SWFA website updated; More to come in 2024

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Same guys on here:
"Ewe it is ugly, what a shit show, total fail!".

I think the latter 2 comments have to do with the launch not including the 2 most desired models (from our perspective).

 

[ETtikka]

I guess when you’re dependent on others (light optics, I think), to perform your manufacturing and you give them a cheap budget, nothing comes fast. I am trying to remain optimistic, it’s better than paying 1000$ plus for a “big name” self manufactured scope that won’t perform reliably

 

[goalie]

It is interesting that they didn’t include the weight upfront on in the description or specifications. Why make someone dive into the manual to find that? I probably wouldn’t have opened the manual if you hadn’t pointed that out.

Is the weight still 24oz?

 

[sndmn11]

Assuming that their three best sellers are the 3-9, 6x, and 3-15, why not focus production efforts there? While they updated the 3-15, the reticle looks like the same one they had in the 3-15 before. Seems like an attempt to show they are still alive without putting much into it.

You’re not wrong - it checks a lot of boxes. And if the 3-15 went on a diet that would be an improvement.

While I assume production is still in Japan, I honestly can’t find mention of it anywhere

Perhaps someone was paying attention to complaints of "the market" and asked themselves why the 3-9 was a better seller than the 3-15 and decided it was the weight. Turret attachment was "upgraded" to be on par with the 3-9, the reticle remains the same, but isn't a hindrance.

According to many here, the 3-15 should be sold out already..."killing it".

 

[ElPollo]

It appears they spent an awful lot of time and resources to add a zero stop, which most of us handled with a rubber washer. They didn’t substantially change the overall design or glass. And they doubled down on their poorer selling variable (3-15) and fixed (12,16, & 20x) scopes over their better sellers (6x & 3-9). Not a particularly inspiring start.

Honestly, the best thing SWFA could do right now is produce the heck out of the 6 & 10x fixed scopes and the 3-9 to ensure they are available on a regular basis. It would help them get their credibility back and generate revenue to be able to work on developing additional products. Don’t understand most of the decisions the company is making.

 

[Choupique]

I like my OG 3-15 a whole whole lot. This one seems like it'd be better. I know yall have a hard on for the 6x and 3-9, but i bet this one still sells good. It addresses the only issues I have with the 3-15.

 

[Ajsomp]

Perhaps someone was paying attention to complaints of "the market" and asked themselves why the 3-9 was a better seller than the 3-15 and decided it was the weight. Turret attachment was "upgraded" to be on par with the 3-9, the reticle remains the same, but isn't a hindrance.

According to many here, the 3-15 should be sold out already..."killing it".

Parallax adjustment - check
Zero stop- check
Capped turrets - check
Reliable operation - check (assuming nothing changed with the internals)

So yes, it should be a great option. But I do prefer the reticle in my 6x to the one in the 3-15 (or any with the open diamond reticle). If I needed a scope today, for $700 it’s a good (not great) option. For another couple hundred you get a maven that addresses all of those things and the company seems to be listening.

It appears they spent an awful lot of time and resources to add a zero stop, which most of us handled with a rubber washer. They didn’t substantially change the overall design or glass. And they doubled down on their poorer selling variable (3-15) and fixed (12,16, & 20x) scopes over their better sellers (6x & 3-9). Not a particularly inspiring start.

Honestly, the best thing SWFA could do right now is produce the heck out of the 6 & 10x fixed scopes and the 3-9 to ensure they are available on a regular basis. It would help them get their credibility back and generate revenue to be able to work on developing additional products. Don’t understand most of the decisions the company is making.

I know the turrets on the HD were different than the non-HD turrets in the past - which allowed for the shim kit. Maybe the reason they didn’t release the HD versions in the turret design? I’m speculating of course.

A lot of people are sitting with unrealistically high expectations of a S2H 3-12? with a THLR style reticle that weighs 20 oz. And I would bet even then someone would find something to gripe about @Formidilosus

 

[goalie]

Parallax adjustment - check
Zero stop- check
Capped turrets - check
Reliable operation - check (assuming nothing changed with the internals)

So yes, it should be a great option. But I do prefer the reticle in my 6x to the one in the 3-15 (or any with the open diamond reticle). If I needed a scope today, for $700 it’s a good (not great) option. For another couple hundred you get a maven that addresses all of those things and the company seems to be listening.

The price difference is even less if you have a .mil discount.

