Rifle Scopes 3-15FFP: SWFA vs Vortex vs Athlon

[txaggie929]

Hey everybody,

Currently have an SWFA 3-15 FFP scope that I am pretty content with. However, just had to have it replaced as the parallax knob became so hard to turn it became unusable.

Got me looking at other scopes out of curiosity. Two I have found, but have not had the opportunity to look at to directly compare to my SWFA, are the following:

-Vortex Viper PST 3-15x44 FFP

-Athlon Ares BTR 2.5-15x50 FFP

I know Vortex has a pretty good reputation. Also hearing good things about the Athlon, and especially interested since its $549 through the end of the month.

Can anybody say whether either of these would be a step up, step down, or just a lateral move from my SWFA?

Thanks!

 

[txaggie929]

Also, I have the opportunity to buy the Vortex used locally, but not sure what they should go for used, as they are $749 new on eBay.

 

[BurnOut]

I hate to be that guy, but another option worth consideration is the Weaver Tactical #800363 (assuming that the EMDR reticle is appealing to you).

 

[gconnoyer]

Regarding the Gen2 PST, I havent looked through the 3-15 but the 5-25 is a pretty solid optic for under $1000.

I dont think it would be worth the cost to upgrade though, unless you can step into the used one super cheap.

My approach would probably be to sell the SWFA, take the $750 you planned to spend on the new scope, and pickup a used 3-18 Gen2 Razor, or maybe a Cronus 4.5-29. I had a Cronus not too long ago that was surprisingly a decent optic.

 

[cattleman99]

At $549 you can't go wrong with the Ares BTR. I have used mine in the last six or so matches I've been to and it has tacked perfectly. It is clear, and very feature rich for the small price tag.

 

[Basher]

@koshkin seems to think the 3-15x44 PST2 is the sweet spot for that line, so that says something.

That being said, I’m following along. I have an S&B 4-16x42 on the way back from being serviced, and as amazing as it is, I’m once again realizing that I was a little ambitious in my spending on glass for a little 18” SPR, haha. It’s an amazing optic, but I can’t justify the cost for it right now so I’ll be stepping down to this glass range for the time being as well. I, personally, will also be adding the 4.5-18x44 LRTSi to the mix, having had a few before and been pleased.

 

[cattleman99]

Also, check out the Steiner P4Xi 4-16.

 

[bnanaphone]

I have owned the 3-15x42 SWFA in SFP and sold it to upgrade to an FFP optic (you are good there)I liked the scope but could never get use to the Mil Quad reticle. I don't like the diamonds.

The PSTII will get you illumination, zero stop, a true zero on initial setup and a useful "christmas tree" for wind holds. I have not looked through a PST yet but glass is suppose to be good. My cousin just got a 5-25 PSTII and I will get to use it in a couple weeks.

I currently have an Athlon Midas Tac 6-24 with APRS3 FFP and am very pleased. It also has a "christmas tree" styled reticle with thin lines with .2 MIL marks to the first 1 MIL indicator up/down and a floating center dot (which I like) and a good zero stop. I do not have illumination but rarely use it on my .22 LR.

You need to think about what features you want in a scope and choose the optic with the most boxes checked. Glass is likely very similar between your choices, both have zero stop and illumination. Pick the reticle you like more and get it.

 

[txaggie929]

Thanks for the input guys. I realize there are better scopes out there for the magnification range, but was looking to stay under $700. And yes, I have found the the Vortex for just shy of that from a smaller dealer.

The advantages that I see overall with both options are a zero stop and illumination vs just the basics with the SWFA.

Interested to see if any other thoughts come in.

 

[Glassaholic]

I can't speak to the other scopes but the Vortex PST II 3-15x44 is a fantastic bargain for all that it offers - great glass, great turrets, good reticle, best in class warranty - all in a decently small and light package. I reviewed a bunch of $1k scopes last year and this was one of my favorites, as for used price it will depend on condition, if you can buy new for $750 I'd expect an excellent condition one to be around the $700 mark or less, for me, I wouldn't want to pay more than $650 used, but that's me, you've got to decide the value for yourself.

By the way, I will say I have found the PST II 3-15 and 5-25 have the best control of CA of any of the $1k class scopes, and even better than some of the $2k class.

 

[wade2big]

The swfa 3-15 is a great scope. I have one. I have two pst gen ii 3-15 scopes. The gen ii pst 3-15 are better than the gen ii 5-25 which I had and sold. The pst 3-15 glass is much clearer than the pst 5-25 and probably slightly better than the swfa. The reticle thickness of the pst 3-15 is also about the same as the swfa. The 5-25 pst reticle is thinner which i dont like. The field of view through the pst 3-15 is much wider than the swfa. The illumination is a plus as well. I like the milquad reticle as the diamonds make the reticle easier to see when dialed down and helps to break the reticle down easier when shooting. I am not a fan of holdover reticles. I dont hate them but i think they are unnecessary and holding over with a non tree reticle is just as easy with wind values of less than 2 mils. The swfa 3-15 is a lighter scope and is easier to zero with just having to slip the turrets which I prefer.

I love the SWFA scope but the pst 3-15 edges it out. If the swfa was iluminated and could be had at the $550 black fridaY price it would be on most of my rifles though.

 

[patriot07]

I've had the SWFA 3-15 SFP and seen the PST Gen 2 3-15 as well. I'd take the Vortex for sure, although both are good values for the money.

