-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes SWFA 16x?
- Thread starter cro789
- Start date
Had one, sold it.
Lack of Side Focus was a a show stopper. Didn't realize it though till after I bought it. I have the 10x model with Side Focus now for my day 12.5 300BLK Hog gun and am very happy with it for this application (<200 yds).
Lack of Side Focus was a a show stopper. Didn't realize it though till after I bought it. I have the 10x model with Side Focus now for my day 12.5 300BLK Hog gun and am very happy with it for this application (<200 yds).
Athlon Argos BTR 6-24x in MRAD is good glass for $370, but I haven't tested it for tracking. Turrets SUCK, but the glass is clear and the reticle is very usable.
We had an a Swfa fixed 16x on my wife's .223 bolt gun to start off with. Tracking is superb, but it does have a very tight eyebox. The eyebox on the 10x and 12x is much more friendlier to get behind.
I own and used a SWFA 10x when I started stretching out my .308 out at our local range maximum of 800 yards. I don't feel like 10x held me back much at all, but the upgrade bug eventually bit me as I got deeper into the sport. I am now running a Burris XTR II 3-15x. I don't feel like my top end of 15x holds me back much at all, either.
My wife did real well with her 16x when she first started shooting with me. She even has a couple F-class match wins under her belt with that scope. She did always struggle with the tight eyebox, though. Now she has followed in my upgrade footsteps and is running a Burris XTR II 8-40x.
Knowing what I know now, if I ever had to hit the market for another budget scope, I would most certainly go for the SWFA 12x with the mil-quad reticle and mil turrets. For a $300 investment, you can go a long way into the sport before feeling an urge to upgrade.
My wife did real well with her 16x when she first started shooting with me. She even has a couple F-class match wins under her belt with that scope. She did always struggle with the tight eyebox, though. Now she has followed in my upgrade footsteps and is running a Burris XTR II 8-40x.
Knowing what I know now, if I ever had to hit the market for another budget scope, I would most certainly go for the SWFA 12x with the mil-quad reticle and mil turrets. For a $300 investment, you can go a long way into the sport before feeling an urge to upgrade.
This will be a fill in scope as I have a US Optics B 5-25 on order. It wil sit atop of a Desert Tactical SRS in .308 22" barrel. That is why I am looking at the SWFA line I hate to put a lot of money into a scope that I won't be using very long. But also I don't want to get something that doesn't have a good track record. I have always heard that the SS track well and return to zero.
I have teh 10, 12, 16 x swfa, they track perfectly, they are solid, the 10 and 12 have a better eye box but the 16 never held me back.
Being stuck at 16x is a bit of a disadvantage, depending on intended use. You don't have much of a field of view at closer ranges.
With that said, SWFA scopes are a great value for the price. They track very well. The glass is good, but not great (again, it's a budget scope).
With that said, SWFA scopes are a great value for the price. They track very well. The glass is good, but not great (again, it's a budget scope).
I used to have their 16x and 20x, they were my first attempt at trying to get into long range on a budget. They were okay and my comments would mimic what the others mentioned but I found a fixed power scope in that mag range limiting and the glass was disappointing to me. Stuck at 20x with mega mirage sucks. I think I would have better luck with the fixed 10x back then.
The less expensive Athlon variable power FFP scopes, even though the turrets could be much better, have done me well.
The less expensive Athlon variable power FFP scopes, even though the turrets could be much better, have done me well.
I have a couple of them and like them very much for the price. I've never tried a 12X, so I can't say which I'd prefer, but I don't personally have any issues with eyebox or finding targets with fixed power.
My 10x rear focus model (mil/mil) was always very easy to get behind and had a clear picture to me. Definitely a great option for your situation.
I own both a 10x and 3-15x with side focus and mil-quad reticle. the 3-15 is currently what I'm running on my rig that is my profile pic. I'm am currently looking to upgrade now no fault of the scope just wanting better glass. Now with that being said if your on a budget I really really recommend them. Both of mine track great every time. I started with the 10x went to the 3-15 for 3 years now looking to replace it. As I said before scope is still working great just looking for something better pun intended. Ohh I'm keeping both 10x and 3-15 when I get a new one that's how much i liked them.
So hypothetically if someone was going to purchase either the 10x, 12x, or the 3-15x... which would you recommend they get and why? Is there an appreciably difference in the glass between the fixed and variable? I've used the 3-15x before.
They all have there ups and downs as old reliable said variable are "weaker" in terms of construction but that is the nature of the beast. More parts the more that can go wrong. All have their application I haven't tried anything fixed above 10x so I can't comment there. But depends on what your scope of use is. "Pun intended" i can't comment on PRS style shooting as I have yet
to go to a match myself (will be shortly). I am just coming from the long range hunting scene.
Largely depends on budget. As mentioned before these are nice scopes for the money. If I could do it again with SWFA I wish my 10x was in HD so I could compare it to the variable and give a clear opinion on weather one should just buy the variable or really go for straight power with HD glass.
I got the scope today and I am impressed! Now its not Razor Gen II, USO or a nightforce but it is very clear and even at night I can see a target at 100 yards with just a street light. Cant wait till I can get it out to the range to check the tracking and get it zeroed. The eye box is tight for a 16X just like my USO but that is something I can work around. So far great scope for the money.
Now you guys with the S&B, Razors, and other high dollar scope don't start this is apple to oranges. Both have their place and use.
Now you guys with the S&B, Razors, and other high dollar scope don't start this is apple to oranges. Both have their place and use.
I sold my early 16X model. I'm using a couple of the 12x and one of the 10X nowadays, all milquad. I don't miss the 16X. I've taken the 12X to a mile and worked well with the fine MQ reticle.
The things I didn't like so much about the 16X were smaller FOV, tighter eyebox, grainier view, dimmer view.
The things I didn't like so much about the 16X were smaller FOV, tighter eyebox, grainier view, dimmer view.
I have a 16X that gets used for load testing and rimfire target shooting. It's not something I would recommend to anyone for a primary optic, 16X is a big high for a fixed power scope. It's great though for shooting off the bench or load work. Tracking is spot on and the reticle is nice and thin for precise aiming. If you want a scope that's a little more field friendly I'd go with the SWFA 10X. It's got a little more forgiving eye box, plenty of erector travel, and a magnification that's useable at closer ranges.
The SWFA, in my opinion, is the best scope out there for under $500. Other scopes may have more features but the SS scopes track and hold up extremely well.
The SWFA, in my opinion, is the best scope out there for under $500. Other scopes may have more features but the SS scopes track and hold up extremely well.
I will agree with you. The main thing I will be using this scope for is to do load development and training on the rifle until I get my other scope. That is why I picked it. Didn't want to tie up in a lot of money and I am glade it has turned out to be a very nice scope as well. I will be putting it on another rifle later. More than likely my 22 trainer.
I love my 3-15 It's a joy to be behind. I've cranked it out to 1100 yds. Gone back to zero and I kill digs at 100 every time, we're well when I do my part. I have not punched paper to verify it's returning to zero but I think the on fit results don't lie.
I bought it used for 350.
for those looking I see swfa has a 3-15 on eBay for 440
I'm not sold on ftp reticle for hunting. I'm actually not sure all guys pushing the have to have ffp even use there's to range target's. I've used mine to range and find I'm know where near as accurate as the range finder.
I bought it used for 350.
for those looking I see swfa has a 3-15 on eBay for 440
I'm not sold on ftp reticle for hunting. I'm actually not sure all guys pushing the have to have ffp even use there's to range target's. I've used mine to range and find I'm know where near as accurate as the range finder.
I went with the 16X and it has worked out well so far. Now it's not the USO, Razor, or S&B but its not bad either. The first few rounds I was able to get some pretty good groups at 100 yards. The weather was cloudy at first and then went to a sunny day. The scope performed very well and I was able to see impacts at 200 yards. I like the rear parallax adjustment.
Still use a SWFA 16x42 SS. Great scope for what it is but fixed 16x makes scanning for targets harder than it needs to be. Glass isn't super bright either. Honestly like the 12x better. I had USO ER-25 and other USO's and now use Vortex Razor II's, the difference is pretty radical in clarity between the 16x42 and the top end stuff. Rear focus was still as hell and hard to use. Biggest problem was 5MRAD turrets and getting lost or being on the wrong rotation and missing big.
100% agreed here.
There great for what they are but there is a huge difference in clarity. This weekend I just mounted my razor HD gen 2. the difference was unbelievable, I prolly spent 1/2 hr. or so just looking at targets from 100-600yds. Now I don't know how much difference it will make on a full sun day. As it was a cloudy day and not real bright, so it really brought out the difference in glass. (another consideration is that the razor has 34mm tube vs. 30 mm. 56mm objective vs 42mm so that all plays into the equation.)
But all in all the there was no comparison but there is also no comparison in price tag as well, so if your on a budget they will make a fine scope. like I said I used the 10x, and 3-15x and still use them. love them for the price point. If I had to buy a fixed power id buy another 10x, but if I could afford 3-15x id go that route.
I have the 16x, and I like it, though like others have mentioned, the eye box and glass aren't awesome, but for $250, It's great. I do love the mil quad reticle though. My eye picks it up very well.
Scott
Scott
Similar threads
