SWFA 2.5-10 ultralight

[fbhandler]

Anyone have any experience with this scope? It seems almost to good to be true.

Also with a set up like this how are you compensating for bullet drop?


https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-2-5-10x32-ultralight-rifle-scope.html

 

[doverpack12]

This is what Skylar from SWFA emailed me when I asked about this scope for use to 5-600 yards and will not be dialed alot once I have confirmed drops.

"The turrets on the lightweight will track. However they were designed as a set it and shoot it.

You could dial it, however if you are wanting something to dial, I think that the most prudent thing to do would be to purchase the 3-9X42. The turrets on this scope is meant to be adjusted on the fly."

 

[matthewmt]

Anyone have any experience with this scope? It seems almost to good to be true.

Also with a set up like this how are you compensating for bullet drop?


https://www.swfa.com/swfa-ss-2-5-10x32-ultralight-rifle-scope.html

A bdc in that would be the ticket,

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[huntsman22]

No reticle choices. No turrets. No eye relief. No thanks.....

 

[fbhandler]

A bdc in that would be the ticket,

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

That’s what I was thinking as well !

 

[fbhandler]

This is what Skylar from SWFA emailed me when I asked about this scope for use to 5-600 yards and will not be dialed alot once I have confirmed drops.

"The turrets on the lightweight will track. However they were designed as a set it and shoot it.

You could dial it, however if you are wanting something to dial, I think that the most prudent thing to do would be to purchase the 3-9X42. The turrets on this scope is meant to be adjusted on the fly."

I’m looking to set up a 600yrd rifle and that’s how I came across this... I was a little perplexed as how to deal with the drop at those ranges with a scope set up like this. Without any dials or recital references I suspected it was a point blank range only kind of scope. Just wasn’t sure if there was something I was missing

 

[Muttly]

Call me crazy, mil quad reticle in that scope with a little eye relief, would cover a fair bit more ground than what they now have, even without the ability to dial much..

 

[Burnt Reynolds]

It’d be really nice on fast flat 223 or 270. Easy holds for those ballistics out to 350.

 

[deerkiller]

I bought one when I got the notice from SWFA that they had come out - Promptly put it on my Tikka '06AI and headed to the range - I LOVE the lightweight, the reticle, the finish, everything about it says "ahhh perfection in a HUNTING scope" … then I shot it … I felt a "touch" on my eyebrow, thought nothing of it, second shot same faint "touch" … getting ready to shoot #3 except for the BLOOD …. I shoot ALOT, testing loads for me and the other 4 guys in our group, I'm certainly no "newbie" but the eye relief on this scope, especially a HUNTING scope, well I called SWFA and asked (maybe a bit more of a surprised complaint) and got "uh, well ya, we've been hearing some about that" next they willingly offered me a full refund incl. shipping no questions asked even when I told them I'd learned this issue "the hard way"... NOOO Problemo - Guys, I see this as a .22 scope and I'm DARN disappointed about that

 

[Newtosavage]

I agree that even the simplest of ballistic reticles would sure be handy - esp. for that price. I'm wondering just how much light a 10x32 scope could pull in. Perhaps enough on a bright day, but I dunno... Will wait to see. 9.5 oz. is legit however. If the optics are really good, it might be worth it.

 

[Newtosavage]

I’m looking to set up a 600yrd rifle and that’s how I came across this... I was a little perplexed as how to deal with the drop at those ranges with a scope set up like this. Without any dials or recital references I suspected it was a point blank range only kind of scope. Just wasn’t sure if there was something I was missing

Not sure about 600 yards, but I've had a couple of setups where I used (actually preferred) simple duplex reticles and set the top of the bottom "post" at 300 or 400 yards, then worked off of that. It usually meant a 180-240 yard zero, with 2-3" over at 100 and 4-6" under at 300.

 

[Mike 338]

The magnification range very good. Parallax should be set for 150 but certainly not a deal breaker. Eye relief is a bit scant but also ok. Capped finger adjustable turrets for me are a plus. I prefer mil instead of moa but also not an issue. Reticle is quite functional and perhaps preferred.

A rifle is a fairly useless appendage on the end of your arm, right up to the point you shoot it, which amounts to a few seconds over maybe a week long hunt. The part of a scope that matters the most is, does it aid your sight picture adequately and is it dependable. Bells and whistles for the most part matter little when most field opportunities present themselves. With this scope, you may not "own the mountain" but you can sure bring home the bacon and with a very nice weight savings on the end of your arm. I currently have an old Leopold VX 2, 3x9 @ 11 ounces. It works.

