Rifle Scopes Trade - NF NXS for SS HD?

[AvsFan]

Gent's,

I want a good quality FFP optic for my one of my AI's. I currently have a NF 3.5-15x56 NXS w/MLR reticle on top. However, I'm thinking about trading it for SS HD 5-20x50 (non-illuminated)...this will give me the FFP (that I want) + a little more magnification as a bonus w/o illumination. I've never seen or, handled an SWFA SS scope first hand. However, I've read a ton of reviews and watched several video reviews on them which all are positive.

Therefore, I'm seeking some input from you guys who had or, have both the aforementioned scopes. I just don't want to make a trade and have traders remorse after the fact...is this a logical trade? Is the NXS glass better, the same, or, inferior to the SS HD glass? What about durability, tracking, etc., does one have the edge over the other?

My primary utilization is for a range toy initially and hopefully for competitive shooting down the road.

Thanks in advance!

AvsFan

 

[Redmanss]

I would do it. Both track well, have good clarity, and the SWFA suits your needs. The 3.5-15 have been going out on some serious discounts lately, putting them in the same price bracket new, although NF keep their value a lot better than SWFA SS do. The rest comes down to whether you like the mil-quad reticle of the SWFA. It's not my favorite, but it's certainly usable.

Sounds like a fair trade to me and works for your goal.

 

[Niles Coyote]

In my experience with the NF 3.5-15x50's I have and had, the difference is to close to call when compared on the same powers. I can say that as the light dims (lowlight) I can see more just a little longer with the NF's while at the same power setting. This last year deer hunting had me looking nearly into the sun and I was getting more flair than I recall ever having with a NF while using the 5-20SS but that's not really a fair comparison as my NF was 900 miles away... on the plus side, the extra power, FFP and lower cost... there is a lot to like about the swfa.

I am a big fan of both.

 

[hk dave]

I think the glass quality will be similar, however the SWFA has 20x and there are times where that will come in handy.

Tracking on the SWFA is great.

The only disadvantage the SWFA has is the parallax... It's just stupidly stiff. I suppose another could be the stiffness and difficult position or the zoom ring.

However to me, the advantages of FFP would make me choose the SWFA.

If it were between the SWFA and an F1 though, I'd go F1.

 

[Voltron]

The SWFA scope will most likely have better glass. I'm very impressed with the quality of glass on my SWFA 5-20 scope. If it were me I'd do it.

 

[mr2.0]

The SWFA scope will most likely have better glass. I'm very impressed with the quality of glass on my SWFA 5-20 scope. If it were me I'd do it.

SS glass is better than NF??? Can someone confirm this?

 

[skeeterIII]

I have had both but my (3) Nightforces are all 5.5-22X56 and the the ATACR is 5-25X56 and I have a 10X42 HD on my 50cal 99A1. Today at the range I put the power level at 10 on both the NXS, ATACR and HD and I thought the Nightforce was the superior scope. Maybe it was not a fair to compare a 56mm objective with a 42mm objective but while the SWFA is a good scope it can not compare to the Nightforce in build or strength IMO.

 

[ArmyJerry]

Interesting thread , thanks for info so far gents.

 

[Niles Coyote]

SS glass is better than NF??? Can someone confirm this?

I thought I had in my earlier post, but I will add a little too it here.

I have had two SWFA ss 5-20’s for about 2 years now and have owned 3 NF 3-15x50’s... The glass in the NF is better but the margin is very small. That margin grows under certain circumstances, such as lower light levels and internal flair with the testing I have done on my own at comparable power settings. Is the NF the better scope??? It depends. Now that SWFA and Bushnell have products that have a higher power range and FFP while at several hundred less than a new SFP NF you won’t see me purchasing many more...

Is the glass better, in my opinion yes NF glass is better. Is it worth more while having fewer features that I would like... no, not in my opinion.

 

[skeeterIII]

When the first SWFA 5-20 were coming out I believe SWFA had a deal and were selling them through Sniper's Hide for about $700. I just figured you get what you pay for and ordered the Nightforce. The Nightforce scopes really hold there value but not many people have heard of SWFA.

 

[Redmanss]

When the first SWFA 5-20 were coming out I believe SWFA had a deal and were selling them through Sniper's Hide for about $700. I just figured you get what you pay for and ordered the Nightforce. The Nightforce scopes really hold there value but not many people have heard of SWFA.

I don't believe they've ever been that low, unless you're talking package deals and running the rest of the items at full cost. Even that would be pushing it. When the scope first dropped, it was around $1250 for illuminated on the initial buy.

 

[BCP]

SS glass is better than NF??? Can someone confirm this?

It's not. They are both on the same level I would say.

If I went FFP I would take a bushnell HDMR over the SWFA 5-20. I'd only go SWFA if it were less than a grand.

 

[RFutch]

To me it's too close to tell. If you want FFP get the SS. If you want better turrets and a zero stop get the NF.

