Rifle Scopes What More Are You Getting For The Money

[RaccoonRanger474]

So, about a week ago, I was pulled down the path of getting into long range shooting. I'd be cautious to overstate my experience with firearms, but suffice it to say I know enough about the firearms that I use to feel comfortable teaching another person how to proficiently operate them in short order. With that being said, I know barely the basics of magnified optics.

Up untill 2015 I shot exclusively with iron sights, and only after that time did I start using EOTechs. Any scopes that I used in the past have been on borrowed rifles, and often I was not happy with either the performance or the price tag. Enter this week where I just ordered my first precision rifle, and now I am preparing to purchase a proper optic to match up with it.
If I thought that choosing a new rifle was a daunting process of research and comparison, the world of rifle optics left me emotionally drained and distressed. I had no idea that there were so many variations of features, reticles, magnifications, objectives, and models to sift through. On top of all that, every time I'd ask a fellow colleague or shooter their opinion, I'd end up running down a rabbit trail miles away from my original goal.

As of this moment I have settled on buying a fixed power 10x, specifically the Leupold Mark 4 LR/T 10x40. During my research I noticed many different scopes that shared similar "specs" such as magnification range and objective diameter, but prices could range from $300 to $3000.
For example, three scopes that I came across in my research would appear to be very similar in terms of optical measurements and reticles. These scopes were the Bushnell 3200 10x40, the Sightron SIII 10X42, and the Leupold Mk4 LR/T 10X40. The Bushnell retailed around $200, the Sightron around $600, and the Leupold around $1400.

My question and something I would like to get a discussion going on is this: Using the previous example or one similar in nature, what would you get from a more expensive scope, that you wouldn't get from a less expensive comparison?

I'd love to hear y'alls thoughts and explanations.

 

[RidiculousMetacarpus]

Generally between major price jumps, often called tiers, you get better glass quality (clarity), then more features, and then, better turret tracking. Features as in things like illumination, certain proprietary zero stops, and so on. Most of the time the difference between price jumps, all other things being equal, is glass quality.

There is a dogmatic commandment on many forums that says one must spend at least the same amount of money on a scope as their rifle's base-price. I'm not sure i FULLY agree with this (i dont mean partially, i mean literally fully), but it's an SORT OF okay (kind of) starting point. For example: i had a $2500 16" AR10 that was built entirely for <400 yard stuff. For game. At that point i see no reason to spend $2500 on glass when a $700 4-16 PST will do just dandy. But then again, if it were, say, a semi-custom bolt gun intended for range queen stuff or competition, or dime holes at the same price, maybe $2500+ glass would THEN (and only then) be maybe worth it.

My latest rifle was $4100. No way in hell am i gonna go try to hunt down a $4100 optic just to satisfy the arbitrary "you have to spend minimum what the gun is worth or youre wrong!" dogma BS, im "settling" for Vortex AMG glass instead, simply because i have a certain weight vs glass quality ratio i want to hit.

If you're getting into "precision" guns purely for long range precision, then yes high price glass is subjectively worth it. I would never settle for a $300 scope on a gun i intended to call a "precision" one. But like all things in life, it's diminishing returns the more you spend.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

There is a dogmatic commandment on many forums that says one must spend at least the same amount of money on a scope as their rifle's base-price. I'm not sure i FULLY agree with this (i dont mean partially, i mean literally fully), but it's an SORT OF okay (kind of) starting point.

That's one of the most consistent items of advice that I recieved from talking to other shooters. I figured it was somewhat sound and let it loosely determine my budget for glass. That being said I am shooting to go as far under MSRP as I can get when the wallet comes out.

If you're getting into "precision" guns purely for long range precision, then yes high price glass is subjectively worth it. I would never settle for a $300 scope on a gun i intended to call a "precision" one. But like all things in life, it's diminishing returns the more you spend.

The competitions that I am looking at are LE "Sniper" matches. Precision is needed, but from what I have gleaned I'll need a fairly practical setup for the various challenges. I have heard from competitors at the match that my partner and myself are looking to get into next year, that many of the shooters up there are bringing way to much glass and rifle for some of the short range scenarios, and they are paying for it in the scores. Beyond that, I might look into qualifying with it for duty use later on, and I'd like an extra margin of durability if money can buy it.

For sure not going to park an El Cheapo optic on an expensive rifle, all other reasons not withstanding.

