Would you buy this scope?

[nm.otter]

Every SWFA I've had has had mushy turrets too. Not a fan. I like a really audible and noticeable turret click.

The 6x Gen2 turrets click nicely, and the zero stops work well -- but they're still quite tall (and the windage catches on stuff way too easily).

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I won’t say much until the test scopes come in, which we are being told will be by the end of this year. Should have been this month or next, but an improvement to the optical design was offered and we chose to use it.

Again, not having any yet- everything about it supposed to be better. LOW states that reliability is absolutely unchanged- if anything, better. The glass is supposed to be better. Slightly shorter, slightly lighter. The power range is improved- with no negative effects to FOV, eye relief, or eyebox.

Appreciate the update.

 

[MuleyFever]

LOW states that reliability is absolutely unchanged- if anything, better.

What does this mean? Unchanged from what? Better than what?

Was there a prototype that was tested for reliability? I have not read the whole thread so I may have missed it. Just curious because when you say its unchanged or better what is the baseline for that statement?

 

[HighUintas]

I really like my 2025 swfa 3-9x and my rs1.2, but I'll have to get one of these at some point if they're still available when I have funds

 

[Felix40]

The 6x Gen2 turrets click nicely, and the zero stops work well -- but they're still quite tall (and the windage catches on stuff way too easily).

I cut the windage turrets off and put a cap on both of mine. Cut a slot in the actual post so I can turn it with a coin. Found a black chair leg cap or something that fit over it perfectly. Maybe I’m retarded but it’s nice to carry the rifles without a turret digging into my wrist.

 

[dreamingWest]

As the power range keeps growing, I get more skeptical. I trust the designers/reviewers here though.

I really wish Nightforce would just update the SHV line at this point. It's so close.

 

[Formidilosus]

What does this mean? Unchanged from what? Better than what?

The base erector design/optical system was the same as several other well known, purpose made scopes that are reliable and durable that hold zero from drops and impacts. It has been interesting to learn as this has went on. LOW knows exactly what scopes hold zero long term and hold zero from drops- because they were designed specifically to do so. And… which features reduce the reliability and durability.

 

[gtriple]

The base erector design/optical system was the same as several other well known, purpose made scopes that are reliable and durable that hold zero from drops and impacts. It has been interesting to learn as this has went on. LOW knows exactly what scopes hold zero long term and hold zero from drops- because they were designed specifically to do so. And… which features reduce the reliability and durability.

As an engineer, I'd love to read an article about this...

 

[omicron1792]

I won’t say much until the test scopes come in, which we are being told will be by the end of this year. Should have been this month or next, but an improvement to the optical design was offered and we chose to use it.

Again, not having any yet- everything about it supposed to be better. LOW states that reliability is absolutely unchanged- if anything, better. The glass is supposed to be better. Slightly shorter, slightly lighter. The power range is improved- with no negative effects to FOV, eye relief, or eyebox.

What’s your eye relief and eye box goals? Those two seem to be what I care about most in a scope

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

As an engineer, I'd love to read an article about this...

Doubt LOW is gonna share and out the decisions that certain brands are making to "appeal" to their customers while quietly yanking out the durability rug under them...

 

[coues craze]

As the power range keeps growing, I get more skeptical. I trust the designers/reviewers here though.

I really wish Nightforce would just update the SHV line at this point. It's so close.

This. I’ve got several first gen (parallax adj and no illum) 3-10 shv’s that are excellent scopes. Only way I’d like them better is with an exposed low profile elevation turret with zero stop.

 

[dreamingWest]

This. I’ve got several first gen (parallax adj and no illum) 3-10 shv’s that are excellent scopes. Only way I’d like them better is with an exposed low profile elevation turret with zero stop.

Yep. In Mils. I don't even need FFP.

 

[Formidilosus]

What’s your eye relief and eye box goals? Those two seem to be what I care about most in a scope

In simple terms- slightly less eye relief than the RS1.2 with better eyebox.

 

[atmat]

I can’t wait to spend money on one of these. Just seeing all the activity on this page makes me excited.

 

[Formidilosus]

I can’t wait to spend money on one of these. Just seeing all the activity on this page makes me excited.

Just don’t sell your other scopes until you actually have this one in hand….

 

[atmat]

Just don’t sell your other scopes until you actually have this one in hand….

Just don’t let me ask for spacers to be installed in this…

I’ll never sell my 6x’s. I lend them out quite a bit and end up losing them to the folks I lend to (who obviously reimburse me).

 

[TreeDog]

Every SWFA I've had has had mushy turrets too. Not a fan. I like a really audible and noticeable turret click.

Pop the O ring off the turret stem. My 3-9 was mushier than mashed potatoes, and now it has better clicks than my Credo. Some risk of water, but seems like it would take a lot to cause an issue. Like submersed.

 

[Kyguy]

Doubt LOW is gonna share and out the decisions that certain brands are making to "appeal" to their customers while quietly yanking out the durability rug under them...

I'm sure there are confidentiality agreements out the wazoo with every company that they make scopes for.

 

[Kyguy]

The base erector design/optical system was the same as several other well known, purpose made scopes that are reliable and durable that hold zero from drops and impacts. It has been interesting to learn as this has went on. LOW knows exactly what scopes hold zero long term and hold zero from drops- because they were designed specifically to do so. And… which features reduce the reliability and durability.

I would guess that side focus is one of those features that reduce reliability and durability, because it's moving the erector tube itself (from what I understand) to correct parallax instead of moving the front lense like an adjustable front objective does, or similarly, the rear adjustment like on the SWFA. I may be completely wrong on this though. I've love to know for sure.

 

[grfox92]

Every SWFA I've had has had mushy turrets too. Not a fan. I like a really audible and noticeable turret click.

I agree. My 10x is stiff and mushy as shit. But I also have never counted clicks and just look at my indicator marks when dialing so kind of a non issue for me, especially on a $300 scope that's bomb proof.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk