SWFA 3-9 vs Maven RS1.2 2.5-15 vs SWFA 3-15 with Mil reticle/FFP

[sjredwings]

I'm having a hard time deciding which scope is right for me.
I'm going to put it on a 6CM that is a 6.5-7 lb rifle. Main use is for mountain hunting for elk and deer.
Max range I hope to shoot after proper training is 600 yards.

Which of the scopes would you pick?
I'm leaning toward the SWFA 3-9x because of weight.
Is the Maven reticle considerably better?
Maven is pretty heavy, 26 oz vs SWFA 3-9 19oz vs SWFA 3-15 24 oz.
Is the Maven glass that much better to justify the cost? The cost doesn't bother me but if I don't need it...

Please advise!

 

[sjredwings]

Sorry I screwed up that poll and hit enter before adding the Maven.

 

[ARK_Ginger]

I don't have a Maven, but I would keep my SWFA 3-9 over the 3-15 if I had to choose.

 

[BradArnett]

I don't have a Maven, but I would keep my SWFA 3-9 over the 3-15 if I had to choose.

Same here

 

[steelheadmike]

Determining which one you can actually purchase currently may help you decide.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

i'm on month 19 for a backordered swfa 3-9.

 

[sjredwings]

Determining which one you can actually purchase currently may help you decide.

Very true

 

[seand]

I’ve got both, I prefer the 3-9 for your use. That said my kids element 6cm has the maven, but that’s mostly due to familiarity- she uses the maven for NRL22 as well. Both are great, but the 10 mil/rev turret is especially nice for 22lr - not a big deal on a 600yd hunting rifle.

 

[sjredwings]

I’ve got both, I prefer the 3-9 for your use. That said my kids element 6cm has the maven, but that’s mostly due to familiarity- she uses the maven for NRL22 as well. Both are great, but the 10 mil/rev turret is especially nice for 22lr - not a big deal on a 600yd hunting rifle.

Thank you for the response!

 

[silasbowhunter]

I’ve used both of the SWFA and never looked through a maven. I doubt the glass on either SWFA is gonna hold you back from killing critters. I like the 3-15 SWFA because I like the zoom. The 3-9 is fantastic though, I’m a novice and I can hit steel at 450 with my RSS 223.

 

[ElPollo]

SWFA makes great stuff if you can get it. Hard to say what is going on with that company behind the scenes right now. The 3-9x is basically unobtainium unless it’s on the used market. The 3-15x is generally in stock along with the fixed 10x. And the 6x seems to show up occasionally. Since they changed their website, there is no way to get on a backorder list anymore. You just have to watch their site like watching paint dry.

But in terms of SWFA scopes, the fixed 6x mil-quad is my favorite for hunting. It’s cheap, reliable, and simple. You just cannot beat them for $300. The 3-9x comes second, only because it’s double the price. It has HD glass, which I don’t think is a big benefit. The zoom rings on mine are super tight, so I generally set them around 6x and leave them. The 6x and the 3-9 reticles are identical and I think they are among the best out there. Both scopes weigh about the same as well. The 6x has adjustable parallax which I set at 300 and never adjust. The 3-9x has fixed parallax. The 3-15 is my least favorite of the three. The biggest issue with it is the eye box, which is pretty unusable above 12x. The reticle is also subtly different in that the diamonds that serve as hash marks are not filled in. The result is that it’s a little more prone to fading out in complex backgrounds, but otherwise it’s the same. The scope is also bigger and heavier than the others, but you don’t get a lot of the benefits out of it due to the eye box limitations. None of these SWFA scopes have zero stops. You can add washers to them to create a stop, but I’ve not done that and it’s never been an issue for me. The SWFAs are tough, but ugly. The friggen turrents are way bigger than they need to be. But I really like them and hope the company doesn’t die.

I have not used the Maven, but it’s on another level above than the SWFAs. From what I’ve seen the reticle is as good or slightly better. Based on my experience with other Maven optics, the glass will be better. However I do not think that is a limiting factor for scopes. The durability appears to be similar to the SWFAs. The Maven is just a nicer overall scope. It has a zero stop and turrets that aren’t hugely oversized. The only downside is that it’s a little porky at 26 oz. That said, it’s among the best scopes available in its class. Availability-wise, this scope is a backorder situation, but they are coming out with them every few months.

Finally, I’ll give an opinion. I don’t care for high power scopes with magnification above 10x. While they might be nice at the range, the high magnification makes it slower to get on target for the initial shot, harder to spot your impacts, and slower to get back on for follow-up shots. I’ve also never found magnifications in the 6-10x range to be a limitation in field conditions. You do not need higher magnification for hunting out to 600 and even beyond.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Having used multiple of each you can’t really go wrong with any of them.

The Maven has the best reticle in my opinion but the MIL Quad is also very good.

The Maven has the best overall “glass” and quick eye focus but the SWFAs are also very good.

The Maven has a capped windage and zero stop on the turrets which aren’t needed but are nice to have for how and where I hunt.

I own 4 of the RS1.2s now for a reason. They work like they’re supposed to and for a big game, multi terrain, general hunting scope there really isn’t anything that beats it right now in my use.

You won’t be held back at all with the SWFA scopes at all, the Maven just does everything slightly better for me.

 

[waldo9190]

What are the odds Maven does something similar to the 3-9 SWFA in a lighter, lower max mag optic with the same durability as the 1.2? They would probably sell a pile of those too if they could get in around that 20 ounce mark.

