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

[Marbles]

I have both, I prefer the RS1.2.

SWFA pro
-Better reticle
-Lighter
-Cheaper
-Smaller
-Better magnification range (can't be tempted to shoot at an animal on 15)

RA1.2 pro
-Zero stop (can be jerry rigged on the SWFA)
-Better glass (can see my 223 bullet holes on paper with it)
-Illuminated reticle
-Capped windage
-Nicer feel to it

And now I'm wondering why I have two RS1.2s and only one SS 3-9x42. The Maven is probably not worth more than double the SWFA.

 

[benconfused]

I have both, I prefer the RS1.2.

SWFA pro
-Better reticle
-Lighter
-Cheaper
-Smaller
-Better magnification range (can't be tempted to shoot at an animal on 15)

RA1.2 pro
-Zero stop (can be jerry rigged on the SWFA)
-Better glass (can see my 223 bullet holes on paper with it)
-Illuminated reticle
-Capped windage
-Nicer feel to it

And now I'm wondering why I have two RS1.2s and only one SS 3-9x42. The Maven is probably not worth more than double the SWFA.

You last callout is also my struggle at the moment. BF SWFA deal coming up for the 3-15 (one I was looking at) vs increased price of the Maven, even though I have a 25% off code for the Maven, it's over 1K with tax/shipping.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Maven I have 4 and trainer and hunting rifle are identical accept for caliber.

The SWFA business model is to unreliable to support long term. I don’t trust their warranty support based on their current practices. Besides the Maven beats them in all categories accept weight

I agree with having the same scope on trainer and primary, but otherwise, I respectfully disagree.

For value, nothing beats the SWFA options. I’ve yet to find a scope I like better than one of the nine SWFAs I currently own (not counting two others I sold within my family). The Maven is twice the price of the 3-15x40, isn’t it? And four times the price of a fixed 6x (if you can afford to wait for it to be in stock!)?

I don’t purchase items based on potential warranty support. I pick things I don’t expect to break. Murphy says, “it will break when you most need it.” If my scope breaks on a hunt, no amount of fast warranty support is going to fix that in time. If I was concerned about a scope failing, I could simply carry three spare SWFA fixed power scopes in my vehicle and be about even on cost with a Maven.

And, for all that SWFA’s low-cost business model can be frustrating, they at least intentionally made a rugged and reliable scope. It bothers me that Maven didn’t do that.

Neither company is perfect. I don’t think you can go far wrong with either scope option.

I will also add that I don’t own a Maven. I know lots of people around here love them. Not saying anything against it except price and design philosophy. If I wanted to spend that much money on a scope, my choice would be between a Maven or a Trijicon. And I don’t think I could go far wrong with either.

 

[benconfused]

I agree with having the same scope on trainer and primary, but otherwise, I respectfully disagree.

For value, nothing beats the SWFA options. I’ve yet to find a scope I like better than one of the nine SWFAs I currently own (not counting two others I sold within my family). The Maven is twice the price of the 3-15x40, isn’t it? And four times the price of a fixed 6x (if you can afford to wait for it to be in stock!)?

I don’t purchase items based on potential warranty support. I pick things I don’t expect to break. Murphy says, “it will break when you most need it.” If my scope breaks on a hunt, no amount of fast warranty support is going to fix that in time. If I was concerned about a scope failing, I could simply carry three spare SWFA fixed power scopes in my vehicle and be about even on cost with a Maven.

And, for all that SWFA’s low-cost business model can be frustrating, they at least intentionally made a rugged and reliable scope. It bothers me that Maven didn’t do that.

Neither company is perfect. I don’t think you can go far wrong with either scope option.

I will also add that I don’t own a Maven. I know lots of people around here love them. Not saying anything against it except price and design philosophy. If I wanted to spend that much money on a scope, my choice would be between a Maven or a Trijicon. And I don’t think I could go far wrong with either.

Are you using the SWFA christmas tree or standard milquad reticle?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Are you using the SWFA christmas tree or standard milquad reticle?

Standard milquad. The only Christmas trees in my house go up on or about December 15.

 

[Formidilosus]

Where did some of you land on the Maven vs SWFA debate? I posted this in the Rokstok chat but was hoping to get a little more feedback from the RS community. Thanks in advance...

What's the consensus here for scope on the trainer?

Trying to decide if I want to get another RS1.2 (to match the 65prc), or try the Gen ii SWFA 3-15.

Considerations for the trainer (Tikka 223 18' suppressed):
1. Overall weight and balance with a Maven vs SWFA
2. Trainer to however far I can shoot
3. Will also use it for Whitetail hunting under 300 yards in middle TN (low-light considerations)
4. Lastly, Maven price increase vs SWFA upcoming BF sale
5. Love the Maven reticle but def a heavy scope

I’ll be the odd man out- while the RS1.2 is generally a very good scope, for most uses I prefer the Gen 2 3-15x SWFA for mainly two reasons:

1). Capped turrets if desired (the RS1.2 spins all the f’ing time). Left uncapped they don’t accidentally spin.

2). Significantly more visible (bold) reticle at lower powers.