Why so much love for the SWFA 3-9??

[Jesse Jaymes]

Per the post below....I am inquiring why the vast internet love for the SWFA 3-9 HD? I own one. I wanted one for many years and scooped one a few Black Fridays ago. I am not terribly impressed. The turrets are close to the most mushy and click-lacking I've used. The glass is OK...and I am not really a glass snob. There is no parallax adjustment. The power ring is machined to mirror the ocular adjustment and isn't really that easy to "find" and adjust. And I am quite certain my scope doesn't track that well and seems to "Leupold Adjust" after the SECOND shot post turret adjustment.

It's OK for a $450 scope. But I don't at all get the "Be All....End All" love it gets. I am for sure in the minority on Xs. I have just about zero use for anything under 15X.

For the record I own maybe 5-6 other scopes. All 3-15X. One SFP and the rest FFP. Turrets are vastly more crisp and firm on those models. Parallax too. Additionally...I've had a few LRHS/LRTS and DMR2...VX5HD and a new MK5HD. Realize all cost a bit more than the SWFA...but I think you get that much more optic. Kinda interested in the best street price on 3-10 SHV. Lastly, I did hear that some 3-10 were produced with parallax adj? Or was it parallax AND illum? Be a decent optic right there.

 

[menhaden_man]

Per the post below....I am inquiring why the vast internet love for the SWFA 3-9 HD? I own one. I wanted one for many years and scooped one a few Black Fridays ago. I am not terribly impressed. The turrets are close to the most mushy and click-lacking I've used. The glass is OK...and I am not really a glass snob. There is no parallax adjustment. The power ring is machined to mirror the ocular adjustment and isn't really that easy to "find" and adjust. And I am quite certain my scope doesn't track that well and seems to "Leupold Adjust" after the SECOND shot post turret adjustment.

It's OK for a $450 scope. But I don't at all get the "Be All....End All" love it gets. I am for sure in the minority on Xs. I have just about zero use for anything under 15X.

For the record I own maybe 5-6 other scopes. All 3-15X. One SFP and the rest FFP. Turrets are vastly more crisp and firm on those models. Parallax too. Additionally...I've had a few LRHS/LRTS and DMR2...VX5HD and a new MK5HD. Realize all cost a bit more than the SWFA...but I think you get that much more optic. Kinda interested in the best street price on 3-10 SHV. Lastly, I did hear that some 3-10 were produced with parallax adj? Or was it parallax AND illum? Be a decent optic right there.

This is Rokslide, be careful with your blasphemy

 

[brsnow]

I think it actually does what it is supposed to. That is where the love comes from.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

They are cheap and have a reputation for dialing reliably.

I bought one and wasn’t impressed. Reliable tracking and consistency just weren’t there. Shouldn’t have been surprised with how cheap the turrets felt. It felt like dialing through sand. I verify all of my scopes and demand that they dial and rtz properly every time. This one failed the test.

After dialing and verifying night force and Meopta, those are the only two scopes going on any of my rigs for the forseeable future. Leupold left me high and dry with their VX-6 and VX-5. I won’t be trusting them for any dialing optic for a long time.

 

[Team4LongGun]

This is Rokslide, be careful with your blasphemy

LMFAO!!! So true....

 

[thinhorn_AK]

They are affordable and they dial reliably and they are durable. They are utilitarian and get the job done. I’m not a huge fan myself after having a few but it’s hard to argue that they do what they are supposed to do.

I think the price point got a lot of guys into dialing and learning the MIL thing and shooting farther.

 

[Wrench]

It does everything you need and nothing you don't for the lowest entry point.

I have a few of them and they all bested my 3-15 optically. I personally would save another couple benjis and find a 3-12 lrhs as its THE best bang for the buck in a hunting scope....but that is just to me.

 

[tdhanses]

I also picked up a 10x42 swfa and am not impressed, the clicks are so soft and the glass is very poor. But it does seem to track yet my Athlons do as well, the Athlon Ares BTR I picked up from cameralandny on sale for $329 is a much better scope overall.

Kind of shocked the 3x9-42 doesn’t have parallex as my 10x42 fixed power does.

 

[ChrisAU]

In the $500 range I'm not sure what is supposed to better that dials reliably and has better glass. Mine has always been dead nuts on. Took my first elk with it. Took a few whitetails at longer ranges than normal for my area. Compared the glass side by side with a Meopta Optika 6 3-18x56 and the SWFA was better in low light, even with the much smaller objective. Its the lightest FFP option out there too. I do have a Leupold Mark 5HD on order to compare it with.

