Just cruising this forum and seeing a lot of hype about the SWFA SS scopes. I have had the 3-15x42 FFP, 2 10x and 1 6x. These scope where super rugged and heavy built but I couldnt find any reason to keep any of them around for very long. Seems as my 3-15 would get very finicky at 12x and up, my 10x's had a blurry ring around the edge of the sight picture about 1/4", the 6x was the best one I had but was way too heavy for a 6x scope I thought. What am I missing?

The “hype” isn’t based on their glass, it’s based on their rugged internals which are unmatched at their price range. Pretty simple really

The reputation is not in quality of glass but in the durability of the internal components and repeatability of adjustments. If a shooter is looking for those two things in a scope they offer great performance for the dollars invested.

Can only comment on the 6x. Seems to work perfectly, but has several disadvantages as a hunting scope, for me anyway: reticle, form factor, and weight (for 6x). The form factor made me drop another scope that was otherwise totally satisfactory at about the same weight, a Tract 3-12. Tall turrets are a giant PITA in the woods and in treestands. I sold the Tract, but kept the SS because if its great utility as a range tool, but it doesn't have a pemanent home as yet. If I buy another SWFA, it'll likely be the 3-9, but even on sale that one's priced close enough to the SHV that I'd probably pop for that instead. 20oz or thereabouts is about my limit for a hunting scope. Lighter is better, as long as the reliability doesn't suffer.

You're not missing anything, you just have different needs and notions. Those who want or need to dial in the field are going to want turrets that make that easy, along with accurate adjustments. The rest of us don't want to tote the bulk for something we don't need.

This. I have the 3x15 as well. I have not bad any of the clarity issues that the op had either. The glass is pretty decent, and it's even better on the 3x9. It's nice to have a scope that stays zeroed, and returns to zero time after time after time. Love the ss dependability. Had my 3x15 since they came out, about 8 years give or take. Lots is rounds on it.

Sounds like you are a set it and forget it kinda guy that prefers stellar glass over functionality. Nothing wrong with that. The SWFA cult uses their scopes as affordable aiming devices that consistently track and hold zero.

A Leupold would probably serve you better.

I have found the 20x SS scopes to be unusable, but that probably has more to do with my vision than glass quality. It seems to me the 16x and 20x scopes aren't very popular though, at least among this crowd. I swapped a 20x for a 10x, and I have no difficulty at all using that one. I think the image is pretty good, actually, and is very usable.

I was told by a guy in Alaska everyone seems to hate that a 6x Milquad would track very well, hold zero and be tough as hell - all at a price about a zero less than some other names you typically by for such performance. So I bought one.

My 6x Milquad has tracked well, holds zero and seems to be tough as hell. All at that good price.

Wasn't hype anymore than saying "water is wet" only to find out that water, is in fact, wet.

Repeatable dialing, decent glass, a reticle that works when you don't have time to dial, and enough discounts to offset the weight and bulk - ten pounds off of my @ss would do me more utility than 10 oz off of the scope...

Turrets are big, but they repeat the input, and come back to zero - older eyes are finding the bigger dial becoming a plus.

He convinced me of the same thing and I bought a 10x demo package that was also on sale for $250. They're a hell of a robust scope, but pretty damned heavy.

I also have a Montucky in 7-08 due to the same influence - been absolutely everything I was promised there as well.

While the SS on the Montucky does feel out of place - overall - the rifle is still a joy to shoot. I'm thinking a lighter scope would be welcome but it's not necessary. I'll gladly put up with the robust and weight at this point over wondering if my scope is still working like it should. Too many people love the fact that certain brands have awesome CS and replace scopes on a revolving door basis.

IMO - the BEST customer service is the one you never need to use. That's just me. I'd rather just get a good product that holds up from day one rather than no hassle trade 4 to find one that works - for a while....

Ding! Ding! Ding!, we have a WINNER!!

It’s not hype when it’s a fact.

Funny when the whiners complained about Nightforce having substandard glass, but bulletproof internals.

Evidently now it's OK.....

For guys who can't or don't want to hunt and need to shoot game from a half mile to be successful they're the cheapest scope that works.

Bought it to be able to shoot as far as I feel comfortable. Everything I've killed not called "paper" with it since I've owned it; less than 70 yards.

It's possible to put holes in paper at long distance for fun - and still use said rifle at predominantly muzzleloader distances. Why the SS checks so many boxes for me.

I don't think the hype matches, I am 2 out of 4 that have exhibited reticle shift and or clicks that don't match what the actual reticle travel is. The 3x9 and the 10x were spot on. IMO the 3-15 is sadly their least offering. reticle tuff to see on low power and glass that has trouble keeping up with the reticle in low light.

The 3x9 is honestly their best scope IMO, for a guy that isn't obsessed about low light performance on the lowest power, I think its a great scope.

The hype is that you get a solid and serviceable LR scope with lots of erector travel for $299.00.


Probably the best out there for that price.

All this and a 243 AI that I've owned a few times before deciding to keep and shoot the snot out of.

You get a durable, reliably tracking s ole with good/very good glass quality that delivers overall performance way above the price tag.

The trade offs are the s opts run a bit heavy and have large knobs.

I love mine for shooting paper, a job where the extra weight and bulk is a non issue.

Probably not my first choice as a hunting scope, but it would certainly deliver if pressed in to service for a hunting role.

I put a 10x42 on a .300 RUM, and the RUM killed it in about 50 shots, groups opened way up. Spent the coin for a Nightforce 3.5-15x50 and the groups shrank back down, instantly, and have stayed there.

I still have a 16x42, which has never been used on anything bigger than a .308, and it still seems to work as far as an aiming device, as long as you ignore the internal objects that sometimes float into view

Had a 300wm that killed 2 Burrises in less shots - combined...

Any make of scope can have failures including ss scopes. Having said that I would have liked to have seen your mounting system....

It's not just you, the 20x's are duds. I picked up a used one once just for doing load development and at 300 yrds the glass just wasn't clear enough to see the targets well. Sold it and replaced it with a 12x which was much better, .

the 20x I have is plenty useable as a range load development scope. only problem is the clicks don't move the amounts they should and the reticle has right shift as you dial down. the 20x is a limited use scope. its not going to be very bright just because of its power and objective. I need to send mine back and see if they can get me one that tracks as it should.

No hype that I've really seen. A lot of us have agreed the glass isn't on par with upper level scopes, but where the SWFA SS excels is in it's ability to track precisely. Every fixed power SS i've owned has tracked flawlessly and always returned to zero perfectly. Much much better than any Leupold rifle scope I've ever seen. SWFA also has stellar customer service. Yes, I had to return a broken 16xSS once. They emailed me and said the reticle that was in my scope was discontinued, but I could pick any fixed power SS scope and any reticle I wanted. I thought that was great service and it didn't take long for them to have a new scope right to my door. I was extremely happy with their flawless service. Also, on a side note, I told them that it was my fault that the scope was broken and they said, "no big deal, pick which new rifle scope you want and we will send it out asap".....

When you talk about sub par glass leave the 3x9 outta that, it has awesome glass

Three buddies have SS’s a 6x and two 10x. I’m not impressed at all with their glass or clarity.

The resolution on the 6x and 10x is actually pretty good.

I was actually able to see .264 dia holes at 400 yards in optimum lighting conditions with the 3–15 version.

The glass on the 3-9 holds it own in optical quality against a swaro Z3.

What part of $299 leads you to expect Swarovski glass?

I have a straight 6x Swarovski and it does present a fantastic view. But you won't find me cranking its adjustments like I do my 6x SWFA scopes.

I find these comments somewhat funny. I thought the scope was used for seeing and aiming to hit the target? Wouldn't that make the glass quality most important?

Different priorities, I'm primarily a big game and predator hunter and was raised on the MPBR (Maximum Point Blank Range). I sight my scope for the cartridge/load appropriately, know the trajectory and hold accordingly. Works surprisingly well out to 450-500 yards, although lots less room for error beyond 400, wind becomes a real factor.

I need a reliable, compact and lightweight scope. Since 1990 the Leupold Vari XIII, VXIII, V3 or V3i has been all I have needed. The one VX3 2.5-8x36 has been to South Africa twice, somewhat abused in the Land Cruiser and by the hunt staff. AOK. I am proud that my rifles wear scopes that bear the golden ring.

I guess I'm not interested in the SS line. There is definitely a SS cult on the Fire though.

My first SWFA was a second-hand 16X Older style with mildot reticle and 1/4 moa turrets. I did find the image slightly grainy through this one. Considering 16X and only a 42mm obj, along with lower grade glass, it was no surprise. I still did a lot of 1000+ yard shooting with it. It was absolutely serviceable.

Down the road I sold it, and purchased the new (at the time) 10X and 12X MilQuad, with .10 mil turrets. With these, I find the image quality to be fine. Mirage might wash you out in certain conditions, but that goes for any glass.

I have no trouble seeing and holding on a 1-moa target at a mile with the 10X and 12X. And they have enough travel for a dead-on hold at a mile with a 308 Win, with a 100-yard zero. They are mounted on 40 and 45 Moa bases.


Fresh paint day for a 308 with a 12X onboard,

If you can't see game through SWFA glass - you prob need medical attention.

Some people seem to think that if you can't count hairs or notice the split ends in a deer's butt hair at 1000 yards - they can't be shot.

No.

1: Vari-X II glass and Nightforce adjustments/reliability.

2: March/Swarovski/Kahles glass and Barska (or other Chicom blister pack) adjustments/reliability.

Think about it.

I always feel like the “they’re known for ruggedness, not clarity” type comments to be a bit misleading.

The 3-9’s glass is fantastic, let’s get that out way first. My eyes like it better than nightforce glass, but your eyes might disagree.

As for the normal fixed line, I have only looked through and shot with two different 10x ss scopes. They were both exceptionally clear—for the price. I think they’re on par with leupold vx3 glass, and definitely better than the vortex vipers I’ve owned and looked through. Not alpha glass, but they’re also $300 so let’s not get carried away with the comparisons.

My friend uses his swfa for nighttime predator hunting without issues, and keep in mind it’s a 10x scope with a 42mm objective and no illumination.

As for the weight: find me a scope under $500 and under 19 ounces that will track as reliably and as accurately as a swfa and I’ll concede that they are heavier than necessary.

Yes, they’re heavy compared to a set and forget scope, but only by a few ounces, and I can deal with that for reliability. I don’t think they are the best option for brush hunting, but I’ve used my 3-9 for that and don’t feel like I’m at much of a disadvantage. Try taking your set and forget scope to 1000 yards and let me know how you do.

Reliability on the dialing is great with them. That combined with the amount of adjustment they have sets them apart from a lot of scope.....and nothing even close at their price range. A little time at distance with a .22 on a still day really lets someone see what's up on erector travel....and even a touch of wind makes a person appreciate the reticle they come with.

It's like so many other things on this forum. We all tend to besmirch things for what they are not as opposed to appreciating things for what they are. Different jobs require different tools AND most tools are not a one size fits all. They, like other scopes, serve a specific purpose with some crossover. They are a good buy for what they are and what they do. Heck, they are a good buy as a "crossover", for lack of a better term, for that of which they are capable, no more, no less.

The reason I first gave one a try was for the rear parallax adjustment.

The side parallax on most scopes is not convenient to a southpaw, in a prone/bipod position. The rear parallax is.

A side benefit is that the scope is slick over the loading/ejection port on a lefty boltgun. Easy in, easy out.

Funny how perspectives differ. Would you still think the glass quality is most important if the scope could not be relied upon to consistently "aim to hit the target"? The interesting thing is, that neither glass quality nor mechanical function are discrete "yes or no", "black or white", "on or off" type of characteristics. There is a scale of optical quality and a scale of mechanical reliability and precision. We all have to decide where on each scale we require our scopes to fall. For me, I'm happy with the optical quality of almost any of today's scopes, so middle of the scale or higher is perfectly fine for my needs. When it comes to mechanical reliability and precision, I demand that my scopes hold zero and adjust correctly. Not just most of the time, but every time. That means that for me, I want my scopes to fall in the top end of the mechanical quality scale. Others may have different priorities, and that's fine with me.

So to use your phraseology, I guess I'm just not really interested in the Leupold line, for the most part (except for very specific applications), but there definitely is a "golden ring" cult on the Fire and elsewhere.

Agreed.

Thats where I'm at too,it needs to track well and track reliably every time. I gave up on leupolds after too many failures to even hold zero or adjust properly. Would i love leupold to get their chidt together? Hell yes. Who wouldnt? Statements like ab2506's actually make me wonder how much experience a guy like that really has. Probably not too damn much, especially at longer range shooting. Hell, ive had most of my leupolds give up the ghost at the range just shooting 100 yard targets.

You get used to it. At first the glass was a major turnoff, but I’ve ran one hard for one year now, and the thing tracks like a NF. Very impressed.

Freely admit that my longest game shot was 500. Got the holdover right and elevation wise the bullet was dead on. The wind was higher than estimated and the bullet struck too far back. Fortunately it was a quick followup and recovery.

Don't do any long distance (Over 500) shooting period, never said I did, hence I dont need to dial scopes to hit what I hunt.

How do you break scopes at 100? Perhaps your experience should be questioned?

As I said, I don't want big, heavy scopes and I don't need to dial the scope for my use. YMMV.

If I ever decide to shoot PRC, or something similar, I'll re-examine my scope selection. Until then, I'm happy with the Leupold V3.

Buy whatever makes you happy.

Seriously? That's a legitimate question?

Off the top of my head, I’ve used at least 7 brands of scopes. From $60 Chinese specials to $600+. Numerous versions of several. Not once has glass quality ever cost me a shot opportunity. However, busted scope internals have cost me from hitting where I was aiming and was confirmed by the manufacturer with their rebuild. Care to guess the brand? Small hint, it had a golden ring.

I should include that it wasn’t the only time optics of this brand were returned. I’m down to 3 of their scopes now.

Like i said, he obviously lacks any experience. There are a lot of guys ive known like that. I wont hold it against him. Guys shoot a box of ammo every year and think they have enough experience to reply to a thread like this. Its pretty laughable. These are also the same guys that need to re-zero their scopes and blame it on the stock warping or maybe "the scope got bumped". Theres no explaining poor tracking and wondering zero to these leupold lovers.

BSA,

I agree completely. For most hunters I know, 2 boxes of shells will last 3-4 seasons. Most of these hunters walk no more than a hundred or so yards to their stands. As you mention, when shots are missed (typically much less than 150 yards around here), excuses are made. My favorites are the "scope got bumped", and "these bullets are crap, I know I hit that deer". This certainly varies by region, but honestly most hunters don't shoot the yearly round count that some on this forum do.

If I were to bet, a majority of the scope sales are made to this type of market. Leopold and all the scope companies know this, which is why they are getting away with crappy quality.

So, I'm hardly qualified to speak here as I'm just getting into dialing.

I've always run Leupolds, the 2.5x8 being a favorite. I like they're size, weight and clarity.
But where I hunt Blacktails, there's plenty of opportunities for shots well over 300 yards and I feel I need to do better than just holding over....which is just guessing, for the most part.

So I sprang for a couple of SS 6X MQ's from a fellow 24HR campfire member.
One is on the Ruger American .223 and the other rides on my Kimber Hunter 7mm-08.
With no time or place to shoot POA/POI, I ran the calc's through a ballistic program and sighted in.

After a quick morning hunt, I set up my steel plates at 300 and 400 yard (12" plates).
I dialed for 300 and shot twice - dead center X2 (7mm).
Dialed for 400 and sent two - one dead center, the other I pulled slightly but still was well on steel!
I'm jazzed!! This is exactly what I wanted and it ran perfectly.

Right now the range goes to 400 yards, but as soon as I can snag another 12" plate I'll go to 500.
I'm heading there in just a few minutes with a bucket full of .223 rounds and a goodly pile of 7-08"s. And I'll be burning a ton of ammo there all spring and summer.

The SWFA scopes have (for me) shown that they are as capable as many folks here have claimed,
Yes they're big. Yes they're heavy. I can live with that. The glass to me is just as good as my Leupolds and I really like the reticle.....it works for me.

By summer's end, I'll have a lot more experience with these scopes and dialing. If it works as well as I believe it will, there will be a couple of their 3x9's purchased during the Black Friday sale.

Not all of my rifles need to dial... several will stay slim and trim with set and forget scopes on deck - all are Leupolds and I'm very comfortable with that. Use what works for you.

I got a 3x9 SWFA for Christmas, and it was sold without being mounted. Tunnel vision at 3X and the blurry edges coupled with terrible eyebox sent it packing quick. Maybe those things are not important to some, but the list of negative attributes was just too long for me.

What do you use in place of it?

Just goes to show that everyone's eyes are different; I can somewhat agree with the tunneling, but have not noticed the rest.

I'm enjoying the 1-6 HD I got from you, thanks again!

Tough to properly assess eyebox without mounting a scope.

I , like a lot of folks do notice tunneling with the 3-9 when set on 3. When set higher than three tunneling disappears for me. I've no quarrels with the eyebox. I plan on buying more 3-9"s in the near future.

Too big and heavy for me on a hunting rifle.

Different strokes. It happens to be the lightest scope I own now, but all of my rigs are setup for dialing up and back. This 223ai with a 21" pacnor mtn contour is super well balanced in a Bansner sheep hunter with the 6x SS riding on top. Use it for coyote calling and prairie dogs to 400. If you paint them they look slim and trim lol.

