Sightmark Presidio 3x18x50 drop test

[RWT]

On my phone so do not expect an in depth review.
After stumbling on a video of a torture test claiming a scope passed the Rokslide drop eval I had to see for myself. I found a good deal on this scope and figured at worst it is similar to the Arkens in price point and features and I would use it on a 22 if it doesn’t pass the test.

Rifle is a Bergara b14 that I’ve used for other test. I have since had the rifle professionally bedded in a an AG composite I had from another build. The cutouts don’t match, but this is a back-up rifle so I am only concerned with functionality. Rail is epoxied to action. Rings are Burris tactical. Everything is acetoned and vibrateted, then torqued to 65 action 65 ring base and 25 scope caps using a fixit wrench.

New test ammo is ACC 140 blacktip. This rifle doesn’t not like it. My 10 shot groups was terrible. Ive shot numerous 10 rounds with Winchester 125 that are half this size. 10 round control is 2.42” group.

Media is the same mats used in previous test. Less grass this year due to no rain. Range is private 107 yards to target. 10+ mph wind coming in at 11:00 from the target. 85 degrees but pleasant.

Started using larger targets as they are just easier to see. Drops are marked. I did a confirming shot shown as C on the target, then drops of:1 Right 2 Top 3 Left all at 18”s.
Followed by drops of 4 Right 5 top 6 Left all at 36”. Then a final 3 on each side from 36” for a total of 15 drops.

The Sightmark appeared to stay in the cone with a 1.65” 8 shot group. My group actually improved. Maybe I should drop my rifle every time before I shoot an animal

I’ll send this to @Form for official testing as soon as the others I have with him are returned.

Not a bad option for the price if it passes the official test.

 

[RWT]

Presidio 3-18x50 MR2 Rifle Scope

Offering a wide magnification range for close to mid-range shooting, the Presidio 3-18x50 combines elite performance with a sleek, stealthy appearance. Designed for shooters, the Presidio 3-18x features a first focal plane reticle calibrated for a maximum caliber of .338.

sightmark.com

Mil reticle is good. Glass and eyebox have no issues below 16x. I shot at 16x as at 18x the eyebox seemed tight and there was far too much shake for me trying to shoot tiny groups. It’s porky at 30 ozs and the scoop caps that came with it added 2 ozs. A little tight to mount on the short action Bergara rail. Had it on my Tikka earlier and it fit better using the full length of the rail.

Considering the features and price it is a good deal “if” it continues to hold zero.
If Sightmark dropped this model down in size and weight it would be awesome. 3x12x44 and it would lose a few ounces and at least 1 internal lense.

 

[walk2112]

Is that a picture of same group? The pattern is almost identical no?

Glad you did this by the way, thanks for contributing further to the cause!

 

[RWT]

Is that a picture of same group? The pattern is almost identical no?

Glad you did this by the way, thanks for contributing further to the cause!

No the first pic is the 10 shot control to establish a cone.
Last pic is the drop. You can see it moved to the left whereas the first shots were on the target.

I’ll let Form chime in if it is worth testing further.

 

[walk2112]

No the first pic is the 10 shot control to establish a cone.
Last pic is the drop. You can see it moved to the left whereas the first shots were on the target.

I’ll let Form chime in if it is worth testing further.

Oh weird it was showing different photo thumbnails before with different file #’s, I got it now, thanks

 

[RWT]

Just noticed I did not have the zero stop in or the battery for illumination.

 

[RWT]

Had an opportunity to compare glass and reticle today between the Sightmark and a SWFA 3x15x42.
All observations are subjective as I am old crusty and diabetes does impact my vision slightly with eye strain. Looking at a stump 95 yards away in afternoon dappled sunlight. Both parallax adjustments focused to 100 yards.

3X the Sightmark gathers more light and offers more clarity to my eyes. Reticle is better in the SWFA due to the thicker side cross hairs. Both reticles are usable

8X - where I normally shoot. The Sightmark has the light and clarity advantage, SWFA advantage on the cross hairs. Both reticle are usable

12X. SWFA is noticeably grainier. Reticle is much more pronounced. Sightmark has less tunneling and is still clearer. Reticles are still a push and just depends on preference. I prefer the Sightmark, but wouldn’t miss and animal if using the SWFA.

Objective lense size of 50 vs 42 explains the light gathering difference between the two. I would assume the clarity could be addressed with parallax or focus adjustments.

The SWFA suffers from more tunneling and a much narrower FOV from my observation.

Conclusion from a very basic test. These two scopes are a push regarding optical viewing performance. The Sightmark has an advantage if you must use magnification over 12X, however, it becomes shakey and grainy over 16X and it’s the first or last light. To my eyes it outperforms the SWFA in that instance. I don’t and generally won’t increase mag during those minutes of light and will turn the mag down for more light and increased FOV.
I would use other criteria to determine which scope I would purchase. The glass is more than adequate to hunt with.