Puked a SWFA at the range today. Pretty anticlimactic...1x4 in a SSALT on a .223 AR. Puked after about 50 rounds. Reticle went blurry, Glass got blurry- target and reticle couldn’t be sharp at the same time. Better at 1x, couldn’t see the reticle at 4x.

Sent em an email, and I’m sure they’ll do right.

The way I hear it, you'll get a 6x or 10x as a replacement.

The 1-4's don't have a great track record.

Wish I could settle for junk. I’d have lots more cash in the coffers. 👍

Subscribe to Cumminscowboys youtube channel Fred, so he can line you out on all the schit you need.

As Hig stated, it doesn't have a good track record compared to the rest of the line. I have no idea what the sales numbers or profit margins are, but I wish SWFA would improve the robustness of the scope. Or, just discontinue it.

I can’t afford the C clamps

But I have SWFAs that I will sell.
And I promise not to creep any play grounds. 😂

I can’t speak for the HD Swfa line as I haven’t owned them but the rest is a case of you get what you pay for. 👎🏾

How old are your SWFA's Fred?

Got one that says Tasco

8 years to present. The classics suck.

Bought an ultra light on the sale it’s nice but I have it on a 10-22 and should have went with the rim fire ultra light. The one I have is not correct for its use. Didn’t intended for it to be a rim fire scope but didn’t like it on a 7-08 so it landed on a beyer barreled 10-22.
Not cussing it yet but I hate the classics the glass suck azz

I get a pretty good chuckle with the “SWFAs suck” crowd. define “suck”. Keep in mind.... it’s $300...

I have more than a few, and while I understand the glass isn’t the best, I’d take mediocre glass over unreliable function 10/10.

I have yet to see a reticle I like more on a sub $3,000 scope.

And the glass is very usable imho.

Not 6x Leupold great, but pretty close.

An SWFA chitting the bed? Say it ain’t so.....

Guess hunting vs looking off ones back deck are different and the classics suck azz I will happily pay 1500+ to scope killing rigs. But if ones experience is play grounds, C clamps and back yards! Bye all means SS away.
The 300 dollar shït sack is still a sack of shït. LOL

I get a kick out of guys talk like they love 300$ shït scopes, then draw a tag after waiting ten years! those guys never show up with a SS scope. But if a 10-22 or over the counter spike deer hunt is the task, SS is fine (I’m a big fan of gophers guns with cheap scopes) how ever I’m not broke enough to use junk or recommend it to others when big game is on the menu.

Don’t forget it’s your thread bitching not mine. 😎 I just agreed with you. And the SWFA guys will 100% take care of you those POS scopes probably OEM at 85$ so if they replace it twice they still make money.

10/10 LOL. Guys here! Build a 2500$+ rifle and azz pucker while buying glass. TFF. 300$ look the fûck out it sucks but it’s 300$ Worth of suck. Enjoy.

If I recall those 1-4 were made in the Philippines and had a bad track record for failing that’s why they discontinued them.. I have one on my service rifle, so far it’s holding up. But heard the glass will actually fall out and other failures.. For guys shooting service rifle I heard the hi-lux 1-4 are performing very well for shooters at Camp Perry, but at the end of the day one will probably be better served buying a Nightforce or March scope for service rifle and be done with it..

My favorite swfa is the 3-9. I like the glass better than the 6x or 10x. That being said I just sent one back this fall because withers reticle centered it only had about 2 mil left adjustment and 12 mil right. It took about a month and they replaced it.

They asked how I knew it was the scope and not my rifle or mounts being off. I told them i held a mirror to the front to center the reticle. The new one is good.

I'm not sure what a decent sub $500 score is these days. I got rid of most leupold 6x42 and 3.5-10 scopes i had 15-20 years ago. I had decent luck with first gen weaver grand slams i replaced the leupold with for a 5-10 year spell but I think some erector springs lost some tension so a few of those went back to weaver.

The last 10 years I've bought several SS but i really wish the fixed had better glass and the windage knobs weren't so huge. Plus my easy focus rings always seem to autofocus themselves way out. Nothing tape doesn't fix but...

Too bad swfa couldn't do a gen 2 and update some things. If the fixed had the 3-9 glass with smaller knobs and indented/clicking ez focus I'd buy a bunch more. They could do a fixed 8 while they're at it. It just costs too much to do a prototype. I know because I looked into it for a while.

Bb

Yeah, the 1-4 ain't a good bet on toughness. Most of the other SWFA's are "rated for 50 cal"....the 1-4 is not. A friend from the campfire told me an interesting story on the 1-4....he had a lightweight AR scoped with the 1-4, AR was standing propped against something, AR slid to the ground, elevation turret pushed INTO the tube....not a massive fall, it slid to the ground from standing.