If you are like me, you'll dial back down to shoot 100 yards and notice a perfect return to zero. Also after you shoot out to 400 and 500 in the next few months, you'll be looking for smaller diameter plates. I made a tree just for shooting at 400-450 yards and the biggest plate is 12", the smallest is 2". With a good rifle and dependable optic, i can repeatedly hit the 2" target. I sold my savage 6.5 CM 16SS combo to a coworker and he shot that rifle at the tree for the first time and asked if he should shoot at the "big target first". I said, no aim for the 4" target. I scribed the turret of the SS for different yardages and i told him, as long as he had the dial on the 4, he would hit the target. Sure enough, be hits the 4" plate 8 out of 10 times. Not bad for a new shooter and new to him rifle. He asked if he should try the 2" target and i said sure, go for it. No hits on that one, but if he practices more, it will be possible for him to hit it. Again, good accurate rifle and dependable rifle scope and you can do quite a bit. Now, should i tell you guys about my bosses $1,800.00 leupold and the goat rodeo he had that same day? Lets just say its a good thing my tree has 12" targets on it...

BSA,

Yup, I always run the turret back to my zero after engaging targets further out.
No surprises that way.

I waited too long before going out today. I wanted that nice warm 60* + weather we had predicted.
I got it OK, but along with it came the wind and I got to use the windage mils in the reticle for hold off.
It worked just fine until 400 yards.... the little 60 gr Hornadys I was slinging were parachutes in the gusts.
The 7-08 did much better all around. Elevation values for both was spot on.

I'll be loading longer, heavier bullets in the .223 soon. I just finished mod'ing a magazine for them.
I have two Kimber Hunters - the 7-08 above and a 6.5 CM that I really like.
Both will probably wear SWFA 3x9's by the end of the year. They're both hunting rifles and as such will be running something appropriate for their task - steel is for fun and learning.

BT53

It was beautiful here today. In the 70's and very minimal wind. You should try the 77TMK in your 223. They are pretty good for shooting longer range. No where near as good as a creed or your 7mm08, but pretty good for a 22 cal. It looks like youve learned, like i have, that the SWFA SS isnt all "hype". Its a pretty useful tool.

Just to show some of the guys that think these scopes are all hype, this is what I'm talking about when I say it returns back to zero perfectly:

This target was shot with my clunky ol savage that I recently sold to my work mate. Yes, the rifle is accurate and it works well, but it's no match for my CTR's with Nightforce scopes...

Here's that 400 yard target I was talking about:

Yeah, it's the dark spot in the hill side....

Here's a closer view of my shooting tree:


It takes a good tracking scope to put the bullets on steel, even at a sedate 400 yards...

This is a fun target picture of mine that shows the Nightforce does no better than the $300.00 SWFA SS when it was on top of my Savage 12fv 6.5 cm:


This is how my CTR returned to zero after shooting 400 yards. Yes, thats with my Nightforce. Try that with your Leupold..:


Here's a pic where I engraved the numbers in the turret to mark yardages for its pet load:

Those 77 TMKs have been excellent for me as well out of AR’s and a Ruger Predator. Good all around Bullet that works well at AR Mag length as well.

It always cracks me up, when people start griping about not having crystal clear glass on a $300, or less scope. These things are made to be tough and to guide bullets. If you are worried about the clarity on the sides of the view, then that tells me that you are using it as a spotting scope, instead of a bullet-steering device. LMAO! This crap would be real funny if it was not for the fact that it is ridiculous

Kenton?

John

Hey there John. No, it's a wrap around tape product from customturretsystems.com. They work great.

JG,,
What optic is that???

Looks like an lrts or lrhs

Yep. Riding in some SM rings.

JG has some nice rigs, setup for killin’...

SWFA should make a "Hunter" series of 6x and 19x fixed SS scopes with a turret setp Identical to the Bushnell.

I damn sure do not need a $700-1000+ Bushnell scope that weighs 26oz on a hunting rifle.

But I would buy a SWFA at under $400 and 16 oz (or less) if it had those turrets.

Thank you ckat, and that's exactly what the setup is. Appreciate your kind words.

Only a Whining CLUELESS Texan,would cover up a turret,to make it "better". Hint. Congratulations?!? LAUGHING!

Be curious to see how she'd make a clock "better" and how a Speedometer and Tachometer soooooooo very reliably stump her too. Hint. LAUGHING!