 

[WPace21]

The fixed power SWFA scopes can be had for about $300 And it will track perfect and have plenty of elevation. They also have a 3x9 and 3x15 if you wanted to go with something other than a fixed magnification scope. All of their scopes perform well and seem to be highly recommended.

 

[SRPowah]

Pick up the SWFA fixed 10x or look at the Athlon series of optics for a budget variable. When starting out, it doesn't hurt to stick to a cheaper optic so you can figure out exactly what you want as far as dimensions, glass, reticle, etc... No matter what, tracking should come first if you dial at all.

 

[rtpguy]

The competitions that I am looking at are LE "Sniper" matches. Precision is needed, but from what I have gleaned I'll need a fairly practical setup for the various challenges. I have heard from competitors at the match that my partner and myself are looking to get into next year, that many of the shooters up there are bringing way to much glass and rifle for some of the short range scenarios, and they are paying for it in the scores. Beyond that, I might look into qualifying with it for duty use later on, and I'd like an extra margin of durability if money can buy it.

For sure not going to park an El Cheapo optic on an expensive rifle, all other reasons not withstanding.

RE: bolded portion...yet you're looking at a fixed 10x, while most 'over-glassed' are likely running 5-25x or similar, so won't you be doing yourself a dis-service running fixed 10x?

What ranges realistically are you looking to shoot at? What about 2-10x optics or a 3-15x SWFA FFP or used medium mag optic?

 

[Basher]

I'm not sure how guys are bringing "too much" magnification unless a) they're using fixed mag optics, which is what you're looking at or b) they don't know how to use the magnification ring on their scope. Unless somebody's throwing in 10m shots in these matches (which would be highly unusual), any quality variable should work fine.

What, exactly, is your budget? What ranges (min/max) do these competitions run? As far as having a "fairly practical" setup, a quality variable is going to check that box way more often then a fixed 10x. Fixed mag optics have their place, but they're not very versatile.

For a lower budget yet still quality option, I'd be looking for a used Bushnell LRHS or LRTS in either 3-12x or 4.5-18x. You can find them from about $600 up to $1200 or so depending on which model it is and how much use it's seen. And they punch above their class as far as features and optical quality go.

 

[steve123]

The downside of a fixed 10x scope is that "fixed" and relatively small field of view/FOV. You mentioned stages closer in, so the ideal, is a wider FOV to locate targets quickly, that is what a variable scope will provide.

It's 2018, variables have come a long way in a lot of ways.... BTW, there will be a bunch of new offerings from every optics Co available in the near future.

IMO, 3-15, 4-16, 4-20 variables cover a lot of bases as far as versatility. I find myself rarely at low magnification, approx half the time at 14x-18x magnification, and nearly as much at max mag/20. For dynamic situations I adjust the FOV to suit.

Some other things you could consider;

There are a lot of scopes out there with 50Y minimum parallax focus, I suggest getting one that focuses close, I don't buy scopes anymore unless they focus at 25Y or less.

Would you need at any time, an illuminated scope?

Might you need locking or capped turrets, or a zero stop?

The $1400 Leopold is on your list, that scope for that price would never cross my mind considering there are so many superior choices out there within that price range.

 

[deersniper]

Just get a used NF 3.5-15. F1 if u can swing it.
Leupold is so 1995

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

So moving into variable power scopes I am even more hopeless.

The downside of a fixed 10x scope is that "fixed" and relatively small field of view/FOV. You mentioned stages closer in, so the ideal, is a wider FOV to locate targets quickly, that is what a variable scope will provide.

It's 2018, variables have come a long way in a lot of ways.... BTW, there will be a bunch of new offerings from every optics Co available in the near future.

In concern to variable power scopes, that is even more technical aspects that I am not super comfortable with. For around $1400-1800 do you have any suggestions?
Ranges are going to be anything from 25-600 meters, and targets will vary widely. There will be some ranging exercises. I'd like to adjust parallax as close as possible. Do they make anything under 25 yard adjustments?
No illumination needed, and I wouldn't know enough about locking or capped turrets to know if I needed them or not.

 

[Basher]

So moving into variable power scopes I am even more hopeless. What are

In concern to variable power scopes, that is even more technical aspects that I am not super comfortable with. For around $1400-1800 do you have any suggestions?
Ranges are going to be anything from 25-600 meters, and targets will vary widely. There will be some ranging exercises. I'd like to adjust parallax as close as possible. Do they make anything under 25 yard adjustments?
No illumination needed, and I wouldn't know enough about locking or capped turrets to know if I needed them or not.