"Discontinued": https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-1-4x24-tactical-30mm-riflescope-109309.html?___SID=U

Exactly! I don't have any complaints with my six SWFA "junkers". I don't know what some here expect from glass, but mine guide bullets very well. I guess if you like to drop $1000 plus on scopes that make you feel better, go for it.

The scope in question has had a bad reputation, so if you did not pay attention to that, then it is nobody else's fault but your own.

SWFA will take care of you.

I can't wait for Larry to tell everyone how great pussy is. That should be enough to drive Freddy out of the closet.

No doubt SWFA will treat you right.

When my then-recently-acquired used 20x fell apart they replaced it with a new one. I don't know if it was the new scope or my vision failing me, but I just couldn't use the new 20x...it was very difficult for me to keep the reticle focused. I put it up for sale here and no one wanted it so I used SWFA's trade-in program and selected a 10x. I used it earlier this week and it worked very well for range work. No complaints here.

The 1-4 actually was gone from the SWFA site for a while. I had one this spring that did something similar as described in the OP. They told me they couldn't replace it because it was discontinued and gave me credit instead. The 1-4 I originally bought was labeled the "1-4x24 Classic". They are calling this one the "1-4x24 Tactical". Due to the discontinuation, and then bringing it back with a small name change I wondered if they did a small refresh on the design to address the issues, but admit that is 100% guess.

Duct tape is your friend.

Hmmmm ! ? Am I really reading about scopes other than Leupold failing ! Wonder of wonders ! 😁

Just think.
You can tell us how great dik is.....
Surely this will pull you out of the closet.

Beg and wish all you want GIRL HUNTER, (night stalker) I’m not jumping the fence so you can hold my balls on your chin. 😉 But great try! LMFAO nice new screen name. Rick still have your big hat locked in the basement. Sad 😉

PS who’s Larry?

I have 2 3-15x40 SS SFP MOA/MOA that are used I’d trade for a SS 3-9 HD that’s used.
For the guys who like classics and could care less about glass.

Not bitchin whatsoever. Just stating a fact.

I think you’re getting me confused with cumincowboys....

My point is people sure get a hard on with the blanket statement “swfas suck”. What you mean is that they’re not ideal for your purposes.

OP.

No, I know who cumin cowboy is and the joke wasn’t for you in that regard.

I believe you are correct that the classics are not ideal for my intended purpose/use. I buy scopes to hunt and low light performance is a must. Just holding a place on a safe queen not so much. So yes they don’t fulfill my needs. It’s gray and rainy 75% of the time here in coastal WA and the classics are not even on my top 10 list.

But I would happily prove it and swap someone out of their 3-9 hd, like I offered above.

Girl hunter may even sweeten the deal with a back rub for the lucky owner of two classics 3-15’s.

1100 looks and not one taker speaks volumes.

The "guru" says the Illuminati (aka) swfa 1-4 is da shizzle....... and if you disagree you are a cross eyed drooling dumbfuk.... couch dweller , running imagination pretend as your only play... ha

😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Some consider them assists. Bahhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaa

That illuminated reticle is da bomb for poachin deer at night.....

I saw that but didn't think anything of it. Must be recently they brought them back. Earlier this yr they you couldn't get one.

Fred, you get all the hot chicks!...Girlhunter jumping up and down, Screaming at you, “I Love You”.....”I want you inside me”...Crying here....
😎

Edited for the purpose of innernet accuracy. 🖕🏿🖕🖕🏾🤜🏼

quote=Girlhunter]I can't wait for Larry to tell everyone how great pussy is. That should be enough to drive Freddy out of the closet.[/quote]

Bet if’n it were MILs....you wouldn’t have an issue.... grin...

Slobber cleanup it aisle 2 please!

I own a couple SWFA 5-20x50 HD with lit reticle. Good scopes....Now that SWFA will let a guy add bushings for a ZeroStop, is nice.

😎

Boy bud you ph ucked up that story about renegade ...

One thing I have realized is that for more limited use rifles, they don’t need a scope. Just a rail and I will take the 3 shots necessary to zero when they are put into service. Definitely leaning towards quality over quantity when it comes to scopes

It says that nobody who intentionally bought a FFP MRAD scope wants your SFP MOA scopes

BTW, I’ve won or placed on the podium of multiple Practical Rifle matches using a SWFA 10x Classic just to prove that they’re plenty good enough to get the job done. I had other scope options that were more PRS-appropriate sitting on my shelf that retail for up to $2,500, but I wanted to prove a point. I’ve also killed critters at first and last light with the Classic 6x and 10x here in AB. Maybe in the lighting conditions you usually hunt the Classics aren’t ideal, but you can’t tell me they’re no good on a hunting rifle in general.

She's another liberal sack of shiet, living in a liberal sack of shiet state.

From an elk hunting pic I saw, I'm certain he'd trade for METH.

Beaver is far from being a liberal..

And Girlhunter is far from capable of manhood. LOL.

