Q&A for SWFA UL 2.5-10x32mm Field Eval

[Formidilosus]

So failed on 9x36” drops again with Vortex rings…any chance we’ll see UL Tikka 1” rings anytime soon?

I believe UM is doing T3 1” rings. We’re getting NF 1” rings.

 

[Formidilosus]

Updated again.

 

[TX_Diver]

Updated again.

What torque failed and what torque passed on the update?

Definitely fared better than i thought. Have you seen multiples or just one of these scopes?

 

[Luke S]

That is wild. I was just about ready to sell mine and swap it for another Trijicon 2.5-10 Huron (had one that has been working well on my other rifle). But now I wonder... Sounds like the little SWFA will work and maybe loose zero enough to cause a miss if I hit it hard (hard enough I'll notice?) and if I take a long shot after that knock. Maybe I'll just keep it where it is, especially since I've been running an untested Trijicon on the assumption that it will hold up reasonably well. Who knows? The SWFA might be as good or better at this rate.
The little scope does look nice on a carved down .358 Ruger American.

 

[Formidilosus]

What torque failed and what torque passed on the update?

18 in-lbs. I did not torque higher. When retorqued, 18 in-lbs did move a couple of screws slightly as 18 in-lbs just isn’t enough across the board.

Definitely fared better than i thought. Have you seen multiples or just one of these scopes?

Just this one for the drop eval. I have seen a couple more used, but not extremely heavily. They did work fine from what I saw.

 

[dkime]

Not much a Q&A but an observation. Had one of these In the 556 reticle flavor mounted on a rifle for a hog hunt last week. Scope had performed great, shot some pigs one evening and the next evening the reticle had spun about 30deg. Rifle hadn’t been dropped and was carried nearly everywhere. Once I had the chance to check zero on the rifle POI shift was close enough to my initial zero that I wouldn’t have even called it a failure. Killed a few more pigs and obviously SWFA covered it under warranty no problems asked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mickythekid]

I'm so on the fence with this one for a deer / elk gun. I have a Tikka that's 6.5 lbs and it kills me to add a 20-25 oz scope to it.

The SWFA UL is SO light, a reasonable price...and it mostly passed the test. That eye relief is horrific though and I question its low light capability.

The alternative I see is the Accupoint 3-9x42 at 13 oz. More expensive, but you can get real eye relief, an illuminated mil-dot reticle, and it's likely to be reliable.

Anyone with first hand experience have any thoughts on this? What am I missing here?

 

[Luke S]

I like mine for a compromise scope. But the stories of random failure mean I probably won't buy another one. Eye relief wasn't a problem on my 358 Winchester. Low light performance is a bit less. It hasn't been a problem so far but your mileage may vary.

 

[280Ackley]

@Formidilosus I looked for UM and NF 1” rings and couldn’t find anything. If that is the case and I am not blind, what rings would you recommend?

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus I looked for UM and NF 1” rings and couldn’t find anything. If that is the case and I am not blind, what rings would you recommend?

If it’s for a Tikka, UM makes 1” rings now.

 

[NSI]

And if it’s not, Warne Mountain Tech or Hawkins are great.

-J

 

[280Ackley]

If it’s for a Tikka, UM makes 1” rings now.

Not a Tikka it would be for a picatinny.

 

[Formidilosus]

Not a Tikka it would be for a picatinny.

Oh. Warne Mountain Tech as stated above.

 

[HighUintas]

Oh. Warne Mountain Tech as stated above.

Do you have any thoughts on whether Talley lightweight rings and 20inlbs will work on this scope provided that the Talleys don't break? Would it be likely to cause binding inside the scope?