Rifle Scopes SWFA 3-15 view

[Freediver111]

I’ll admit it, I’m a big fan of SWFA scopes. Super reliable tracking and reasonably priced. I’m a range shooter and hunter only.

I had a fixed 10x once, and no real complaints, but the glass was not great. Useable sure, but didn’t meet my needs. I would say I’m a bit of a glass snob and notice this stuff more than the average joe.

I currently own a 5-20 HD and no complaints. Really like it. Aftermarket zero stops work great even though not super necessary. Wouldn’t mind .2 mil subtensions, but the reticle works for my needs.

I’m looking at building a new lighter weight hunting gun in the future and wondered if the 3-15 is the same glass quality as the fixed 10? If so, I may opt for the fixed 10 HD. Would save a little weight too.

Thanks for any opinions. Oh, and while I’m sure I can get great glass at $2k, for this build I’m looking at a package under $1500. Thinking Tikka CTR or T3X and glass under 1k.

 

[PAYDIRT]

I have the 3-15 on my 455, it's super clear, it amazes me when I get on it after shooting my "big" rifle and it wears a T5XI.

 

[uncoffeed]

3-15 is good. One of my faves. A good working scope.
It's not great in low light, IMO. I would stick with the 10xHD if the FOV is acceptable for your use. I have a few >$1500 scopes, and they all outclass the 3-15 by a mile in glass (though not durability!!).

 

[lancetkenyon]

I have a stable of high end glass. Premier ×2, S&B PMII ×2, Tangent Theta ×2, Kahles, March. I also have had most other high end glass. Steiner T5Xi, Vortex Razor/Razor Gen 2/AMG, SWFA SS 5-20HD, and shot behind a bunch of NF, Swaro, Zeiss, Leupold VX-5/VX5HD/VX6HD/Mark 6 Bushnell Elite, Burris XTRII, even a Hensoldt.
I also have a pair of SWFA 3-15×42 on some 10/22s. While the glass is not S&B or TT quality, it is very good for the price point. Not many (or any?) other $600-700 FFP scopes I would even consider.

 

[Bender]

I’ve had both. Glass is comparable. I thought they were both very useable. But it’s not going to be like your HD.

 

[Freediver111]

I’ve had both. Glass is comparable. I thought they were both very useable. But it’s not going to be like your HD.

So is the 3-15 a little better than the 10x, or the same really?

 

[Bender]

So is the 3-15 a little better than the 10x, or the same really?

In all honesty. The 10x is brighter to me, but they both had the same clarity. They are both very useable and clear. I think the 10x has better light transmission because it lacks the extra couple lenses of the FFP variable power 3-15.

That said. The 3-15 is best in its price class. Hands down.

 

[bravesirrobin]

The reticle on the 3-15x is honestly a bit too thick for my liking. The 10x is much easier to use because the reticle is so fine.

 

[steve123]

I've had three SWFA 3-15's and one old 10x, the mil/moa one. Also a 20x fixed. All of them just lacked in the glass department.

Most recent disappointment with my remaining 3-15 was when my friend and I were hitting a black painted turkey silhouette at 421Y with our 22 rimfires. It was hard to make out hits with the SWFA but the hits were noticeable with a cheap Athlon Argos BTR 6-24x50, both set on 15x. Both my friend and I were surprised there was that much difference!

Plus with my diopter setting, which is screwed out farther because of my older eyes, these scopes run out of focus past 700Y, in other words on infinity by 800Y, the image is slightly blurry. So mine is on a 10-22.

On top of that, I sold one of them to a friend. The parallax knob fell off when my friend was turning it. The company replaced the scope which is cool.

Not bad scopes, they track well, but if choosing for glass quality, not the best choice for sure. I'm not buying one again.

If you are really set on a SWFA buy a used HD series. If not then there are better choices elsewhere nowadays.

 

[Lawless]

That said. The 3-15 is best in its price class. Hands down

I am a SWFA fan, have 2 HD scopes myself, but isn’t the Athlon Tac a better scope than the non-HD? Better glass, splined turrets, 10 mils per turn and it has a zero stop as well.

I am considering one and was torn about the SWFA and had decided Athlon but I’m curious about your thoughts.