 

[letrbuck]

Resurrecting this thread a bit after seeing a couple folks on here using them. Is the eye relief an issue? Debating on this SWFA and the Maven RS.2. Anyone have experience with both?

 

[fbhandler]

I’m still interested in it too... seems like some guys are making it work, at least a few. Still not sure what they’re doing about bullet drop, must be set up as point and shoot.

 

[Megalodon]

There’s a BDC reticle now. I don’t like it but after saying a mil-quad reticle was coming soon 6 months ago they’ve really dropped the ball. I’ve asked a few times about it and each time they say they have no plans for it.

I ordered the BDC a week ago and no shipping or other communication. Might be worth it to take the weight and $$ penalty and just go NF.

 

[david2duck]

I have the BDC version on a 6.5PRC. Only have 30 rounds with it so far but I like it. The eye relief, for me, hasn’t been an issue at all. Haven’t had enough time with it to get the reticle figured out for my gun yet but have dialed it some. The turrets aren’t bad for what this scope is. Took it from 100-940 and back to zero. So far so good. If things keep going the way the have I will buy another.

 

[BAKPAKR]

I bought one with a Plex reticle last fall. It works well for me. I thought about ordering another one just like it in the next sale but I think I will wait to see if the mil-quad reticle actually comes out any time soon.

 

[Newtosavage]

Got my new-to-me SWFA ultralight today. First impressions:

Compact and light, but very solid feeling. Slightly smaller than my VX-1 2-7x33 and the same weight. That tells me the internals are a bit more rugged. It feels that way too. Nicely damped and smooth zoom ring. Turrets have extremely positive and consistent clicks. Optics from 2.5-8 are outstanding. 9-10x are completely usable, but there is some fall-off in optical quality. At 5-6x (where I expect to set it while carrying) it is outstanding. Much brighter and sharper than my VX-1, and I consider that a fine little scope.

I was worried about the eye relief, as it's a good 1/2" shorter than the scope it's replacing (the 2-7x33) but I still think it's fine. I have it mounted on a 6 lb. 6 oz. (with this scope) Savage lightweight storm in 7mm-08.

I have the duplex reticle, and it appears to be 16 MOA across, or 8 MOA from the center to the tip of the bottom post at 10x. That's the same as Leupold's "wide duplex" and although I wish it was 6 MOA, I can also make good use of 8 MOA, as that's exactly the drop at 500 yards for the load I'm using in this rifle when zero'd at 100. (131 Hammer Hunters at 2985 fps). My drops are 1.3/3.3/5.3/8 MOA at 200/300/400/500 so I'll have the option to hold over or dial and both will be pretty simple.

Range time tomorrow will tell the tale. I'm looking forward to it!

 

[Newtosavage]

Range report:

The good:
This scope tracks better than any scope I've ever owned. I sighed it in in literally one shot. 2nd shot confirmed it, and the next 3 were a tidy 2" group at 300 yards, holding over for the first two shots, and dialing for the third.
I'm really going to like the option to either hold over with the 8 MOA reticle or dial in MOA.

Now for the not so good:
I wish they had made this a 2.5-8x scope, and stopped right there. The optics are really good up to about 7-7.5x. Beyond that, not so much. Usable? sure. But there is a noticeable falloff in image quality above 7x. IMO there is no reason for this scope to go to 10x. I have no idea why they chose to do that. If they had stopped at 8x, this would IMO be the perfect ultralight hunting scope. Sure, I can always stop at 8x, but then the wide duplex is even wider at 8x than at 10.

Give me a 2.5-8x with a 6 MOA (crosshair to tip of bottom post) in this scope, with everything else being the same, and I'd put one on every rifle I own.

Last shot I took today, I dialed it for 100 yards and too one shot. It was a good hold and a good shot. The round hit within 1/16" of where I was aiming. In other words, dead center.

That will give a person confidence.

 

[Newtosavage]

Oh, by the way, the eye relief concerns on this scope are completely overblown IMO. Shooting my sub-6.5 lb (scoped) 7mm08 with a hot load of 131 Hammer Hunters, I never thought twice about the eye relief. It's a non-issue to me.