Knowing that info, I'd suggest a Vortex Razor GenII 3-18x50. You get a 25-Infinity parallax range, an excellent reticle, proven tracking and performance, and they can be found here in the PX for $1500-1800 depending on condition and accessories. Some scopes adjust for parallax down to 10y (I believe Schimdt&Bender does), but for quality optics, 25 is generally the lowest you'll find without paying out the wazoo.

 

[spife7980]

If you’re comfortable spending 1700 an Athlon Cronus btr will be a great value, call a forum vendor and they might make you an even better deal.
If you only want to spend 1000 a 5-25 gen2 vortex pst.
700 a swfa 3-15
There are lots of options. If you get a front focal plane scope the reticles subtensions will match the turrets marking at all magnifications. That is one less thing you have to calculate in your head. Seems like that’s right up your alley.
If you get a scope in mils it’s a simple system that works on tenths. You read on the reticle how many tenths you need to adjust and then adjust the turret that amount. MOA is another system that works on quarters. Not any more difficult, just different. You seem like a mil guy.

The more expensive the optic the more refined and dependable it will be. 1800 will get you a heck of a lot of scope. Get on eurooptic and see what piques your curiosity, they have the most friendly web design I think. Ask us to confirm or explain the differences between particular models and we’ll try to make the differences as clear as we can. Don’t rush this just because it’s frustrating, you’ll appreciate the decision more once you understand it.

 

[steve123]

So moving into variable power scopes I am even more hopeless. What are

In concern to variable power scopes, that is even more technical aspects that I am not super comfortable with. For around $1400-1800 do you have any suggestions?
Ranges are going to be anything from 25-600 meters, and targets will vary widely. There will be some ranging exercises. I'd like to adjust parallax as close as possible. Do they make anything under 25 yard adjustments?
No illumination needed, and I wouldn't know enough about locking or capped turrets to know if I needed them or not.

Spife has made very good suggestions.

Generally I prefer FFP scopes/first focal plain.

I run a Cronus BTR 4.5-29x56, too me it offers a great set of features and quality for the price. It's close focus is at 25Y.

I've had a March 3-24x42, it's pretty good scope and I bought mine used for $1800. It focuses at 10Y. I like the Cronus more but would rather it focus closer like this March. I sold it because the glass in it wasn't what I thought it should be.

I have had 3 SWFA 3-15's. Not a bad scope, it's the darling of it's price range around here. LOL, the one I sold to a friend broke, "of course, right", Murphy had to get involved since it was my friend. The parallax knob fell off and previously we were wondering why the come ups wouldn't line up. The good news is SWFA sent him a new one. It focuses at 6 meters but I always had problems with focus past 700Y for whatever reason. Plus I prefer tree style reticles.

I had a Athlon Ares BTR 2-5-15x50. It focused at 10Y. I sold it to a hunter needing a scope and on a "I need it right now" basis for a hunt he had coming up. I will replace it when I get a chance and I definitely prefer it to the SWFA 3-15.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

There are lots of options. If you get a front focal plane scope the reticles subtensions will match the turrets marking at all magnifications. That is one less thing you have to calculate in your head. Seems like that’s right up your alley.
If you get a scope in mils it’s a simple system that works on tenths. You read on the reticle how many tenths you need to adjust and then adjust the turret that amount. MOA is another system that works on quarters. Not any more difficult, just different. You seem like a mil guy.

Mils are easier for me to process in my head, but I can manage minute of angle as well. I've used DMS in land nav long enough to understand the minute system, but mils seem cleaner and quicker in terms of ranging.

The more expensive the optic the more refined and dependable it will be. 1800 will get you a heck of a lot of scope. Get on eurooptic and see what piques your curiosity, they have the most friendly web design I think. Ask us to confirm or explain the differences between particular models and we’ll try to make the differences as clear as we can. Don’t rush this just because it’s frustrating, you’ll appreciate the decision more once you understand it.

I'll head that way. If I can come under budget and still get a really good optic, I've got a trip to the ammo store for my leftover funds. Questions to follow shortly.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

Okay, so EuroOptic had 1,585 different scopes under their riflescopes tab. There is a whole lot to process out of those options. I've got two that I am wondering what the difference is. The Vortex Viper PST 3-15x44, and the Viper HST 4-16x44. Both have mil adjustments, the PST is first focal plane (which I like) and it is illuminated (not so much like). The HST has about a half inch more eye relief, and it is about 26% lighter. HST is also second focal plane.