 

[Freediver111]

I’d like to know as well. If there’s a scope out there with bombproof tracking and better glass, I’d consider it. This is for a hunting gun, so needs to be tough and reliable. I’ve always been a fan of the SWFA’s. The HD line easily meets my criteria, but the standard line lacks the clarity and resolution for my eyes.

Yes, I know you can get some great scopes if you pay the money, but for my next hunting build I’d like to keep cost of the scope under $1k, MIL, and FFP.

 

[steve123]

I much prefer my Midas TAC's to any SWFA scope, period, for a number of reasons, the TAC has pulled ahead in value and features.

 

[hypno02]

I much prefer my Midas TAC's to any SWFA scope, period, for a number of reasons, the TAC has pulled ahead in value and features.

If this is going on a hunting rifle I'd never put any Athlon short of a cronus on it. They are frail optics in comparison and have nowhere near the tracking track record the SWFA's do.

I've owned the 10xHDand the 3-15. Both performed as expected. The 10XHD is a bit more refined. I'd go with the 10x.

 

[steve123]

The Athlon scopes I've bought, I lost count because I sold a bunch to my group of friends, close to 15 now, have all worked and haven't needed to be sent back for repair. No knobs have fallen off like on that SWFA I mentioned.

Heck I've won state the last 3 years in a row in my division with a Athlon Argos BTR 6-24. That thing has been knocked over, rained on, and dialed up and down thousands of times.

A guy a know just bagged a nice Coues in Mexico two weeks ago with Argos BTR 6-24 hiking miles a day. Two years ago I sold a Ares BTR 2.5-15 x 50 to hunter, he got his Muley.

Longer track record for the SWFA, yes. The TAC isn't even a year old.

Fragile, uh no.

 

[hypno02]

The Athlon scopes I've bought, I lost count because I sold a bunch to my group of friends, close to 15 now, have all worked and haven't needed to be sent back for repair. No knobs have fallen off like on that SWFA I mentioned.

Heck I've won state the last 3 years in a row in my division with a Athlon Argos BTR 6-24. That thing has been knocked over, rained on, and dialed up and down thousands of times.

A guy a know just bagged a nice Coues in Mexico two weeks ago with Argos BTR 6-24 hiking miles a day. Two years ago I sold a Ares BTR 2.5-15 x 50 to hunter, he got his Muley.

Longer track record for the SWFA, yes. The TAC isn't even a year old.

Fragile, uh no.

I'm just speaking from experience. I used to sell Athlon product in a previous career and we had more Athlons go back to the factory for QC/Mechanical Failures/Etc than anything else. We sold them at about a 1:1 ratio to leupolds FWIW. I'm glad you and your friends have had excellent luck with their products I just know I'd never take one of their scopes hunting for anything other than a gopher in my backyard.

A lot of people like to deny it but there's legitimate reasons the cheap Vortex's and Athlon's carry the stereotype of being fragile & unreliable.

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

Kinda buried in all this is a key distinction: there is an old model 10X and a newer 10X HD. The glass is different, the turrets are different, the scope is entirely different - other than the symbol, maker, and power.
The 3-15 shares the older turret design (not my favorite, but very reliable and repeatable) and the glass to me looks a bit sharper than the old 10X but not as sharp as the newer 10X HD.
As said above, SWFA scopes have a great reputation for durability; and if one does break, they stand behind them very, very firmly. I've owned just about everything they make other than the 1-6 and the 16X and 20X, and all have served me well. A few have had issues, and those issues are always promptly addressed.

I've not owned any Athlons, but SWFA has been the gold-standard lower priced, quality riflescopes for many years.

If looking for a good hunter from a proven company, SWFA came out with a 2.5-10 last year and it is a good scope for the money. Eye relief is a bit short and eyebox ain't great, but for the money, it is quite good. And it is exceedingly light weight. It is a more traditional hunter, capped turrets and all, but a version with a mil reticle is coming out shortly - I hear. I don't know much about long-term durability, it is a new scope, new design; but I like it so far.

I like the 3-15 for the pricerange, but it is not a small scope; and depending on how you hunt, the turrets can spin with more ease than I like for a walkabout gun.

 

[BCP]

I’ll admit it, I’m a big fan of SWFA scopes. Super reliable tracking and reasonably priced. I’m a range shooter and hunter only.