Retards going the extra mile,to make sure an erector and it's windshield don't/can't jive,is simply fhuqking HILARIOUS! May as well etch Retardation too. Ooooopsie! Hint. LAUGHING!

You could spin these Droolers in a circle,within a Phone Booth and they'd haveta' dial 911 for directions,on how to get out! Hint. LAUGHING!

Bless your hearts,for doing your BEST,with what incredibly fhuqking little you "have" to "work" with.

Hint.

LAUGHING!

WOW +P+++!!!...................

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there!

Personally, if I were you, “luckily I’m not”, I’d worry more about who the ex has her ass throwed up in the air for, or how your neck isn’t gonna suffocate you in your sleep, than worry about what uncle Johnny runs... just a thunk... xoxoxoxo

The sad part is that it’s true. Covering turrets? WTF

I have the 3-9 HD on a Tikka T3X Superlite 6.5 Creedmoor. Grandson likes it and we are slowly learning the mil system.

Another vote for bankable adjustments over brightness or clarity to edge of field. Scopes are aiming devices, not primarily for scanning.

If you can punch paper with a 1" Leup BR then a 20x SWFA will not make you whine. Unless an 8 y/o firing a rifle for the first time, I'll grant.

Ain't hype if it's true. I've got 13 SWFA scopes in five models and they do exactly what they should at a price that's unbeatable. On the other hand I've had over 40 others of various brands and most of those have been sent down the road except for some old Leupold M8 fixed powers and some Nightforce and Bushnell models. A SWFA scope isn't ideal for all rifles, but neither are any other scopes.

I've only got 70+ of 'em and in more than a few flavors. Have yet to experience anything resembling an "issue",but have had quite a few others Puke in that timeframe. Hint.

There's nothing to "learn",when making strides and doing it right,ala Mil scale. Simply run DOPE in .10 Mil values and apply same,less "conversion" or "counting clicks". Hint.

Sure is nice sighting in a new platform,in (2) shots,as opposed to the Reupold Shuffle of yore. Hint.

Bless the hearts of others,for doing their HILARIOUS best.

Hint.

LAUGHING!.................

Maybe because I never "convert click to a measurement" - Mil/Mil is very easy for me to use.

I don't give a chit about how many inches something is - move it the Mils my scope tells me. Dafaq do I care if its 3 inches or 6? Spin the knob and light another primer.

SS does a good job giving me a reticle that let's me "measure" on the windshield and go.

Amen, it’s so intuitive it’s scary. Plus the 1-2 shot zeroing doesn’t suck.

Yep.

Did eventually find one SWFA where the clicks weren't as specified (a 16x fixed), but otherwise they've been dead-nuts.

So, what experience do you have with SWFA?
Seems like most of your posts have no sustenance or correlation to the topic!?!?

I just "happen" to keep a NIB 3-15x MQ FFP at work,along with a Sig LRF,reticle subtension schematic and other things germane to POA/POI correlations,for dissenting Newbs. Hint.

No thang to source anyone/everyone's favored boolit,at their favored speed and their favored zero range ala Ballistics AE or JBM. From there and for those fretting the "daunting" Learning Curve" and "conversion factor(s)",it's easy to literally connect dots. DOPE as cited prior,is in .10 Mil graduations,as per their environment and it's a breeze to factor that which can be done on the reticle,by simply saying "where is a 7.3 Mil holdover correction?",as a finger pinpoints same upon the schematic. Conversely,it's also easily manipulated into said erector and the "Learning Curve" and "conversion factor(s)" are OVER. Hint.

The only thing prudent,is that a windshield only offers 10 Mil's,while the erector can easily grant 40+ of same. Then the obvious,in which both can be conjoined and why it is soooooooo fhuqking easy to get a 22LR to the 700yd++ line. Hint.

Couple such simplicity with a FFP Spotter and everything is speaking fluently in the same language. To cover up that commonality,defines STUPIDITY and correlates why Texans gotta "justify" fences for their "Adventures". Hint. LAUGHING!

It ain't like a Bushie is "Double Extra Tricky",with their Base 10 .10 Mil erector scale. Hint.



BDC's suck ass,no matter who the fhuqk or what the fhuqk. Hint.




Droolers trying to talk "scopes",is never not fhuqking hilarious. hint.

Bless their hearts for trying.

Hint.

LAUGHING!..............



As an aside,they prolly hold zero.

Hint.






And likely track to boot.

Hint.





Not that a Texan could do any of it.

Hint.

LAUGHING!.................