About the only thing that the PST had that I found lacking in the HST was the first focal plane and a closer parallax setting (PST 25 yards vs HST 50 yards). Would that be worth the almost double price?

 

[Basher]

That particular PST is a GenII model. Glass is supposed to be improved, it's FFP, better reticle options, a true zero stop (not one that uses shims), updated construction methods, a better location for the illumination controls, etc. The HST is more a direct comparison to the GenI PSTs. For what you're considering (especially if you want to use it as a duty rifle at some point), I'd lean heavily towards the GenII PST, personally.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

That particular PST is a GenII model. Glass is supposed to be improved, it's FFP, better reticle options, a true zero stop (not one that uses shims), updated construction methods, a better location for the illumination controls, etc. The HST is more a direct comparison to the GenI PSTs. For what you're considering (especially if you want to use it as a duty rifle at some point), I'd lean heavily towards the GenII PST, personally.

What advances have been made from gen I to II in terms of construction methods? Any real difference in durability?

Speaking of durability, a guy told me that second focal plane scopes are generally more “durable” than first focal points plane. Any truth to that?

 

[Basher]

What advances have been made from gen I to II in terms of construction methods? Any real difference in durability?

Speaking of durability, a guy told me that second focal plane scopes are generally more “durable” than first focal points plane. Any truth to that?

I'll answer your second question first: no. FFP scopes display no difference in durability from an SFP scope, provided they're of the same quality. A $400 FFP knockoff special compared to a quality $1500 SFP scope will obviously show differences, but in the same quality bracket, there'a no difference.

As far as differences between PST GenI and GenII, there's a world of difference in their overall construction. GenIs were a game changer in their day, as they offered amazing value and features for the price. They're still decent scopes, really. But the GenIIs offer a much improved zero stop mechanism, better illumination (and a better location for it), more reticle options, some say the glass is clearer (that's highly subjective), and they supposedly track better than the GenIs. Their mag ranges are also different, though I don't know that I's call that an improvement, just a difference.

Perhaps spend a few weeks reading up on what you can before you go spend a huge wad of cash. Also, try to visit a few local matches and ask questions, see if people will let you look through their scopes or even shoot their rifles antime or two. The precision world is filled with an overwhelming amount of info, but those of us who know a bit about it gained that knowledge the same way you'll have to. I've been a lurker here on SH and numerous other sites for well over a decade, and I still have a ton to learn. But that's all part if the fun.

 

[IanHusaberg]

What advances have been made from gen I to II in terms of construction methods? Any real difference in durability?

Speaking of durability, a guy told me that second focal plane scopes are generally more “durable” than first focal points plane. Any truth to that?

Gen 1 are known to go down all the time and the warranty has to be used. I've never picked up a Gen1 PST. I did buy a gen 2 and have been pleasantly surprised. Focal plane has nothing to due with reliability. I'd say the opposite. People usually pay more for FFP than SFP. You usually get more product for your $ if you do your homework.

 

[tna9001]

To add another option to the mix, have you considered the Burris XTR series?

I’ve got a Kahles 624i on my rifle which is a $3k scope, I’ve shot a couple rifles with the XTR on them and was impressed considering they are $1k optics.

One thing you can’t see on the spec sheet is how your eye “feels” behind the scope, if you were going to be observing for a period of time spending extra money for better glass might reduce eye fatigue.

 

[supercorndogs]

Burris XTRII,
Bushnell LRHS, ERS, DMR, DMRII,
SWFA 10x, 3-15x42, 5-20x50,
Weaver Tactical 3-15x50 4-20x50, 6-30x56,
Sightron SIII
Steiner TX5i 3-15x50, 5-25x56
Steiner has some older military models that can be found for a great price too.
Athlon Ares or Cronus

 

[Birddog6424]

Don't get wrapped around the axle on a 25 yard parallax. Short of a 22 rimfire match, I've never seen a target closer than 100 yards in any precision rifle match.

Definitely take a look at the Burris XTRII. It's one of the best selling scopes on the market in the 900 to $1100 price points. They are prolific in the PRS.

 

[scudzuki]

There is no Leupold MkIV scope, fixed or variable, that is worth $1400 IMHO.
For that money you could find a used ERS or similar which is twice the scope of the best MkIV Leupold offers.

