland in the near future, you can have one for the Black Friday price, which was $200. Or pay shipping?

I've had the 6x, 10x, 20x, 3-15x, and 3-9x. Strictly 6x and 10x right now, but I still like the 3-9x a bunch.

Jason

Black Friday is a pretty good opportunity to try a scope and pretty much get out it whatcha paid if you change your mind.

4th_point, pm sent.
BT53

I have not tried the variables, but I am sold on the 6 and 10x. My go-to scopes.

I sent one back at you.

Order arrived today with 6x MQ scopes.

J

16bore, 257heaven, others, re: 2-10x tiny swfa.

What’s your opinion on the image quality and eyebox at higher powers?

Would like a little more more mag than what 2-7 leup offers on a hornet and 222 that have gopher duty, but both rifles being small want to keep the optic compact. That said, there’s no free lunch, so if at 8, 9, 10x things are degrading or tiny exit pupil, tiny eyebox, With the little swfa then wouldn’t really be gaining anything. In the end, may just buy one, but. What’s your take?

I ran an 8x36 years back, yes an M8 with a 36 that was PA for 300 yds, was made for a short while, it worked perfect on a Mohawk 222. Later ran a straight 12x on a 223 Varmint, a 10 was just not quite enough to use it's range, but never lacking with 12x, a Premier reticle, tapered CH was perfect, had target knobs of course on that 12x M8.

I would be very content with a 3-9x or 3-10x on that 222, if it's a sporter, nothing over 4-12x for me...on the Hornet, nothing more than 9-10x on the top end would be enough for me. I tend to prefer an AO on anything over 10x.

65br,
Funny you should mention them. Splurged on ebay recently for a leup 8x AO duplex for the hornet and 10x AO tapered reticle for the 222. I’d go a little higher on the 222 if could, but its a little sporter barrel sako vixen, not much barrel to stabilize herself. If a varmint barrel would go up.
Anyway, the swfa 2-10 intrigues, but my critical thinking questions if the scope would gain me much.

Haven’t shot it yet, but they shoulda left off everything past 8x. 5x seems to be a sweet spot on that Tikka. Nothing more than a few glances through it at this point though.

10XMQ’s on sale for $199

If you take 15 minutes to set up every shot, you'll be good with the SWFA. If you take sheit as it comes and shoot offhand some, it's one [bleep] scope.

Yep, now through Friday. And 11% off site wide. If only they could figure out flat rate shipping to AK. Oh well.

No doubt!!! Sucks living in this foreign country. Its just USPS postage and no way it costs as much to ship them as they are charging us.....

I'm hoping the "SWFA SS Surprise" they had mentioned in their email will be the ultralight 2-10 in Mil/Mil. Dare to dream right?

Pretty sure they are just referring to the 10x's being back on black friday pricing.

I fear that is the case as well. Just being hopeful.

I don’t think my scope has shipped yet.