Rifle Scopes Are the Primary Arms and BSA 4x14 the same components as Falcon Menace 4x14?

[Deputy D.A.]

I have read a few comment that the 3 scopes above are the same with just different manufacturer's name on scope. However, I see a couple minor differences in specs. Are the 3 scopes made using the exact same materials and from the same manufacturing plant?

Thanks for any insight and information.

 

[Nathan11B]

I've owned a Falcon Menace and now I own the BSA and to some degree they are very similar, almost way to similar if you ask me. Although it would appear to me that of the two the Falcon has the better glass. I have not nor do I intend on buying the Primary Arms optic which you have listed so I cannot give you any thoughts on that.

 

[orkan]

It's really hit or miss with those low end optics. I've used all three, and still have a couple falcons and PA's kicking around. They are great on rimfires... especially rimfires that don't see much action.

I think I've only had 1 BSA, so I can't speak to that one much... but I've had 3-4 PA's and 4-5 Falcon's through here. It seems to be a matter of luck in regard to which has good clicks and functions properly. You can take two of the same scope purchased at the same time, and find that one will be good, and the other is crap.

With optics, you tend to get what you pay for. If you don't pay for it, don't expect to get it. Yet sometimes you can be surprised. One of my PA's is actually quite good! Tracks excellent, clicks are nice, glass is yummy, reticle is clean and straight. If they were all like that, the scopes would be far more appealing! Same thing with the falcon's. I think I have one which is quite good.

So if you have to buy 5 to get a good one... the likelihood of you getting one that's not so good is fairly high. Perhaps BSA has better QC, but I sincerely doubt it.

Still, you can take the BSA or the PA, strap it on a savage 22lr, and you have one heck of a nice cheap plinker for someone to start learning on.

 

[Deputy D.A.]

The two that I am considering are the Falcon Menace 4-14 and SWFA SS 3-15. However, the SWFA is twice the price, and this will be my first experience with any scope--i am purchasing to target shoot at anywhere up to 800 yards or so when available to me. I Will mount it on a .308. I have seen many great reviews on the SS, but had also seen several positive reviews on the Falcon. What caught my attention most recently was that a few people described the BSA and PA as clones of the Falcon. And If that is true to the extent they are using the exact same materials and manufacturing then I wanted to also start reading the reviews on the BSA and PA 4-14 models to have more data with which to judge the quality of the Falcon.

 

[steve123]

Spend the extra money and get the SWFA!

The reticle on the Falcon is too thick and my friends didn't track right!

Of those three 4-14's I'd get the BSA. I have 3 of the BSA 4-14's. Other than being a cheap scope with not the greatest glass they have all worked very well and the reticle is the perfect thickness for the mag range. Actually I like their reticle better than many of the half mil reticles out there.

 

[morganlamprecht]

i wouldnt put the BSA, PA, or falcon in the same category as SWFA...get the SWFA...id get the SWFA fixed 10 power before a variable of the other brands

 

[S12A]

You get what you pay for.

Better off in that price range with a 10x swfa, 10x bushnell or the 10xfalcon.

Dont buy into the feature packed made in china with enormous mag range, it will be trash. The less features for the price, the more likely they will be done right.

 

[mr2.0]

I have read a few comment that the 3 scopes above are the same with just different manufacturer's name on scope. However, I see a couple minor differences in specs. Are the 3 scopes made using the exact same materials and from the same manufacturing plant?

Thanks for any insight and information.

I have the Falcon4-14x44 on my savage 22 and 2 of the BSA4-14 on the ruger sr22 rifle. Very similar but different at the same time so cant confirm its from same manufacture, but for sure the glass on the Falcon is better. Don't quote me on this but one of the Primary Arms vendor here claimed that PA is from differ manufacture

 

[mr2.0]

You get what you pay for.

Better off in that price range with a 10x swfa, 10x bushnell or the 10xfalcon.

Dont buy into the feature packed made in china with enormous mag range, it will be trash. The less features for the price, the more likely they will be done right.