SWFA fixed is good low cost offering and it's never a bad thing to have a decent accurately tracking backup scope around should you decide to replace it later.

For a few hundred more than the Leupold you were considering you can get an Athlon Cronus BTR (or plain Cronus) 4.5-29x56 which has optical and mechanical performance on par with $2500 scopes (not conjecture, my experience).

Leupold Mk6 and better scopes are the real deal (and possibly Mk5) but the 6 and better are a lot of money for the features IMHO.

 

[supercorndogs]

There is no Leupold MkIV scope, fixed or variable, that is worth $1400 IMHO.
For that money you could find a used ERS or similar which is twice the scope of the best MkIV Leupold offers.

SWFA fixed is good low cost offering and it's never a bad thing to have a decent accurately tracking backup scope around should you decide to replace it later.

For a few hundred more than the Leupold you were considering you can get an Athlon Cronus BTR (or plain Cronus) 4.5-29x56 which has optical and mechanical performance on par with $2500 scopes (not conjecture, my experience).

Leupold Mk6 and better scopes are the real deal (and possibly Mk5) but the 6 and better are a lot of money for the features IMHO.

The glass in the Cronus is really impressive for the price point.

 

[steve123]

Don't get wrapped around the axle on a 25 yard parallax. Short of a 22 rimfire match, I've never seen a target closer than 100 yards in any precision rifle match.

Definitely take a look at the Burris XTRII. It's one of the best selling scopes on the market in the 900 to $1100 price points. They are prolific in the PRS.

I haven't been to many tactical matches the last couple years but I've seen/shot a stage as close as 11Y before. A couple stages with 25Y shots as part of them, and a clay pigeon offhand stage with all of the shots less than 50Y.

It's a "better to have and not need, than need and not have" thing. But I will admit I hate an unfocused target. Also not saying a close target can't be hit with 50Y parallax.

 

[Quarter Horse]

Burris XTRII,
Bushnell LRHS, ERS, DMR, DMRII,
SWFA 10x, 3-15x42, 5-20x50,
Weaver Tactical 3-15x50 4-20x50, 6-30x56,
Sightron SIII
Steiner TX5i 3-15x50, 5-25x56
Steiner has some older military models that can be found for a great price too.
Athlon Ares or Cronus

This list from supercorndogs is excellent. The Weaver 3-15X50mm is available through Natchez Shooter Supply for $600.00. You get Japanese build, Japanese glass, 5X power range, FFP, two color illumination that's almost daylight bright, an enhanced mil-dot reticle and a lifetime warranty. You do not get zero-stop or a Christmas tree reticle. The glass hits well above it's weight class. These have parallax adjustment that bottoms at twenty five yards but, if I remember correctly, that minimum parallax is at highest magnification. At lower magnification you will have correct adjustment at a lesser distance. Natchez has several scopes that meet the general description. Be sure you are buying Weaver's item #800363. BTW, if my poor memory is incorrect regarding decreasing mag. decreases distance for accurate parallax adjustment, please correct me.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

Don't get wrapped around the axle on a 25 yard parallax. Short of a 22 rimfire match, I've never seen a target closer than 100 yards in any precision rifle match.
PRS.

The match that my partner and myself are training for has small targets as close as 25 and out to 100. Not sure how much of parallax error can be induced over that short of a range, but some guys were missing at 25, and they were running serious glass.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

To add another option to the mix, have you considered the Burris XTR series?

I’ve got a Kahles 624i on my rifle which is a $3k scope, I’ve shot a couple rifles with the XTR on them and was impressed considering they are $1k optics.

Thank you for the suggestion! I got behind a PST and an XTR today at the range. The XTR called my name. The weight is a little on the heavy side, but I’ll take the trade off for the 34mm tube.

