SWFA 1-6x HD Gen II?

[ElPollo]

I reached out to SWFA asking about this scope yesterday. They responded last night saying they were currently working on a replacement for it. The 1-6x HD was a really good LPVO that held zero, but the reticle wasn’t a favorite of mine. Too much illumination for my tastes. Would love to see them use the MQ reticle from the fixed 6x with just an illuminated dot like the Accupoints. I’m sure that is unlikely because the trend is generally toward overly complex, overly illuminated reticles these days.

 

[BigCountry376]

Geez, with a HD 1-6 Gen 2, HD 5-2X Gen 2, and S2H scope on the horizon...

Good time to be a gun slut.

 

[Shraggs]

I reached out to SWFA asking about this scope yesterday. They responded last night saying they were currently working on a replacement for it. The 1-6x HD was a really good LPVO that held zero, but the reticle wasn’t a favorite of mine. Too much illumination for my tastes. Would love to see them use the MQ reticle from the fixed 6x with just an illuminated dot like the Accupoints. I’m sure that is unlikely because the trend is generally toward overly complex, overly illuminated reticles these days.

I do like mine a lot, actually love the center dot it’s my favorite. Don’t care for the illumination either. I think if they didn’t light up the circle that would help. But at the end of the day, 36mm ish objective size would make it a better hunting scope. Fov is just too small.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I like mine a lot. Nice to see another one being introduced sometime this century.

 

[ElPollo]

I reached out to SWFA to check on the status of the Gen II 1-6 and they had no updates. So I just got impatient and picked up a nice used Gen I for $450. Pretty jacked about that considering I was looking at $1-2k for a Trijicon or Nightforce with reticles I don’t like.

 

[Konez]

I've been curious about their 1-6 since I'm pretty happy with my fixed 10x. Do you find the big illuminated ring to get in your way when in you're around the 4-5x range?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I've been curious about their 1-6 since I'm pretty happy with my fixed 10x. Do you find the big illuminated ring to get in your way when in you're around the 4-5x range?

I don’t.

 

[ElPollo]

I've been curious about their 1-6 since I'm pretty happy with my fixed 10x. Do you find the big illuminated ring to get in your way when in you're around the 4-5x range?

Have not mounted and shot mine yet and will preface my comments with I really don’t care for most LPVO reticles. Illuminated LPVOs are a compromise that tries to be a red dot at low magnification and are often not great at higher magnification with the illumination turned on because it washes out your target in low light. I think the SWFA 1-6 does both ends pretty well, but isn’t great in the 4-5 range.

It does the red dot thing pretty well with the big ring and the illumination is good enough to use in daylight if that’s your thing. Around the 4-5x range that ring does start to cover a big chunk of your FOV and is pretty overpowering when illuminated. At 6x with the illumination turned all the way up, you get a fair bit of bleed into the FOV, and the center illumination is more than I’d like to see for hunting. That said, I would likely keep this scope in the 1-3 range with the illumination off and crank it to 6x for longer shots. At 6x, the reticle is very similar to the fixed 6x MQ reticle, which I’ve used for hunting in low light without illumination and like a lot. I would only use the illumination for quick and close stuff which is likely less than 0.01% of my use. The dial is well set up for that because every half click is off. You can set it between the upper two illumination settings and have it off, but one click from your preferred setting.

While still a compromise, I think this reticle is better than the Trijicon Credo and Accupoint reticles and is better than the Nightforce 1-8 tree reticle. If I could make suggestions for SWAFA on the reticle for their Gen II version:

1) I would make the outer ring thinner, so it’s still visible in daylight with the illumination on, but is less overpowering.

2) I would reduce the illumination in the central part of the reticle to a center dot so it is useable in low light at higher magnification without washing out your target in low light.

3) I would add wider outer bars on the reticle that go all the way to the edge of the FOV in 1x. I’m talking thick enough to be readily visible at 1x with the illumination off but thinning down to what they currently have in the center for high magnification.

I think those three things would make the reticle more useable at low magnification without illumination and would make the illumination less of a handicap at higher magnification. Unfortunately, I doubt they will make changes to the reticle for the Gen II version. That said, it’s still probably as good as any LPVO that is currently made.

 

[Konez]

I think a thinner outer ring would be better overall. Same thing with you 2nd point too. Not sure if its as bad in person, but in the pictures and videos I've seen, it seems like the illumination washes out the hash marks on the reticle