Is SWFA the best bang for the buck

[SIP]

First post on the site after being a stalker for quite some time. I'm in the process of building a lightweight "truck gun" consisting of a Ruger Gen 2 in .308. I've noticed that the SWFA 3X9 gets plenty of accolades and wanted to really know if a scope in the sub $400 price point was truly that good. My previous thoughts were geared toward the Maven RS.2 or possibly a Swaro Z3 in the classifieds. I shoot a Khales on my main rifle and am more concerned with clarity and low light capability over dialing in shots.
I'm curious to hear comments from those with more experience on this matter.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

The SWFA 3-9x scope is really good, but it is $600, not $400.

When they are in stock, the 6x gen 2 scopes are the best deal, in my opinion. The 10x is the second best deal. I own three 6x, two 12x, and a 10x. I’ve also sold a 10x and 6x to my brothers. The new fixed power scopes are $350.

I also really like the UL scope. I have two of those on .22s.

Edit - a Trijicon Huron or AccuPoint is another great option in the $650 or less budget.

 

[SDHNTR]

Swaro Z3 is garbage.

 

[CJ_BG]

For an all around scope the maven is the best value, for a truck gun that's gonna get beat up and likely isn't shooting far then you're gonna have a tough time beaten the 6x or 3-9 swfa. Low light on the ultralight ss isn't great.

 

[left hunter]

The SWFA 3-9 is my absolute favorite hunting scope regardless of cost. I believe it’s maybe $600 currently but will most likely go on sale for black Friday and be closer to $500 more or less.

 

[rickyw]

I like my swfas. Best bang for the buck, yes

 

[rclouse79]

I voted for two swfa 3-15's with my dollars when making my two new hunting rigs and have no regrets.

 

[BowBaboon]

I voted for two swfa 3-15's with my dollars when making my two new hunting rigs and have no regrets.

This is what I’ve got on my gun. Bought used off the forum after using an older Nikon for a while and wouldn’t trade it for the world. The only reason I’ve adjusted zero is for different lots of ammo and it’s been beat around for about 2 years of deer, antelope, bear, and elk.

 

[Pwb199]

Im going to offer a slightly different opinion: honestly I prefer the SWFA 10x over the 6x. It depends on your use case. But for 90% of my shots being between 100 and 600 yards, the 10x has been perfect for me. The only time I wish I had less magnification was on a bear hunt when I shot one at 15 yards - not ideal at 10x but still made it work.

 

[prm]

The 6X is my best bang for buck. It is a cheap scope yet reliably does everything I need.

Never tried the 10X in fairness, though have had 3-9s and a UL. Not a fan of the UL.

 

[Matt5266]

I have a 10X. Is the lack of parallax adjustment on the 3-9 am issue at extended ranges? I've never fondled one.

 

[SIP]

I appreciate the feedback! Considering I'm in the Southeastern U.S., most of the shots I'll be taking with this rifle will be less than 300 yards. Hence the thought on going with a 3x9 scope. I've no experience with SWFA but it sounds like I've been missing out.
I purchased a Meopta Optika for another rifle last year that I do like the clarity on but it carries too much weight for what I would like for this particular gun.

 

[nm.otter]

SWFA 6x MQ Gen2 is stupid good for $350:

• 7mm exit pupil (gathers lots of light)
• Good depth of field (set parallax at 100m, usable from 30-400 yards)
• Solid zero stops
• Decent reticle

My only complaint is 5 Mils/rev turrets, and tall -- windage hangs up on stuff at times, and requires carve-outs for hard cases.

 

[rclouse79]

This is what I’ve got on my gun. Bought used off the forum after using an older Nikon for a while and wouldn’t trade it for the world. The only reason I’ve adjusted zero is for different lots of ammo and it’s been beat around for about 2 years of deer, antelope, bear, and elk.

Nice. Both of my scopes have performed flawlessly during testing. My son killed a mule deer at 533 yards with one shot from the 25-06. The peace of mind knowing your bullet will hit where you want it to after dialing feels like it should cost more.

 

[M3Inline6]

All of my Sig scopes were purchased from SWFA for decent prices. It’s generally one of the first places I look.

 

[Ajsomp]

All my hunting guns have SWFAs, all my work guns have NF. I have the money to put NF, maven, whatever on my hunting guns, which actually draws some ire from hunting buddies who know I don’t purchase poor quality or “cheap” goods.

SWFA flat out work. Kinda ugly with the turrets. The 3-9’is great, more of a 4-9 scope in my experience, and truly its only flaw is lack of zero stop and capped windage.

I currently rock the gen2 6x. Zero stop, capped turrets (albeit they are rather large) parallax adjustment, clear clean glass. Killed a number of animals from 75 yards to 400+.

For what’s available today - buy either the 3-9 or 3-15 and be done. If a 6x comes back in stock, grab as many as you can.

 

[SIP]

SWFA 6x MQ Gen2 is stupid good for $350:

• 7mm exit pupil (gathers lots of light)
• Good depth of field (set parallax at 100m, usable from 30-400 yards)
• Solid zero stops
• Decent reticle

My only complaint is 5 Mils/rev turrets, and tall -- windage hangs up on stuff at times, and requires carve-outs for hard cases.

That would fit the bill for much of what I'm looking for in a scope, but as you mentioned those turrets hanging up on something concern me.

 

[Ajsomp]

That would fit the bill for much of what I'm looking for in a scope, but as you mentioned those turrets hanging up on something concern me.

I haven’t had the turrets hang up on me personally but they aren’t low profile

 

[JCMCUBIC]

The 3-9 SWFA is a great scope for the money.

The 6x SWFA is the best bang for the buck.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

That would fit the bill for much of what I'm looking for in a scope, but as you mentioned those turrets hanging up on something concern me.

Only you can decide if it is a problem for you, but it hasn’t been a problem for me. It takes some getting used to the look, but function over form every time.

My rifles fit in the cheap old hard cases I use for a trip to the range or the 4-hour roadtrip to the farm. The kind that still have the $11.99 Walmart stickers on them from 2005. I’d probably get better cases and go for a better fit if I was putting them on an airplane.

I’ll happily admit that there are better scopes than an SWFA, but every purchase is a compromise. And for the money, there is no better option. For me, the touchstone for every scope purchase is, “How is this option better than a $350 dollar SWFA 6x gen2? Am I willing to pay for the things this option does better?” Sometimes the answer is “yes” and sometimes it is “no.”

My thinking is also a function of what I own. At present, I have a dozen bolt action hunting rifles. Even if I sell four of them, as I plan to do, I will still have a “First World problem” - too many rifles. You can go broke buying good deals. I can’t afford to put $1000-3000 optics on each one. But even if I only had one rifle, my touchstone would be the same. I am not a sniper. I am a rifle hunter. I’m not looking through the scope for hours. I’m not shooting at night. I need a reliable sight which works well to confirm PID and place the shot precisely during legal shooting hours, at a normal range of 60-300 yards, and out to an extreme range of 600 yards.