Analysis Paralysis

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Thanks for all the inputs fellas. I feel like I’m still stuck in neutral at the moment, at the same spot I was 2 days ago, so maybe i just need to go one way or another and adjust over time if I wind up unhappy with what I have.

If I could find a SWFA 3-9 today I’d buy it. So their unavailability is really the driver of my indecision. So I either just sit here without an optic and hope I can be first guy to the table when one lists in the classifieds, or I choose between the NF SHV 3-10 and the SWFA 3-15.

I can get the SFP SHV new for not much more than the Demo B SWFA 3-15 on SampleList right now. So money is not really a factor. FFP SHV would be another $200 over the SFP.

Does NF do their extensive testing like in the Shot Show video on YouTube on all their optics where they are banging it on a steel plate and checking it, including the SHV line?

If you qualify for the Nightforce military discount, then you can't go wrong with that SHV.

 

[aftriathlete]

If you qualify for the Nightforce military discount, then you can't go wrong with that SHV.

I do.

Guess I need to do some research tomorrow on this Bushnell as well. I might go ahead and email the NF rep and ask about how long of a wait time for the SHVs they are experiencing right now. If several months that will factor in as well.

Seems not much support for the SWFA 3-15 route, so I assume that's for a reason like I mentioned originally, that it just doesn't have the same street cred as the 3-9.

 

[Fartrell Cluggins]

Guess I need to do some research tomorrow on this Bushnell as well. I might go ahead and email the NF rep and ask about how long of a wait time for the SHVs they are experiencing right now. If several months that will factor in as well.

They are running 6-8 weeks on the SHV 4-14x56 MOAR.

 

[aftriathlete]

NF rep got back to me immediately and said "no more than 6 weeks" for SHV models. I sent the guy on the forum here selling the Bushnell an email to ask some questions as well, but honestly, while I appreciate the inputs and the recommendations on everything here, I think I would prefer to buy a new NF for roughly the same cost over buying a used Bushnell. If it's apples to apples, dollars to dollars, a new NF seems to make more sense to me over a used optic with unknown history. Not pissing on that guy's classified ad, it's just how my mind works.

In debating with myself if I want FFP or SFP, I think I would prefer FFP as long as it's illuminated so there are no reticle visibility concerns on the low end of the mag range. So that puts me at the SHV 4-14x50 F1, which is the limit of my budget. Anyone think there's any reason I wouldn't be happy with that optic for my purposes? Is 4x too much magnification for responding to shot opportunities in the 20-25 yard range?

 

[Macintosh]

3-10 shv has 30% wider field of view than 4-14. Probably plenty wide at short range for a stationary target, only place I feel that makes a difference is in very thick stuff where a moving animal is only intermittently visible—for me its much easier to lose the animal and not pick it up again with the narrower field of view in this situation, which is often a followup shot for me.

 

[Balderdash]

I do.

Guess I need to do some research tomorrow on this Bushnell as well. I might go ahead and email the NF rep and ask about how long of a wait time for the SHVs they are experiencing right now. If several months that will factor in as well.

Seems not much support for the SWFA 3-15 route, so I assume that's for a reason like I mentioned originally, that it just doesn't have the same street cred as the 3-9,

NF rep got back to me immediately and said "no more than 6 weeks" for SHV models. I sent the guy on the forum here selling the Bushnell an email to ask some questions as well, but honestly, while I appreciate the inputs and the recommendations on everything here, I think I would prefer to buy a new NF for roughly the same cost over buying a used Bushnell. If it's apples to apples, dollars to dollars, a new NF seems to make more sense to me over a used optic with unknown history. Not pissing on that guy's classified ad, it's just how my mind works.

In debating with myself if I want FFP or SFP, I think I would prefer FFP as long as it's illuminated so there are no reticle visibility concerns on the low end of the mag range. So that puts me at the SHV 4-14x50 F1, which is the limit of my budget. Anyone think there's any reason I wouldn't be happy with that optic for my purposes? Is 4x too much magnification for responding to shot opportunities in the 20-25 yard range?

For what it's worth, the Bushie in reference and the NF SHV come out of the same factory, as do the SWFA HD models - LOW Japan. Not saying that they're built to the same spec because I don't know; however, I can say that they've all been equally rugged and repeatable for me. I happen to like the LRHS and LRTS FFP reticles better than those that NF currently offers.