 

[South tx]

I am new to the site, but will offer my opinion.
Only been shooting long range(generally 400-1200 yds) not to be confused with extreme range, for about ten years.
I always stuck to high end European glass. When I started lurking on the internet, I saw a lot of chatter about swfa. I always wrote them off simply because almost every good comment I saw about them includes "good for the money". I bought my first on a few months ago, 10x42 base model. I have done things to them I would never do to a $2500 scope, and I am impressed. I have been putting them on several rifles now and testing them. I have had very very good results with them. Even pulled a mark IV and sold it for extra cash and replaced with base model ss.
I'm sure someone will have something negative to say, but I've done a lot of shooting in a lot of places with a lot of glass, and I think they are excellent scopes.
The high density glass models are bound to be outstanding, but until I get a bad scope, or go blind, I haven't felt the need. Average shooting conditions are 95-97* here in south tx and mirage weeds out scopes pretty quick. Hope this helps

 

[jeo556]

I'll add that I'm very pleased with my SWFA 5-20x. Glass is very good, tracking is very accurate and she's built like a tank. Only complaints are the power ring and parrallex ring are stiff. Can't say if the trade is worth it because I have never looked thru a NF NXS.

 

[Voltron]

One thing I noticed reading through the post's in this thread is that a lot of the comparisons are made between the SWFA and the NF F1 and ATACR. The OP's scope that he is looking to trade off is an NXS, not the much more expensive F1 or ATACR. I've heard that the glass on the F1 and ATACR are leaps and bounds better than the NXS line. The glass on the SS HD should be noticeably better than the NXS that the OP has. If you read reviews, the glass on the SS HD gets favorable reviews, as well as the rest of the scope being build well.

This is just my 2 cents, but maybe I'm bias because I really like the SS HD scopes.

 

[Niles Coyote]

reviews

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...wfa-5-20x50mm-ss-super-sniper-evaluation.html

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/snipers-hide-rifle-scopes/84367-swfa-super-sniper-5-20x50hd.html

 

[Voltron]

^ Boom, nailed it with the links to those reviews. Good info for the OP.

 

[4000fps]

Keep the Nightforce. SFP are nice if you like to hunt. A FFP scope with no illumination will have a pretty faint reticle on low power in low light or timber.

 

[WVshooter]

I'll add my $.02 since I've compared a few of the scopes mentioned. I have had my SSHD 5-20 for a couple years now and I love it. I've compared it directly with a friend's NF Mil-Spec scope which was quite a bit more expensive and neither of us could really see an appreciable difference in the clarity or image quality between the two. I've also compared it to another friends HDMR with the H-59 reticle and I think hands down the edge goes to the SSHD as far as clarity and image quality.

The SSHD is kind of a one trick pony but it does that trick very well and I believe it shames some more expensive scopes and their ridiculous prices. I've not compared the NF or HDMR in tracking tests and I haven't used the SSHD in any kind of adverse conditions but I can say the tracking is spot on at least up to 12 mils, the turrets and reticle match spot on too. The SSHD I have been able to sight in almost every time with one shot and could not accomplish that same task with the HDMR for whatever reason.

No doubt I'd choose the NF over the SSHD if I had to go to Afghanistan tomorrow but I'm not going to Afghanistan tomorrow and I shoot my rifle for fun, not for a living. If you want different reticle or turret options, zero stops, and other fancy options then skip the SSHD but if you can get by with it's standard features then I don't think there's much in it's price range that compares.

 

[FALex]

If you want FFP, get the SSHD. They are outstanding optics, I've owned 4 of them up to this point. Obviously, NF are great too, but you won't go wrong trading into the SSHD. Take a look at this link:

SaPPeR DZ: SWFA SS 5-20x50 FFP HD

It gives you a good idea of the subtensions of the mil quad reticle. I found it highly useable and liked it much. Unfortunately, I like the GAP-type reticles a bit more or I would still have the SSHD's.

 

[ArmyJerry]

I have a 3 of the milrad 16 x scopes and find them totally functional for anything other than combat. I will say this thread has me looking at the NF and the SSHD versions for my doomsday zombie attack rifles, possible replacements for the Bushy ET's and Vortex PST that currently sit on my zombie attack rifles.

 

[Aimsmall55]

From my point of view , the SS is AWESOME for the $. The reticle is a bit thicker than I would like, but I'm not shooting F class matches with it. I tested one out on a .300 win mag and tracking was true, clarity was excellent, had enough elevation to shoot to the moon, and the light transmission at dusk was EXCELLENT. Did several box tests with it and it was spot on. I often think to myself that this is one of the BEST scopes made for the amount of money it costs. IMO. , while I DONT have the 3x15x56, I do have the 5.5x22x56 and ( this is just a personal observation ) the SWFA is clearer glass. I probably wouldn't shoot f class with it, but PRS.... In a heart beat

 

[delfuego]

The SWFA 5-20 is the better scope. Better glass, FFP and better price. Is it perfect? No, but no scope is perfect. I have been using one for 2 years in competition and keep thinking I need to "upgrade". Every time I check out other scopes I am unimpressed, they just don't seem to be worth the extra cash (at least to my eyes). The things I want out of my next scope will be 2/10 mil reticle and great glass, tracking/FFP/durable are a given and SWFA already has those.

Not sure where in CO you are, but I would be happy to let you check out mine.

 

[acts238]

I'll trade you
I agree with 4000fps & I hunt -so yes I'd trade for you spf nf

 

[acts238]

I took my 5-22 nf & the ss 5-20 to the range today -after comparing side by side - at mid-day- I think the only thing the ss is lacking is the parallax adjustment is way better on the nf- as in easier to use while looking through the scope
the glass is really to close to call -

 

[EasyGravy]

Ive thought since the hd swfa came out that if they thinned the reticle or offered a couple differnt choices they could sell a shitton of them at the $1,000 mark. Just my .02