 

[Fatcamp]

It does what I need. For $500 it kind of stands alone. I think the glass is fine. Can certainly see clearly waaaay farther than I will never shoot.

Certainly room for improvement, but the industry is geared towards, "Gotta have at least 15X!" and is ignoring the rest of us.

 

[BAKPAKR]

Tracking on the one I have mounted appears spot on, the scope is relatively light, clarity is decent, and I got it for around $475. For just a little more than what a NF 3-10 SHV would cost, I now have two SWFA 3-9s.

 

[BCD]

I also picked up a 10x42 swfa and am not impressed, the clicks are so soft and the glass is very poor. But it does seem to track yet my Athlons do as well, the Athlon Ares BTR I picked up from cameralandny on sale for $329 is a much better scope overall.

Kind of shocked the 3x9-42 doesn’t have parallex as my 10x42 fixed power does.

Which model in the BTR??

 

[tdhanses]

2.5-15, doubt he has any left that sale was a while ago but it’s clicks are more firm and the glass is much better.

 

[JollyRoger]

Both mine have done great so far for tracking, return to zero, and the glass is fine for me. My older beat up one does not have as great of clicks as my newest one... but it’s completely functional. For the price I wouldn’t trust anything else.

There’s a few changes I’d make if it were up to me (zero stop, capped windage, easier to align marks on turret). But they aren’t deal breakers

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

Per the post below....I am inquiring why the vast internet love for the SWFA 3-9x HD. The turrets are close to the most mushy and click-lacking I've used. The glass is OK...and I am not really a glass snob. There is no parallax adjustment. The power ring is machined to mirror the ocular adjustment and isn't really that easy to "find" and adjust. And I am quite certain my scope doesn't track that well and seems to "Leupold Adjust" after the SECOND shot post turret adjustment.

It's OK for a $450 scope. But I don't at all get the "Be All....End All" love it gets. I am for sure in the minority on Xs. I have just about zero use for anything under 15X.

For the record I own maybe 5-6 other scopes. All 3-15X. One SFP and the rest FFP. Turrets are vastly more crisp and firm on those models. Parallax too. Additionally...I've had a few LRHS/LRTS and DMR2...VX5HD and a new MK5HD. Realize all cost a bit more than the SWFA...but I think you get that much more optic.

I’ve seen and used a lot of them to obscene round counts and abuse. While everything made has a failure rate, I nor anyone I shoot or hunt with has had any issues.

As for the other scopes you mentioned, again have and do see bunches of them and the SS is a better aiming device than all (save maybe the Bushnells). And that’s the crux- they’re aiming devices. SWFA SS HD’s favor resolution over color rendition. The vast majority of people when viewing sided by side come to the same conclusion as Chris- the 3-9x “glass” is very good. The few that say what you say, are generally people that equate color “pop” with good glass. That color “pop” doesn’t effect aiming near to the degree as poor resolution, which lots of scopes that seem to have good glass lack.

As for power, people are over gunned, over X’d, under bulleted and under scoped. On anything but dedicated LR rifles, scope power is generally not your friend. I shoot between 800 and 1,200 meters at least once and usually twice a week in mountain conditions with the largest target being a 12” plate. The vast majority of rounds are with scopes that top out at 6x or 8x. This year I killed an Antelope at 576, Elk at 801, and mule deer at 606 with a 3-18x scope and they were on 11x, 7x, and 11x respectively due to those being the max magnifications to spot my own impacts due positions/recoil.

They are cheap and have a reputation for dialing reliably.

I bought one and wasn’t impressed. Reliable tracking and consistency just weren’t there. Shouldn’t have been surprised with how cheap the turrets felt. It felt like dialing through sand. I verify all of my scopes and demand that they dial and rtz properly every time. This one failed the test.

Same deal as above, I’ll buy the 3-9x SS from you. Not being combative- I’ve seen so many put through legitimate abuse, that I would like to see one that doesn’t work.

I also picked up a 10x42 swfa and am not impressed, the clicks are so soft and the glass is very poor. But it does seem to track yet my Athlons do as well, the Athlon Ares BTR I picked up from cameralandny on sale for $329 is a much better scope overall.

Kind of shocked the 3x9-42 doesn’t have parallex as my 10x42 fixed power does.

My experience with Athlons is relatively poor. Very few made it past 500 rounds before issues, and none of them held zero from side impacts.

Why do you believe a 3-9x scope needs parallax adjustment?

 

[JimGa]

Many people claim the "glass" is not very good. I have a 3-12 LRHS, which is generally agreed to have "good" glass. In comparing it to even the 3-15 SS at dark, it beat out my LRHS, and it is also generally agreed the 3-9 glass is better than the 3-15.