Most of the time, 10 yrs ago I picked up a 10x with side focus from SWFA. after 650 rds of .223 on my 24" ar15 barrel, the mildot cross hair starts to cant a little pass 12:00. sent it back to the good folks at SWFA and they confirmed it. I lost faith in the scope, paid extra and picked up the 16x IOR instead

Until recently, I got the CZ455 and in search for the scope with medium power and no more than 44mm objective and able to focus down at 25 yards. Well SWFA got the 3-15x42. I was a little concern about the quality at first because the SS 10x that I had before, the knobs are mushy. Few folks here told me that they had the same mushy feeling knobs of the 10x SS years ago too and supposedly the new ones are much better now. I have been thinking hard about picking up the SS 3-15x42 for my CZ and hopefully I'm not wrong again.

 

[orkan]

mr2.0, have you looked at the bushnell elite tactical 3-12x44? I have a couple of them on rimfires. One with the old mildot, and one with the new G2 reticle. Probably my favorite rimfire scopes right now, given that they parallax down to about 10yds. They are a perfect fit on a rimfire. I just wish they were a little less expensive.

 

[mr2.0]

mr2.0, have you looked at the bushnell elite tactical 3-12x44? I have a couple of them on rimfires. One with the old mildot, and one with the new G2 reticle. Probably my favorite rimfire scopes right now, given that they parallax down to about 10yds. They are a perfect fit on a rimfire. I just wish they were a little less expensive.

Yeah I did, just didn't like the look of the knobs plus I need more power

 

[orkan]

The knobs are very similar to all the scopes mentioned in this thread, and they make a 6-24 version as well.

 

[sulcop96]

Most of the time, 10 yrs ago I picked up a 10x with side focus from SWFA. after 650 rds of .223 on my 24" ar15 barrel, the mildot cross hair starts to cant a little pass 12:00. sent it back to the good folks at SWFA and they confirmed it. I lost faith in the scope, paid extra and picked up the 16x IOR instead

Until recently, I got the CZ455 and in search for the scope with medium power and no more than 44mm objective and able to focus down at 25 yards. Well SWFA got the 3-15x42. I was a little concern about the quality at first because the SS 10x that I had before, the knobs are mushy. Few folks here told me that they had the same mushy feeling knobs of the 10x SS years ago too and supposedly the new ones are much better now. I have been thinking hard about picking up the SS 3-15x42 for my CZ and hopefully I'm not wrong again.

The new SS scopes are not the same SS as 10 years ago. SWFA scopes track dead nutz accurate, glass is very good and glass on the 5-20 is excellent, not China made crap anymore. I have used the SS scopes in a wide variety of tactical applications, sniper schools, matches and monthly training with zero issues.

Sully

 

[mr2.0]

The knobs are very similar to all the scopes mentioned in this thread, and they make a 6-24 version as well.

I agree with what you said. Been looking at the Bushnell elite as well as the new Bushnell LRHS, basically I want a scope with low profile knobs like March or US optic. Dont mind to spend extra cash for this CZ built

 

[orkan]

I thought you said you wanted more magnification? Isn't the LRHS a 12x top end?

The March stuff would certainly be a step up from bushnell!

 

[Deputy D.A.]

The new SS scopes are not the same SS as 10 years ago. SWFA scopes track dead nutz accurate, glass is very good and glass on the 5-20 is excellent, not China made crap anymore. I have used the SS scopes in a wide variety of tactical applications, sniper schools, matches and monthly training with zero issues.

Sully

Sully,
Is the glass quality you described above on the newer SWFAs 5-20 also true of the 3-9 and 3-15 or are your experiences with the new SWFAs just the HD models?

Thanks

 

[sulcop96]

Sully,
Is the glass quality you described above on the newer SWFAs 5-20 also true of the 3-9 and 3-15 or are your experiences with the new SWFAs just the HD models?

Thanks

I have the 3-9 and the glass is not as quality as the SS, but still very good. Excellent contrast and very clear. I shot the 3-15 and think it is the same glass, more or less as the 3-9. I would put the 3-9 on average with my NXS. As for the HD, the HD stands for Heavy Duty and not any reference to the glass. The glass in the HD has different coatings and has significantly more pop and contrast then my NXS and about on par with my Razor.

Sully

 

[cshann55]

I have SWFA's fixed in both 10x and 20x. The glass is superb and I have just as much faith in them as my Vortex. Cant go wrong IMO. For the $ anyways

I also have a Bushnell 10x Elite and is very decent for the money as well.