Maven RS1.2 2.5-15x44mm SHR-Mil Q&A

Joined
May 16, 2021
Messages
1,371
Location
North Texas
The SWFA 6x on my 223 tikka is an MOA version since that’s all I could find. Those seem to sit when they come up for sale and are perfect for that rifle and especially perfect for young shooters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Possibly but the glass is bleh in comparison to the NF and presumably this Maven. And it weighs the same as the NF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
OP
Formidilosus

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Shoot2HuntU
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
9,922
Possibly but the glass is bleh in comparison to the NF and presumably this Maven. And it weighs the same as the NF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I’d bet you that without a reticle, and with the scopes blocked you couldn’t consistently tell if it was a SWFA 6x glass or the NF at 6x you were looking through.
 

ljalberta

WKR
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
1,651
I think most people will take the added features of a zero stop, capped windage, fast focus eyepiece and parallax adjustment for the Inconsequential weight penalty.
If the 3-9 swfa works for you then it’s already an option- sort of. Used market only


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m not sure this is true. Lots of people I think would prefer to shave 6 ounces for non-critical features. I’d guess there’s more people backpack hunting who care about ounces than who care about a zero shop. I could be wrong though. For my primarily backpacking rifles, the SWFAs will still be the ticket. But I’ll be adding one of these to a rifle where I’m less concerned about counting ounces.
 

pods8 (Rugged Stitching)

WKR
Rokslide Sponsor
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
4,457
Location
Thornton, CO
I think most people will take the added features of a zero stop, capped windage, fast focus eyepiece and parallax adjustment for the Inconsequential weight penalty.
If the 3-9 swfa works for you then it’s already an option- sort of. Used market only


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Parallax adjustment is the only thing you mentioned that would potentially add weight and not 4-8oz…

Frankly I would love to know the technical answer to whether the NXS 2.5-10x42 at 20oz could be made FFP for the same weight? Not saying they will do it but could it’s form factor as is be FFP? Cause if so it again demonstrates that having zero stop, parallax, etc doesn’t require another 4-8oz.

FYI the revamped swfa is supposed to have zero stop (not sure on capped windage).

I have no problem with companies kicking out these 24-28+oz scopes, just don’t ignore the completely adequately sized ~20oz ffp scopes as if there is no market or desire. It’s there as shown by swfa desire even with those huge ugly turrets! Just imagine if it’s form factor was sleeker…
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2018
Messages
328
Location
Oregon
That’s exactly not what most wanted this scope to be.
I don’t know about that. You maybe not and maybe not the majority of people who are on this thread… but not sure if that qualifies as most. There’s multiple fine options in this size, weight, mag range. Like the trijicon. There’s not really any good options in the 4-24/5-25 range. Who needs 2.5 on the low end? I live on the west coast jungle of Oregon. And I wouldn’t use that here. Why not have more on the top end? When ya need want it, it’s there and when ya don’t crank it down. It’s not like going 2.5-15 got you down to sub 20oz and small size. It’s still 26.4 oz, 44mm obj and 30mm tube as far as I know? So what advantages do you have? The 5-25 mark5 would be the best if it tracked and was a little smaller foot print. So we are stuck with the 4-32 nx8 which was a little bit of a fail. Still the best option. In a reasonable price range. Anyone that I personally shoot and hunt around. I do a good amount of both would much prefer a 4-24/5-25 over this. Not saying this isn’t a good option if it fits your style but I just am not sure the statement of “most wanting this” to be true.
 

amassi

WKR
Joined
May 26, 2018
Messages
3,885
I don’t know about that. You maybe not and maybe not the majority of people who are on this thread… but not sure if that qualifies as most. There’s multiple fine options in this size, weight, mag range. Like the trijicon. There’s not really any good options in the 4-24/5-25 range. Who needs 2.5 on the low end? I live on the west coast jungle of Oregon. And I wouldn’t use that here. Why not have more on the top end? When ya need want it, it’s there and when ya don’t crank it down. It’s not like going 2.5-15 got you down to sub 20oz. It’s still 26 as far as I know? The 5-25 mark5 would be the best if it tracked and was a little smaller foot print. So we are stuck with the 4-32 nx8 which was a little bit of a fail. Still the best option. In a reasonable price range. Anyone that I personally shoot and hunt around. I do a good amount of both would much prefer a 4-24/5-25 over this. Not saying this isn’t a good option if it fits your style but I just am not sure the statement of “most wanting this” to be true.

Most of the hunters asking for this form factor scope can use this on deer sized out to 1000-1200 yards
1x per hundred yards is totally sufficient while providing enough field of view to be effective


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Dobermann

WKR
Joined
Sep 17, 2016
Messages
1,908
Location
EnZed
I disagree, we are there.

If NF came out with a NX-Lite 3-18x44 at 23oz it would crush both the NX8 models. In this industry weight matters.
Hmm ... we may not be disagreeing. :)

My point was to ljalberta who was asking for something lighter than the RS1.2. I was just saying that we don't *currently* have something lighter that has the needed features for the lighter weight (basically what was in your list of suggested specs to Maven).

I'd love a lighter weight scope too, all else being equal. If the Maven holds up for reliability, it will crush the larger NX8 models. And if NF came up with your NX-Lite, I'd be all over that too.
 
Joined
Jun 8, 2021
Messages
765
Location
NorCal
I don’t know about that. You maybe not and maybe not the majority of people who are on this thread… but not sure if that qualifies as most. There’s multiple fine options in this size, weight, mag range. Like the trijicon. There’s not really any good options in the 4-24/5-25 range. Who needs 2.5 on the low end? I live on the west coast jungle of Oregon. And I wouldn’t use that here. Why not have more on the top end? When ya need want it, it’s there and when ya don’t crank it down. It’s not like going 2.5-15 got you down to sub 20oz and small size. It’s still 26.4 oz, 44mm obj and 30mm tube as far as I know? So what advantages do you have? The 5-25 mark5 would be the best if it tracked and was a little smaller foot print. So we are stuck with the 4-32 nx8 which was a little bit of a fail. Still the best option. In a reasonable price range. Anyone that I personally shoot and hunt around. I do a good amount of both would much prefer a 4-24/5-25 over this. Not saying this isn’t a good option if it fits your style but I just am not sure the statement of “most wanting this” to be true.
I just can’t imagine ever turning a scope to 24 in a hunting situation. Are you hunting ground squirrels at a grand?
 

z987k

WKR
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
1,788
Location
AK
I don’t know about that. You maybe not and maybe not the majority of people who are on this thread… but not sure if that qualifies as most. There’s multiple fine options in this size, weight, mag range. Like the trijicon. There’s not really any good options in the 4-24/5-25 range. Who needs 2.5 on the low end? I live on the west coast jungle of Oregon. And I wouldn’t use that here. Why not have more on the top end? When ya need want it, it’s there and when ya don’t crank it down. It’s not like going 2.5-15 got you down to sub 20oz and small size. It’s still 26.4 oz, 44mm obj and 30mm tube as far as I know? So what advantages do you have? The 5-25 mark5 would be the best if it tracked and was a little smaller foot print. So we are stuck with the 4-32 nx8 which was a little bit of a fail. Still the best option. In a reasonable price range. Anyone that I personally shoot and hunt around. I do a good amount of both would much prefer a 4-24/5-25 over this. Not saying this isn’t a good option if it fits your style but I just am not sure the statement of “most wanting this” to be true.
Are you hunting at 2000 yards? Or are you using your aiming device as a spotter?
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2018
Messages
328
Location
Oregon
Most of the hunters asking for this form factor scope can use this on deer sized out to 1000-1200 yards
1x per hundred yards is totally sufficient while providing enough field of view to be effective


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well I hunt eastern Oregon the majority of the time as well as Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and others when the opportunity is there. I would consider myself a “long range” shooter and hunter. I guess. Majority of our shot are 600-1k but every year something gets shot from 100-300. I also shoot a ton in my free time. We have a farm with a private range. I guess I just want a scope that kinda does it all. I like magnification though. We shoot a lot and are used to dealing with the “limitations” if you want to call it that when on hire power or quickly zooming out. Etc.
 

amassi

WKR
Joined
May 26, 2018
Messages
3,885
But it does give some information on planned updates. We can assume (hope?) that those planned changes will be across multiple models.

I wouldn’t
Economy of scale and SWFA’s track record would point towards not all models getting these updates


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top