 

[palmettoman]

I have the 3-15 Vortex on my AR10 and like it.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Not one of the two you asked, but I’ve been playing with the Nikon FX1000 4-16 and like it so far.
Not top tier glass, but light and works well. I’m not a Horus-style reticle fan and never have been so I really like their mil reticle.

 

[stilesg57]

Don’t know the status on the GAP deal with the Bushnell LRHS but if they’re getting another run of them that’s probably your best option on this price/feature set. Less expensive than the Vortex, has better glass, LOW made, tracks perfectly, and is 3oz lighter.

 

[wade2big]

Don’t know the status on the GAP deal with the Bushnell LRHS but if they’re getting another run of them that’s probably your best option on this price/feature set. Less expensive than the Vortex, has better glass, LOW made, tracks perfectly, and is 3oz lighter.

I dont think the the Bushnell has better glass than the Vortex 3-15. I have both scopes. I do think its probably a little better than the vortex 5-25.

 

[stilesg57]

I dont think the the Bushnell has better glass than the Vortex 3-15. I have both scopes. I do think its probably a little better than the vortex 5-25.

Interesting. I think this is a great example of how everyone’s eyes are different and you need to be careful buying something expensive (and anything over $500 is expensive to me, ha) sight unseen over internet recommendations.

To me it wasn’t very close between the two, the LRHS glass was significantly better in every way except for a tie/slightly behind on CA. The eyebox was definitely better. Everyone’s different though...

 

[Glassaholic]

Interesting. I think this is a great example of how everyone’s eyes are different and you need to be careful buying something expensive (and anything over $500 is expensive to me, ha) sight unseen over internet recommendations.

To me it wasn’t very close between the two, the LRHS glass was significantly better in every way except for a tie/slightly behind on CA. The eyebox was definitely better. Everyone’s different though...

I agree with you stiles, having had both the PST II 3-15 and the LRHS/LRTS 4.5-18 I would give the nod in resolution to the LRHS/LRTS; however, the PST II did handle CA better. Both are fantastic options, but outside the GAP LRHS deal the PST II is quite a bit cheaper. I like both reticles but the circle of death on the LRHS is a pretty cool feature especially at low mag.

 

[steve123]

If you don't need illumination then consider the 4-16 Midas TAC.
I like it a lot more than my SWFA 3-15.
Saw somebody bought a new one for less than $500.

 

[Jack's Dad]

There are some annoying things about the SWFA that can be changed by going to a more modern scope (zero-stop, .2 mil hashes, 5mil turns). That said a zero stop with shims can be made with the SWFA. I like how light weight it is and I've not found illumination to have ever been an asset. I'd stick with it. The Gen II 3-15 would be the only thing in it the ball park to perhaps "up-grade" too. Just not sure it's much of an up-grade.

 

[wapiti16b]

If you are not in a hurry wait for the Meopta Optika6 debut in May 2019!

 

[fxdrider]

If you don't need zero stop or illumination, don't overlook the Vortex Diamondback Tactical. Both the 4-16x44 and the 6-24x50 can be bought for WELL under the $700 price point you mentioned. Just a thought.

 

[clcustom1911]

If you don't need zero stop or illumination, don't overlook the Vortex Diamondback Tactical. Both the 4-16x44 and the 6-24x50 can be bought for WELL under the $700 price point you mentioned. Just a thought.

My buddy got a 6-24x50 for his 7mm RemMag. I was shocked at how clear it was.

I have a Viper PST Gen II 3-15. GREAT OPTIC. I also have a Bushy Gen I HDMR 3.5-21 H59 Reticle which is 5-6 years old now. Glass is good, PST Gen II glass is better.

Sometimes you just gotta pull the trigger on one of the optics and go to work. All of your options will likely serve you very well.

 

[Paul_R]

I have every scope in the Gen 2 PST line and the 3-15 is at the top of the heap. They're all great bang for the buck but the 3-15 really shines. You couldn't give me an SWFA scope.

 

[steve123]

People seem to be raving about Athlon right now, but i am far from sold on them. The pitch I keep hearing is they are the same as vortex, but better. I have always seen they have taken advantage of cutting edge and more efficient manufacturing techniques, I'm not buying that either. If you can't sell on your own features benefits and value something isn't right.
Competition is a good thing in the market place, but I am very skeptical on this brand.

"If you can't sell on your own features benefits" - uh, that's the whole point with Athlon.

Those benefits are;

Close focus so the scope can be used "beneficially" for air rifles or 22's and occasional close shots with centerfires. Before Athlon came along most scopes had 50Y minimum focus - parallax adjust, other manufacturers started following suit to keep in step.

A lean towards compactness and lightweight.

Tree reticles, most with the line marking numbers in the reticle off to the end of the stadia so aiming isn't obscured and some of these reticles are in all .2 mil which used to be rare.

Upgraded glass for the price point. Take a look at a BSA 4-14 compared to a Athlon Talos 4-14, the difference is huge as well as the reticle option.

Also there were a lot of scopes before Athlon came along that had MOA turrets with a mildot reticle. Athlon provided inexpensive mil/mil FFP options.

There's nothing to be skeptical about! These scope are what they are, not next level ground breaking tech, just a good value when you look at the features you get for the price.

When the Midas TAC series came out, we the consumer, were blessed with a quality per price value that is "very" hard to beat. So much so that if there were all .2 mil reticle options in this line I'd be selling most of my other scopes to buy such a thing.