I have a SS 6 x 42 and 10 x 42 scope, which seem to be good scopes for price. The glass is clear and the eyebox is reasonable. I like these scopes because they have a reputation of being very rugged and durable, which is an important quality to me. Probably a bit more important than having better glass but a less durable package.

How is the 3-15 x 42 scope? The big benefit for my use would be having the 3x setting, not the high end magnification. Personally, I like the fixed 6x scope a lot, but for closer range and a large field of view, the 3x magnification would be a big plus.  Any thoughts appreciated.

I have one. So far so good, but I really have only ran a few hundred rounds through the rifle.

I know you asked about the 3-15, but I had the 3-9 and it was fantastic. Very robust, good tactile clicks, and great glass.

At $300 the fixed magnification scopes are excellent for the price. At $700, the 3-15 leaves a lot to be desired. Glass quality does not stack up for a $700 scope. Turrets are very mushy (which is forgiveable at $300), and the reticle isn't great.

For that price, I'd look at the Weaver tactical line or spend a little more for a used Vortex PST/Burris XTRII.

Honestly, I would rather have the 3-9HD over the 3-15. Totally different scopes made in different plants. The 3-9 is an excellent and simple scope.

For Vets and .mil the FFP Vipers will be cheaper than the Super Snipers.



 

I agree the Burris XTR2 is a better option but not the PSTs. The turrets on my SS 3-15 are not mushy at all and the glass is just as good if not better than the PSTs that I had.

Another plus with the SS 3-15 is the HUGE amount of internal travel.

" At $700, the 3-15 leaves a lot to be desired"

Compared to which other $700 scope with:
FFP
Mil-Mil with reticle comparable to their Mil-Quad.
Side Focus/Parallax.

The Weaver 30mm tactical 3-15 is usually around $750 now but rarely in stock, is FFP, but only has the standard Mil-Dot reticle.
The 30mm PST 4-16 is close, but can't ever find them in stock for $700 or less, don't like the reticle as much, is SFP, and reviews I read tend to sound like the glass is not as good, but those are subjective opinions.
To jump up to the FFP, mil-mil PST is $200 more.
Neither of those have as much range adjustment or as close a min focus distance if you care about that.

I've been comparing with every sale I've seen for months and still haven't found anything close.  I currently have a SS 20x42 used for load development and for $300 the glass is awesome.  If the 3-15 glass quality is only as good with all the other features mentioned in a variable magnification scope I don't see the downside for $700.  When I have the budget I'm still choosing the SS unless something changes or I get new info.

I paid $530 for my Weaver Tactical 3-15 FFP and I like the turrets much better than any Super Sniper I've used. I've generally experienced better glass in Vipers than Super Snipers, but both are pretty useable.



 

"I paid $530 for my Weaver Tactical 3-15 FFP"

I used to see ads for an older model close to this price with a better reticle than the ones I now find.  I wasn't seriously shopping at the time. For less than $600 I would still consider a similar scope.  The glass has a good rep.

You might price watch it on amazon through camelcamelcamel.  Midway has had them recently but it's been with the MOA turrets IIRC.

The nice thing about the SS 3-15 is that it is relatively light weight and you can mount it low. With the 42mm objective I have had it in my 1.125" NF mount on am AR and it was perfect.

It also has a ton of elevation adjustment and a very close focus distance. I have mine on my LR 22 and I can dial past 350 yards with a 20 moa base.

I also hate the pop up turrets on the Weaver. IMO they suck.

 

I think it compares favorably my MK4 3.5X10. I tried both side by side early in the evening at the same mag. The reticle is pretty heavy at the edges but it makes it more friendly at 3X, I would prefer finer lines myself. The turrets are OK, they still have the three screws to hold it on the post. The controls are all smooth and easy to operate.

I have a 3-15 SWFA and enjoy it. Glass seems good, clicks are positive for me and tracking matches what I see on the reticle.


I'm a beginner when it comes to $500+ scopes but I think this is a good value. I've heard positive opinions about the Weaver SS line also


 

Subb'd for this.

Subscribed.

I'll probably order one in the next week but I'm going to keep an eye on this thread. Anyone know if SWFA has them in stock?

Thanks for all the posts and information so far.

The feedback on the SS 3-9 was helpful, since that is a good zoom range, and overall durability is just as, or more, important to me than a higher magnification or better glass (given a $600 or so budget). I am looking to set this up on an AR in the category of a "designated marksman" field use role, not a bench rifle, and not looking for minimal groups on paper at 500 yards either.

The Vortex 2.5-10 looks like a good option as well. A good feature it has is the capped turrets instead of the exposed target turrets, since for a field rifle at moderate distances with an AR, there is not too much clicking needed.

I asked this question because I'm under the impression that for a given price, the fixed power scope is likely to be more durable, but the recent high quality variables have closed the gap significantly. The 6x SS is a nice scope, and has a great reputation, but that 6x is tough to use at closer ranges in the woods.

I'll add that I live in the north east, and given the terrain around here, even 400 yard shots are not the norm. I used to live in Arizona, where it was flat and dry, and you could see targets at so much further, it was a shock to me. Hardly so in the woods and hills of Pennsylvania. I would say that for my use, 2x per 100 yards is a good balance of being able to resolve targets versus field of view. I like higher magnification at any range when I have a stable rest and a fixed target, but the lower magnification works better in field conditions.

As the 1-6x scopes continue to get better and become more affordable, they would be ideal, although the other scopes have the advantage of the larger objective lens. A 1-6x40 would be nice for me, but then again, everyone has their "ideal" preference.