 

[sjredwings]

SWFA makes great stuff if you can get it. Hard to say what is going on with that company behind the scenes right now. The 3-9x is basically unobtainium unless it’s on the used market. The 3-15x is generally in stock along with the fixed 10x. And the 6x seems to show up occasionally. Since they changed their website, there is no way to get on a backorder list anymore. You just have to watch their site like watching paint dry.

But in terms of SWFA scopes, the fixed 6x mil-quad is my favorite for hunting. It’s cheap, reliable, and simple. You just cannot beat them for $300. The 3-9x comes second, only because it’s double the price. It has HD glass, which I don’t think is a big benefit. The zoom rings on mine are super tight, so I generally set them around 6x and leave them. The 6x and the 3-9 reticles are identical and I think they are among the best out there. Both scopes weigh about the same as well. The 6x has adjustable parallax which I set at 300 and never adjust. The 3-9x has fixed parallax. The 3-15 is my least favorite of the three. The biggest issue with it is the eye box, which is pretty unusable above 12x. The reticle is also subtly different in that the diamonds that serve as hash marks are not filled in. The result is that it’s a little more prone to fading out in complex backgrounds, but otherwise it’s the same. The scope is also bigger and heavier than the others, but you don’t get a lot of the benefits out of it due to the eye box limitations. None of these SWFA scopes have zero stops. You can add washers to them to create a stop, but I’ve not done that and it’s never been an issue for me. The SWFAs are tough, but ugly. The friggen turrents are way bigger than they need to be. But I really like them and hope the company doesn’t die.

I have not used the Maven, but it’s on another level above than the SWFAs. From what I’ve seen the reticle is as good or slightly better. Based on my experience with other Maven optics, the glass will be better. However I do not think that is a limiting factor for scopes. The durability appears to be similar to the SWFAs. The Maven is just a nicer overall scope. It has a zero stop and turrets that aren’t hugely oversized. The only downside is that it’s a little porky at 26 oz. That said, it’s among the best scopes available in its class. Availability-wise, this scope is a backorder situation, but they are coming out with them every few months.

Finally, I’ll give an opinion. I don’t care for high power scopes with magnification above 10x. While they might be nice at the range, the high magnification makes it slower to get on target for the initial shot, harder to spot your impacts, and slower to get back on for follow-up shots. I’ve also never found magnifications in the 6-10x range to be a limitation in field conditions. You do not need higher magnification for hunting out to 600 and even beyond.

Very helpful! Thank you

 

[sjredwings]

Having used multiple of each you can’t really go wrong with any of them.

The Maven has the best reticle in my opinion but the MIL Quad is also very good.

The Maven has the best overall “glass” and quick eye focus but the SWFAs are also very good.

The Maven has a capped windage and zero stop on the turrets which aren’t needed but are nice to have for how and where I hunt.

I own 4 of the RS1.2s now for a reason. They work like they’re supposed to and for a big game, multi terrain, general hunting scope there really isn’t anything that beats it right now in my use.

You won’t be held back at all with the SWFA scopes at all, the Maven just does everything slightly better for me.

Good info! Thanks

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

What are the odds Maven does something similar to the 3-9 SWFA in a lighter, lower max mag optic with the same durability as the 1.2? They would probably sell a pile of those too if they could get in around that 20 ounce mark.

From what it sounds like listening to a podcast from them… Maven says there is no difference in “durability” between the previous model and current model.

So they either got lucky with the new spec requirements and the manufacturer changed something else that’s fundamental, or they are “saving face” in some fashion by not “bashing” the previous model. If they are saving face and increased a durability spec and simply won’t admit it that would be weird.

My guess is, with the new requirements/features to the 1.2, the manufacturer changed the overall spec in some fashion as well. Either that or the previous model is durable and hasn’t been fully tested? I don’t know the answer to that.

All I know is, all 4 of mine work as they should so far. Going to stock pile them since it sounds like it was an accident and we may never see anything like it from them again.

 

[waldo9190]

From what it sounds like listening to a podcast from them… Maven says there is no difference in “durability” between the previous model and current model.

So they either got lucky with the new spec requirements and the manufacturer changed something else that’s fundamental, or they are “saving face” in some fashion by not “bashing” the previous model. If they are saving face and increased a durability spec and simply won’t admit it that would be weird.

My guess is, with the new requirements/features to the 1.2, the manufacturer changed the overall spec in some fashion as well. Either that or the previous model is durable and hasn’t been fully tested? I don’t know the answer to that.

All I know is, all 4 of mine work as they should so far. Going to stock pile them since it sounds like it was an accident and we may never see anything like it from them again.

No doubt that is probably the best course of action honestly. I've been holding out for a while for SWFA to have some semblance of consistency with the 3-9, but that has been a losing proposition as of late. I may have to give one of the smaller Mavens a go.

 

[Jimbee]

I'm sure glad I bought a handful of SWFA 6X a few years ago when they were cheap.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I'm sure glad I bought a handful of SWFA 6X a few years ago when they were cheap.

Yep I still have 3 of these on guns myself. Great scope!

 

[fwafwow]

I’m not an expert or prolific shooter. I do have all 3 of those (the Maven is new to me and hasn’t been mounted). As others have said, I think you can’t go wrong with any of them. I’m very optimistic about the new Maven. But I currently don’t think I will let go of the 3-9 or 3-15. (Or the 6x.)