Not implying that your thought process is wrong as far as getting a discounted NF over a Bushie, or that you'll be displeased in any way with the 4-14 SHV F1, I'll just point out that the Bushnell Elite Tactical models are in a completely different league than Bushnell's lower tier optics. I do get where you're coming from on them as I, too, held similar viewpoints towards Bushnell scopes at one point, but I tried an LRHS because I liked the reticle on low X, and I've been sufficiently impressed over a lot of shooting and use that I'm pretty much always on the lookout for more 3-12 LRHS-LRTS, and I also qualify for a Mil/LE/FR discount from NF.

I have limited experience with the SHV 4-14 F1. Mounted one for friend and spent a couple hours at the range with it. I'm sure one will serve you exceedingly well if you don't mind the extra weight over the 3-10 or SWFA 3-9.

 

[aftriathlete]

3-10 shv has 30% wider field of view than 4-14. Probably plenty wide at short range for a stationary target, only place I feel that makes a difference is in very thick stuff where a moving animal is only intermittently visible—for me its much easier to lose the animal and not pick it up again with the narrower field of view in this situation, which is often a followup shot for me.

That's a good point. I just compared the FOV for the 3-10 and 4-14, and it's 39% wider at 3x on the 3-10 than it is at 4x on the 4-14. Also a good point Balderdash just shared too on the weight difference, the 4-14 is 8 oz heavier, which is a lot. I didn't realize it was that much til I just looked on their site.

In my caveman understand, SFP is probably fine for me on a 3-10 mag range. I don't think I'd fall on my sword for a FFP or a SFP either way at this mag range. If the reticle is accurate at 10x, that's the end of the mag range that the hash marks/subtensions matter to the shooter, and using the short end of the mag range you're not going to be doing much beyond looking at the center dot anyway.

Obviously I'm back and forth on everything, but right this minute maybe the SHV 3-10 MOAR w/ center illumination is my best path forward. I emailed the guy on the forum about the Bushnell last night with some questions, no reply yet, so there's honestly a chance that he's already dealing with someone on it anyway.

 

[Balderdash]

I

That's a good point. I just compared the FOV for the 3-10 and 4-14, and it's 39% wider at 3x on the 3-10 than it is at 4x on the 4-14. Also a good point Balderdash just shared too on the weight difference, the 4-14 is 8 oz heavier, which is a lot. I didn't realize it was that much til I just looked on their site.

In my caveman understand, SFP is probably fine for me on a 3-10 mag range. I don't think I'd fall on my sword for a FFP or a SFP either way at this mag range. If the reticle is accurate at 10x, that's the end of the mag range that the hash marks/subtensions matter to the shooter, and using the short end of the mag range you're not going to be doing much beyond looking at the center dot anyway.

Obviously I'm back and forth on everything, but right this minute maybe the SHV 3-10 MOAR w/ center illumination is my best path forward. I emailed the guy on the forum about the Bushnell last night with some questions, no reply yet, so there's honestly a chance that he's already dealing with someone on it anyway.

I'll stay away from the Bushie in the classifieds for you. They're not hard to turn around if you decide that it's not your cup o tea. Neither are the NF's, for that matter.

Where are you located? I have a 3-10 SHV Moar that I didn't mount yet. I'd let you run it for a bit to see if you like it before commiting to one. As you stated a 10x SFP isn't always ideal, but it is plenty usable and isn't too limiting for fov and getting settled in and steadied up.

 

[aftriathlete]

I

I'll stay away from the Bushie in the classifieds for you. They're not hard to turn around if you decide that it's not your cup o tea. Neither are the NF's, for that matter.

Where are you located? I have a 3-10 SHV Moar that I didn't mount yet. I'd let you run it for a bit to see if you like it before commiting to one. As you stated a 10x SFP isn't always ideal, but it is plenty usable and isn't too limiting for fov and getting settled in and steadied up.

I'm gonna wait til this evening to make any "final" decisions, give the seller of the Bushnell a chance to reply if maybe he just hasn't seen my message yet. Maybe it is still available and I have a choice between the two to make. From what I've found on the LRTS, it does seem like it checks a lot of boxes. That's cool of you to offer that, I'm in PA. But I probably wouldn't take you up on that offer, my work schedule this year is especially busy in the next 6 weeks so I can't see myself really getting to the range before second half of April.

I think the way I described the SFP vs. FFP consideration above wasn't perfect, but it sounds like you catch my drift. I am just thinking that at any point I need the subtensions to be accurate because I'm holding over for range or wind I am 99.9% of the time going to be at max magnification anyway. And at 3x you aren't holding over at all, you're just putting the center dot on the animal's pump house, so focal plane doesn't really matter in that situation. Just seems like on a 3-10 you are either going to be using 3x or 10x for the vast majority of the time.