 

[tdhanses]

I’ve seen and used a lot of them to obscene rounds counts and abuse and while everything made has a failure rate, I nor anyone I shoot or hunt with has had any issues.

As for the other scopes you mentioned, again have and do currently see bunches of them and the SS is a better aiming device than all. And that’s the crux- they’re aiming devices. SWFA SS HD’s favor resolution over color rendition. The vast majority of people when viewing sided by side come to the same conclusion as Chris- the 3-9x “glass” is very good. The few that say what you say, are generally people that eqaute color “pop” with good glass. That color “pop” doesn’t effect aiming near the degree as poor resolution, which lots of scopes that seem to have good glass lack.

As for power....everything I see says that most people are over gunned, over X’d, under bulleted and under scoped. On anything but dedicated LR rifles, scope power is not your friend. I shoot between 800 and 1,200 meters at least once and usually twice a week in mountain conditions with the largest target being a 12” plate. The vast majority of rounds are with scopes that top out at 6x or 8x. I killed an Antelope at 576, Elk at 801, and mule deer at 606 this year with a 3-18x scope and they were on 11x, 7x, and 11x respectively due to those being the max magnifications to spot my own impacts due positions/recoil.







Same deal as above, I’ll buy the 3-9x SS from you. Not being combative- I’ve seen so many put through legitimate abuse, that I would like to see one that doesn’t work.







In the last 15-20 Athlons, very few made it past 500 rounds before issues, and none of them held zero from side impacts.

Why do you believe a 3-9x scope needs parallax adjustment?

I don’t believe it needs one, just interesting the fixed 10 has one and the 3x9 doesn’t.

So far my first Ares has well over 8000+ rds shot, it dialed fine from 50-400 yards for the 22 for most of those rds and is now on my 6.5 creed, it’s dialing fine out to 1000 currently. The first 1000 rds were with about 300rds through a 270wsm and 700 through a .223. It’ not been handled gently but yeah I don’t drop my scopes like you, lol. That scope fails I’ll send it back as it’s not a hunting rifle.

My Midas Tac has over 500rd and is still true.

I have a new Ares on an AR-10 but waiting for a new barrel since the first one was improperly chambered, so no idea if it’ll be good.

The Athlons are much more crisp edge to edge, close to the swaro Z5 in optics, they also do not darken in gloomy or last light like the swfa. That said I just put the SWFA on my 22, because it was cheap and will be dialed a ton and truthfully crappy glass in dark gloomy or the end of day doesn’t really matter. The glass is crap but with a rifle scope crap glass will get the job done in legal light.

You are correct, these are aiming devices and once my Athlons fail they’ll be replace with much better options but not SWFA’s. I’m really wanting an NX8 next, I liked the NF scopes I’ve had before or used.

Also I think your info is a great resource for all of us as you get to use and abuse these aim devices much more then any of us would ever get to do.

 

[Formidilosus]

tdhanes,

That’s good on the Athlons. We haven’t seen those results but I’m not doubting you.

The 10x SWFA is a range or dedicated LR scope, not a hunting scope in my opinion. The 6x is fully functional. The 3-9x “glass” in blind tests (where viewers can’t see what brand/model) has rated above Leupold VX3, and about the same as Zeiss Conquests in low light for most, the few times we have set it up.


The SWFA scopes are certainly not perfect if such a thing exists, but they offer things that no one else has been able to so far.

 

[Formidilosus]

I don’t believe it needs one, just interesting the fixed 10 has one and the 3x9 doesn’t.

Meant to address this. Mostly it’s how the scopes came into being. The SWFA 10x is really a revamped, but mostly unchanged version of the Tasco SS that competed and won a Navy contract for sniper optics. PA was a requirement. The 3-9x was a fresh design and that power really doesn’t require PA.

 

[tdhanses]

tdhanes,

That’s good on the Athlons. We haven’t seen those results but I’m not doubting you.

The 10x SWFA is a range or dedicated LR scope, not a hunting scope in my opinion. The 6x is fully functional. The 3-9x “glass” in blind tests (where viewers can’t see what brand/model) has rated above Leupold VX3, and about the same as Zeiss Conquests in low light for most, the few times we have set it up.


The SWFA scopes are certainly not perfect if such a thing exists, but they offer things that no one else has been able to so far.

Truthfully though I have 3 but only have used 2 (1 ARES and 1 Midas Tac) could be I got lucky as that’s not much of a sample population. Everything can fail, even swfa’s I’m sure.