 

[Spoonbill]

Perhaps someone was paying attention to complaints of "the market" and asked themselves why the 3-9 was a better seller than the 3-15 and decided it was the weight. Turret attachment was "upgraded" to be on par with the 3-9, the reticle remains the same, but isn't a hindrance.

According to many here, the 3-15 should be sold out already..."killing it".

It would help if swfa put the wieght of the scope in the description. I had to come to Rokslide to get the weight. A 3-15 scope at 21-22 ounces that holds zero should “kill it”

 

[sndmn11]

for $700 it’s a good (not great) option. For another couple hundred you get a maven that addresses all of those things and the company seems to be listening.

I read on here regularly where folks ask for advice and then grovel over $50 to end up letting it get in the way of a great choice. A 50% price increase to get into the one Maven that works is a big jump.

The point is that these kind of negative reactions are what keeps other companies from delivering on the checklist.

 

[Moccasin]

It would be enough just to have another manufacturer of reliable scopes up and running, but that’s assuming these are the equal of the others. That said, I’m a bit disappointed and confused at their offerings.

 

[jfk69]

I don’t love the look at all, but I may still give a 3-15 a shot. At 21 ounces I could shave a lot of weight from one of my rifles by switching to that scope.

 

[Schmo]

So yes, it should be a great option. But I do prefer the reticle in my 6x to the one in the 3-15 (or any with the open diamond reticle). If I needed a scope today, for $700 it’s a good (not great) option. For another couple hundred you get a maven that addresses all of those things and the company seems to be listening.

Well, let’s break this down. A Maven is not a “couple hundred” more. It’s $500 more comparing the everyday price of both scopes. That’s pretty big. It’s 5 ounces lighter than the Maven. That’s big. It has been stated that Maven ISN’T listening. Just ask Form. Maven doesn’t believe that the rugged durability of the RS1.2 is what has led to its success. Instead, they believe that they hit a perfect blend of weight, reticle, and features, and that those things are what has made it super successful. They weren’t interested in making the talked about UM/S2H scope, because they don’t think enough will sell. To me, that says that they aren’t really listening.

 

[TxLite]

I wonder if they fixed the spongy turrets

 

[Black_Labrador]

I thought SWFA had gone out of business? Do they still have the Samplelist where you could get some decent deals on binoculars?

 

[RyanT26]

I have always liked my 3x15 more than my 3x9’s. The updates aren’t revolutionary, but I like them. I’ll order a 3x15

 

[4th_point]

And they doubled down on their poorer selling variable (3-15) and fixed (12,16, & 20x) scopes over their better sellers (6x & 3-9). Not a particularly inspiring start.

Honestly, the best thing SWFA could do right now is produce the heck out of the 6 & 10x fixed scopes and the 3-9 to ensure they are available on a regular basis.

Unless something changed, the Gen2 just released are made by the same OEM that made the non-HD fixed power Classic scopes and 3-15x.

The 3-9x HD was made by a different OEM. So different production contract, supply chain, etc. Who knows where SWFA might be on the production schedule against other rebranders.

Hopefully there are 6x and 3-9x scopes trickling in to fulfill warranty claims, as someone mentioned earlier.

 

[sndmn11]

For those complaining about turrets snagging and banging something's. This is a 10X side focus that was zeroed in the spring ony brother's rifle. No zero stop, regular adjustable windage.

It went in and out of a soft case many times since being zeroed, strapped to a pack for 10ish miles over 3 walks that day, and then dialed for a 300yd successful kill. The last mile was a hand carried rifle (he didn't buy a sling yet--> budget restrictions) that involved crawling under a fence and crawling a bit to get a shot. His hunting experience is a day in 2021, a half day in 2023, and a day in 2024.

Turrets never hung up in the real world or rotated until he dialed in his shot solution...

 

[T28w]

I’d like to see when someone gets a 3x15 and takes a pic next to the gen 1. I like my gen 1 3x15 also. I don’t know if it’s any eyes/age but I prefer a little more mag sighting in and going for small groups on paper. Also have to put on my glasses lol, But shooting 8 and 10 inch steel plates from field positions, I’m back in the 6-8ish ranges. I have a 6x and a 3-9 also that I’m happy with. Looking to pick up a 3-15 or another maven rs 1.2 or try a Shv.

 

[4th_point]

The downside to the Gen1 3-15x was image degradation above ~12x on some units. All the Gen1 I have tried were like that.

If Gen2 fixed that, it'll be huge.

The side focus is not very robust, but I haven't heard of many failures in terms of seal leaks.