 

[stello1001]

Burris XTRII,
Bushnell LRHS, ERS, DMR, DMRII,
SWFA 10x, 3-15x42, 5-20x50,
Weaver Tactical 3-15x50 4-20x50, 6-30x56,
Sightron SIII
Steiner TX5i 3-15x50, 5-25x56
Steiner has some older military models that can be found for a great price too.
Athlon Ares or Cronus

This list from supercorndogs is excellent. The Weaver 3-15X50mm is available through Natchez Shooter Supply for $600.00. You get Japanese build, Japanese glass, 5X power range, FFP, two color illumination that's almost daylight bright, an enhanced mil-dot reticle and a lifetime warranty. You do not get zero-stop or a Christmas tree reticle. The glass hits well above it's weight class. These have parallax adjustment that bottoms at twenty five yards but, if I remember correctly, that minimum parallax is at highest magnification. At lower magnification you will have correct adjustment at a lesser distance. Natchez has several scopes that meet the general description. Be sure you are buying Weaver's item #800363. BTW, if my poor memory is incorrect regarding decreasing mag. decreases distance for accurate parallax adjustment, please correct me.

I have this scope and love it. I know for a fact the markings on the parallax adjustment knob say 35y so it's supposed to be able to focus down to that distance. Unfortunately, I've never had to shoot that close so I can't comment on the whole parallax/magnification thing on the lowest or highest power setting.

 

[Bender]

XTR is a solid choice. Can’t go wrong. I would just settle on it and go shoot.

 

[m6z]

Go with the fixed SWFA 10x or 12x if you are on a budget. Solid scopes for the money.

IMO you have to jump to the $800+ price point to get a variable with decent glass that's going to track. Most in that higher price range will also have a zero stop.

 

[AF_TT]

Lots of good options pointed out here and there are many good deals to be had in the PX. With that said I'd save more money and wait another week/month or whatever to make entry into the sport and just get what you want, that applies to all pieces of your equipment. If you settle to play today you will still want the other tomorrow.

 

[lawofsavage]

The match that my partner and myself are training for has small targets as close as 25 and out to 100. Not sure how much of parallax error can be induced over that short of a range, but some guys were missing at 25, and they were running serious glass.

Never shot a match anything like this from 10-100. Definitely think you have the right idea of trying before you buy and getting advice though especially if you were considering a fixed 10x scope for a match where a decent amount of your points come from 10 yd targets.

 

[RaccoonRanger474]

Never shot a match anything like this from 10-100. Definitely think you have the right idea of trying before you buy and getting advice though especially if you were considering a fixed 10x scope for a match where a decent amount of your points come from 10 yd targets.

The targets between 25 and 100 are small (inch thick diagonal lines, hostage targets, clays, etc.), and beyond that they use steel disks and silhouettes out to 600. They throw in a lot of dynamic targets, stress courses, and some woodland environments.
Beyond all of that, I’d like it to be up to duty use if I can qualify with it.
My thought process before research was that fixed = simple, simple = less likely to screw up. I still think this reasoning holds water, but it looks like the market is moving completely away from fixed powers, and I lacked understanding on how much optics have advanced since I was a kid. I see that taking on a little complexity is worth the extra versatility.
I am still interested in studying what various factors drive the price differences though.

 

[Deleted member 10043]

Durability Durability Durability!!!!. First and foremost. With that in mind...

Tier 1 = expensive and you should get everything you want for paying the extra premium. More exotic in terms of component quality. Glass quality will be right up there as with serious bird watching glass. If you can't hit shit than don't be that dumbass narcissist that shows up late. These scopes have a tendency to deflate egos that think they can buy their way in as a misguided easier softer way to enter a wolf pack.
Tier 2 = Moderate pricing. Mainstream brands names. They tend to use the same factories. And the glass is good.
Tier 3 = Cheaper pricing. You may or may not get a lemon. If it not a lemon it will operate like a Tier 2. Glass can be okay or good.

It is like picking out a good amplifier as far as specs go. So, buyer beware because even Tier 1 can have smoke and mirrors in the specs. You will see people with lower tier scopes continually and happily out shooting people with tier 1.

 

[pitdog85]

At the ELR event just had the guy that was one of 3 people to hit 3 from 3 at 1500 was using a fixed swfa!!!!! Not sure what power but makes me happy about my fixed 12x swfa purchase.

 

[Gil P.]

I used a fixed 12x SWFA for a few years and did very well with it. For $300 it cant be beat. Its a small investment, but it may help you make a better decision in the future, especially in regards to reticle and turret design. You may wish that the SWFA did x,y and z, and when its time to find a scope with those features, come back to this forum and ask again. The reticle design is a huge factor when buying a scope.

 

[Mordamer]

At the ELR event just had the guy that was one of 3 people to hit 3 from 3 at 1500 was using a fixed swfa!!!!! Not sure what power but makes me happy about my fixed 12x swfa purchase.

It was a 20x fixed SWFA.