 

[StuckoYota99]

I'm in the exact same boat. I have a Bushnell nitro on my 6.5 cm and it's been ok. Now I'm debating on the need for better glass to shoot out to 1000yds.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

Take a look at the GPO Passion 6X 2.5-15x50i - G4i
This super-premium 30mm line of riflescopes offers a comprehensive array of features for shooters. The 6X super-zoom allow extreme versatility for close and distance usage. The large internal lenses assure optical brilliance and low-light visibility. This super-premium flagship product is sure to impress the most discerning hardcore trophy hunter.

The iControl™ illumination assures users that they always have a live battery when most needed.

• Automatically powers down the illumination when the electronic module has been stationary for more than 3 hours
• Offers bright, fiber optic technology
• Alerts users when the battery has only 15% remaining battery life
• Super-zoom 6X technology
• iControl™ illumination options
• Massive lenses assure optical excellence
• 30mm main tube
• GPObright™ lens coating technology
• PassionTrac™ quick-zero target turrets
• Double HD Objective glass

 

[Balderdash]

I'm gonna wait til this evening to make any "final" decisions, give the seller of the Bushnell a chance to reply if maybe he just hasn't seen my message yet. Maybe it is still available and I have a choice between the two to make. From what I've found on the LRTS, it does seem like it checks a lot of boxes. That's cool of you to offer that, I'm in PA. But I probably wouldn't take you up on that offer, my work schedule this year is especially busy in the next 6 weeks so I can't see myself really getting to the range before second half of April.

I think the way I described the SFP vs. FFP consideration above wasn't perfect, but it sounds like you catch my drift. I am just thinking that at any point I need the subtensions to be accurate because I'm holding over for range or wind I am 99.9% of the time going to be at max magnification anyway. And at 3x you aren't holding over at all, you're just putting the center dot on the animal's pump house, so focal plane doesn't really matter in that situation. Just seems like on a 3-10 you are either going to be using 3x or 10x for the vast majority of the time.

My aversion to SFP reticles that are used for measuring stems from the fact that I often don't care to be at max X to have the measurements mean something. In a lot of scenarios I'd just as soon be at 6 or 8x; more FOV for spotting hits and game reaction, quicker to steady up for a shot. I can easily suffer an SFP that maxes out at 10X but won't use SFP for big game that goes higher.

I think a lot of folks who think they need massive X for long range shots haven't tried far off targets with lower X. It can be surprisingly precise. Main thing is to use a target that's big enough to line up on. Depending on the reticle, I like a dark circle or a diamond.

 

[BCD]

I do.

Guess I need to do some research tomorrow on this Bushnell as well. I might go ahead and email the NF rep and ask about how long of a wait time for the SHVs they are experiencing right now. If several months that will factor in as well.

Seems not much support for the SWFA 3-15 route, so I assume that's for a reason like I mentioned originally, that it just doesn't have the same street cred as the 3-9.

I have the SWFA 3-9 and just sold the 3-15. I thought the reticle on the 3-15 was horrible for low light on low magnification. It's probably a fine scope for wide open places and it was great for target shooting.

 

[JustSomeGuy35]

I have the SWFA 3-9 and just sold the 3-15. I thought the reticle on the 3-15 was horrible for low light on low magnification. It's probably a fine scope for wide open places and it was great for target shooting.

I've been debating whether or not to purchase a 3-15 for several weeks. My concern was the reticle's visibility in low light and against dark backgrounds since it'd be going on my bear hunting rifle. Based on your experience and many other people's, I think I'm going to pass on it and just wait for a 3-9 to fall in my lap. Besides, my target rifles get by on the cheaper 10x's anyways.

Thanks for sharing that!

 

[aftriathlete]

Well I have decided to do nothing at the moment, despite everyone's good advice. I honestly can't use a scope in the next 6 weeks anyway as my work schedule for the year is starting to peak and will continue til second half of April, and with the fact that I can't make up my mind, I'm going to wait and watch classifieds and maybe the right one will come along at a price I can get behind. Maxing out or stretching the budget for something I'm not really happy with buying seems unnecessary right now. So honestly I'm going to keep my eyes on the classifieds for a while and see what I see, maybe I'll get lucky and find something I'm really excited to pick up.

If anyone has a line on a SWFA 3-9 they or someone they know will part with, I'd pay a finder's fee...

 

[Balderdash]

IME, for the money, you really can't beat the SWFA 3-9 HD. Reliable, rugged, reticle is good thought the X range, glass is good. I can't imagine that you'll be displeased with one.

Best of luck to you on getting your set up.