I had a fixed 10x once, and no real complaints, but the glass was not great. Useable sure, but didn’t meet my needs. I would say I’m a bit of a glass snob and notice this stuff more than the average joe.

I currently own a 5-20 HD and no complaints. Really like it. Aftermarket zero stops work great even though not super necessary. Wouldn’t mind .2 mil subtensions, but the reticle works for my needs.

I’m looking at building a new lighter weight hunting gun in the future and wondered if the 3-15 is the same glass quality as the fixed 10? If so, I may opt for the fixed 10 HD. Would save a little weight too.

Thanks for any opinions. Oh, and while I’m sure I can get great glass at $2k, for this build I’m looking at a package under $1500. Thinking Tikka CTR or T3X and glass under 1k.

For a lighter weight hunting rifle get one of the 3-9 SWFA scopes. I bet you could find one used for 400 bucks.

 

[steve123]

Like I always say, there's no perfect scope, always compromises here and there. Of course the less expensive a scope is the more chance it has of going down. Also I think a fixed power scope can be more reliable than a variable.

Athlon is a newer Co and it had some growing pains for sure but there's people that like to compare their cheap scope to their expensive scope and can't seem to realize....

In build quality I'll give SWFA the nod over the Argos BTR and the Helos BTR but not the TAC. I chose it because of it's price to quality and feature - ratio. In other words I'd rather have the extra $600 in my pocket and it's features than buy a SWFA 5-20, as good at it has been, even though the ones I've messed with had a really stiff parallax knob.

 

[wade2big]

The reticle on the 3-15x is honestly a bit too thick for my liking. The 10x is much easier to use because the reticle is so fine.

I like thick reticles. The SWFA is perfect for a FFP scope. The OP wants a hunting scope. A FFP hunting scope needs a thick reticle.

The 3-15x42 makes a good hunting scope. The only negative is at the last bit of light. Dial up to see the reticle, and there isnt enough light through the scope. Dial down to brighten the scope and the reticle is hard to see with no illumination. This isnt a knock on the swfa. Its a knock on all ffp scopes with no illumination. They are great until the last 10minutes of light.

 

[Freediver111]

I forgot they came out with a 3-9 in HD, and it’s light! Might be a nice combo for a lighter weight hunting rifle for ranges out to 700.

 

[Rancid Coolaid]

This isn't a stalker, is it? I have thr 3-9 on a 6.5 grendel and it is the perfect fit, awesome round, great scope to match.

 

[Lawless]

I love my two 1-4HD SWFA scopes, they are bright and have perfect reticles for what they were designed for. Tough as they come and I wouldn’t get rid of them.

That said, as much as I think the non HD line is tough, the features of the 3-15 are lacking in today’s market at that price. It is pretty bombproof though.

If they just added the turret style of the HD scopes to the old line it would be a big improvement.

 

[BCP]

You know awhile back I had a sightron 3-10X scope with a mildot + target turrets and it was a phenomenal little scope. That would work for you too. Made in Japan IIRC.

 

[Freediver111]

I think based on my experience with the glass on the non-HD line, I’m better off sticking to the HD where I’ve been plenty happy.
What keeps bringing me back is the reliability of the turrets. I’ve heard too many issues with several brands in the $700 price range. I know, you get what you pay for, but budget is a consideration for this somewhat niche rifle. It won’t be my main gun, or my highest priced gun. Fits a niche and a budget so to speak.

 

[Lawless]

The Tac supposedly has the heavy duty erector design of the Ares. Every review I have read raved about how nice and audible the clicks are and how easy the zero stop was to set.

I guess they have not been out long enough to know about long term durability but I think the odds are good that they’ll be known as the go-to in this price range like the SS has been in the past.

 

[Strykervet]

If I was gonna buy a lesser scope, it'd be an SWFA. I haven't kept up on them, but twenty years ago their 10x scope was pretty damn nice for the money. Really nice for the money actually.

 

[palmettoman]

I have a SWFA 10x (not HD) and a 6-24 TAC. I get glare issues with the SWFA that I don't seem to get with the TAC. My Tac also fell 5' to a hardwood floor and still tracked perfectly. It bent the objective housing a little, but the internals were just fine. I sent it back to Athlon to get repaired since I wasn't able to use the sunshade with the bend in the housing. They replaced it rather than repair it. Kudos to them!