Jordan the classics leaves way more wants than it satisfies for me.

Function is 80% for me and they nail that. but clarity ergonomics ect, suck and the last 20% is worth me spending far more than 300$.

I read that right you’re a liberal who would have thought a guy in a maga hat voted for blue. 😂. Someone is reaching to offend and falling short as usual.

100$ Hillary C is better looking than MZ Maggie. LMFAO.

Definitely, and weighs less to boot.

I’ve seen pics.


Lololol

I understand your perspective being that you hunt in dim, overcast conditions much of the time. But for my uses the clarity of the Classics is where we disagree. The clarity is plenty good enough to enable me to hit small things close or far in any lighting condition I'm likely to encounter where I usually hunt. The ergos aren't ideal for a slim, lightweight rig, but for a standard-weight or heavier, it's no big deal. I have better scopes costing a whole lot more, but the Classics are the best bang-for-buck in my scope collection by far.

I saw a picture of the meth whore with an elk, [bleep] that was a funny ass picture. That bitch has smoked more crack than black cock, something Angela Browne can't say.

I think that says a lot, regarding the 10x Classic, in competitions Jordan. And your field shooting abilities.

Jason

I like the 6x and 10x Classics for their mechanical qualities. Tracking and zero retention.

And I agree with Hig that the MQ reticle agrees with my eye more than any other. I dial elevation and slide wind. The 6x guides bullets just fine in most open country situations. I have also used the 6x on my heavy barrel 10/22 to shoot sage rats as close as 10 yards. No problems close or far. I've also used the 10x Classic a fair bit. Not as forgiving of eye placement as the 6x, but the extra magnification is helpful for certain uses.

That said, they aren't the best for stray light or glare. Probably not an issue for most shooters. I have a 6x on an accurate centerfire that has noticeable parallax when the reticle and target are sharpest. I can eliminate the parallax, but the image degrades. I can still hit targets at extended ranges, and spot my hits/misses at 500 and beyond. Plenty good to guide bullets, but it's not an observation device.

The 3-9x is a step up optically, but I don't know that it's a huge step up in light transmission. Definitely better in terms of flare and glare. Mine had a bit of parallax at 500, and obviously there is no way to adjust for it on the scope. Doesn't matter what scope you use, you still need to deal with parallax off the scope anyway, right?

The 3-15x are not my cup of tea. I think they are the worst optically of the Classics so I can see how Fred isn't a fan. And SFP and MOA would suck. I do understand his needs. The coastal mountains can be very steep, deep, and dark. It gets pitch black in those hell holes well before legal sunset. Definitely not like shooting in a Kansas cornfield.

Just trying to put some perspective on the needs/uses and capabilities of these scopes. Hope that helps those new to these scopes.

Jason

Agree 100%

The 6x and 10x MQ SWFA's are proof that God loves us.

Fred just aint figured out that killings easy.....

Or he forgot that he doesn't care what anybody else scopes their rifle with....

Come on Frud, the Leupold Fan Boys could use some troll love too.



@fredIII

I’d had this 1-4 for about 4 years I’d guess. At the time of purchase I don’t think it’s flaws were as well documented as they are now.

Fred got tossed back into purgatory for discussing Girlhunter’s secret desires...Prayers sent 😎

😂😂
#ghosted
#ghoststatus

I agree. Since then, the failures started to be documented, here and elsewhere. It's a black eye for SWFA, in my view. I'm surprised Farris let that model out the door.

I was always taught to not say anything bad about the dead.

Fred's dead.

Good.

#swayze'd

#usedboots

Fred ded? he needs to reinvent himself... maybe go by Fred !V, that will fool the moderator...sysop....

#goatphuck

Cue up creepy religious music 😎

Maybe because at 34 my eyes are good enough that, to me, some clarity and brightness isn’t worth the extra coin.

Side by side by side shooting

SWFA 12x
SWFA 10x
SWFA ultralight 2.5-10
Leupold vx3i 3.5-10
Some brick of a Leica illuminated 2.5x10x50

Leica was bright and clear as hell, but I didn’t have a problem seeing what I was shooting with any of em.

😁😂

#imaginaandpretnd

Who the fugg is Imagina?

LOL!!!!

34?

Geeze, you're just a pup!

Wtf is a brick of a Leica??

I had a 1x4 that was oozing grease out of the erector housing when brand new. Sent it back and it was replaced no problem. I have another that has seen I’d guess 3-4K of 223 and 762x39 via AR, and another that has seen id say 15k ish of semi auto .22 with no issues

That Leica weighs as much as a brick

😂😂

#cumminscowboy

Haha 😂

The Leica is certainly bright....and heavy.

Don't think I'll buy another.

Great post

Yew realie thank heed be that hurd two spout!?

Frud’s dud? Wut a trajedy.... I”m gunna mus hem.