AR Sponsor
Posted: 2/17/2013 12:38:40 PM EDT
|
For shooting .308 at ranges from not under 100 to not over 300 yards. Target shooting from fixed position.
I want to stay with a fixed power scope only. After much deliberation, I was all set to pull the trigger on a SWFA SS HD 10x42 Tactical 30mm Riflescope. The price is at the top of the range I want to spend, and the reviews are good. But a recent conversation with another shooter has me reconsidering a little more power in the SFWA line. When I mentioned I would also use the rifle/scope combination to check the accuracy of my load development, he suggested going to a higher power in the SWFA line. I concede that more magnification wouldn't hurt, but 16x might have just too small an exit pupil, and mirage could be more of a problem on hot days. . . So, this has me looking at the SWFA SS 12x42 Tactical Riflescope as the possible "sweet spot" for magnification and clarity. But I just want to be sure I'm not be missing something in my deliberations, so - - QUESTION What is the deciding factor? The improved glass of the SWFA SS HD 10x42 OR the higher magnification of the SWFA SS 12x42? |
|
Quoted:
Either one would really be fine, if you feel like 12x would help a bit more than go that route. 10x should be plenty for shooting groups at 100. How much did SWFA improve the glass recently TeeRex? Would much difference does one see on the 'old' 10x vs. the 10x HD in various circumstances? i.e. mirage, cloudy days, dusk? That would help with the choice. |
|
Aim small miss small, I just squired another SWFA for my 6.5 Grendel that I'll be shooting 1000 yards with. It's a fixed 10 power, and will go to 1000 no problems. I also have the 16x on my .308 SPS tactical bolt gun, and DPMS .308 that all go 1000 yards. At that range the 16x is just right but the 10x isn't under scoped. You wan the least magnification that you can get away with, because again aim small miss small. For reference I also have a 20x SWFA on my .338 lapua. The rule of thumb is 1x for every 100 yards. 16x is more than plenty if you're only going out 300 yards. The 10x would be ideal, IMO.
Fwiw, the SWFA HD glass is no different than the standard glass. No better or worse to me, so I save my money, there. |
| I have the fixed 10x and I love it. I shoot steel all the time at 300 with it. I also loved my 16x but for some reason when I focused it was a little distorted. So I sold it for the 10x. I have not tried the 12x or the scopes with the HD glass. My friend had the same problem with his 16x also. |
|
The HD glass is a noticable improvement over the standard glass, which I didnt like much at 300y and 9x(3-9 SS). I spent some time shooting 1000y with an swfa 5-20 on 12x today. The 1-4x HD I owned was also very crisp at 440y.
12x is a sweet spot for magnification, but a clear 10x is a better choice, imho. |
|
After the comment a coupe of posts earlier:
Fwiw, the SWFA HD glass is no different than the standard glass. No better or worse to me, so I save my money, there.
That didn't seem to track, so started to do some searching on HD glass. While there is no one agreed upon definition, in spotting scopes and some camera lenses it usually denotes fluoride crystals in the glass. It's supposed to give you better color, contrast, clarity, lowers chromatic aberration/distortion and color fringing. Swarovski' sez it's a glass which undergoes a particularly sophisticated and complex machining process is used in the objective lens. As a result, even the very small remnants of chromatic zonal aberrations are prevented and the image is reproduced with even greater color fidelity. Quoted:
The HD glass is a noticeable improvement over the standard glass, which I didn't like much at 300y and 9x(3-9 SS). I spent some time shooting 1000y with an swfa 5-20 on 12x today. The 1-4x HD I owned was also very crisp at 440y. 12x is a sweet spot for magnification, but a clear 10x is a better choice, imho. Chrome308 ; Those improvements I'm reading about in HD glass backs up your >"The HD glass is a noticeable improvement over the standard glass"< So, the >"The 1-4x HD I owned was also very crisp at 440y."< would track with having quality internals and glass has more to do with being successful at distance then magnification. I'm thinking that as important as magnification is - probably more important - is clarity. The quality of the optics in the SWFA HD tube would matter more than the additional 2x of the standard SWFA 12x42. More comments welcome from anyone. I'm probably pulling the trigger on a scope no later than this Wed. |
|
I understand how glass works, and how it's made, and the processes they use to make it. It still doesn't change my opinion on SWFA glass. A buddy has an HD model, and comparing them side by side with my 16x there was no real change in image clarity, light transmission, or identification of hits on target at distance. No less than 5 shooters, all of varying experience and abilities from new shooter to Mil confirmed the same opinion, "looks about the same to me."
Your results may vary. I would rather save the $700 spent on glass clarity and invest it in training, or ammo. It'll benefit far more than clarity.. |
|
I was trying to make the same decision a few months back on the swfa ss10x42 or 12x42. I called and talked to a guy at swfa and he said the 10x is the sweetspot for those scopes. good glass and good light transmittance.
i went with the 10x and got the model with the side focus and not at the eyepiece. well worth the extra expense. So far very happy with it. |
|
Quoted:
I was trying to make the same decision a few months back on the swfa ss10x42 or 12x42. I called and talked to a guy at swfa and he said the 10x is the sweetspot for those scopes. good glass and good light transmittance. i went with the 10x and got the model with the side focus and not at the eyepiece. well worth the extra expense. So far very happy with it. I called 'the guy' at SWFA on 2/19, he seemed harried, so I did not press my questions. But from the conversation he seemed to be saying the 10x42HD was more about some beefed up internals and edge clarity then more overall brightness. He also implied the 12x42 was the hot seller over both the 10x42 models. Seems that the Sweetspot is more like the 12x42 after talking with him. |
|
Maybe this will help anyone that wants to offer an opinion:
Bump for Wednesday. With some additional information for any commenter. SWFA SS 10x42HD Field of View @ 100yds (ft): 10.5ft Eye Relief (in): 3.75 Overall Length: 344mm / 13.56" Weight (oz): 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------ SWFA SS 12x42 Field of View @ 100m: 3.2m {10.498ft} Eye Relief (in): 3.3 Overall Length: 359mm / 14.133 Weight (oz): 20.8 Here are some through the lens views. Actual Optical Images of the SWFA Line You won't see the 10x42HD, just the classic line. But look closely at the 12.42 brightness and FOV and comment if that works for a tactical rifle. Many Thanks! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was trying to make the same decision a few months back on the swfa ss10x42 or 12x42. I called and talked to a guy at swfa and he said the 10x is the sweetspot for those scopes. good glass and good light transmittance. i went with the 10x and got the model with the side focus and not at the eyepiece. well worth the extra expense. So far very happy with it. I called 'the guy' at SWFA on 2/19, he seemed harried, so I did not press my questions. But from the conversation he seemed to be saying the 10x42HD was more about some beefed up internals and edge clarity then more overall brightness. He also implied the 12x42 was the hot seller over both the 10x42 models. Seems that the Sweetspot is more like the 12x42 after talking with him. haha, we must have talked to different people and that was months ago. i say go with whatever you feel fits the bill. like somebody else said it is really tough to decide which one you want when buying site-unseen. good luck with purchase. i really dont think you can wrong with any of them based on reviews people have of all of them. |
| The SS glass is pretty average, or even expensive for the money. The non-HD glass on the $300 scopes is very similar to say bushnell 3200 series, burris fairfield II. Its kind of became legend (historically good) because it was one of few scopes that would fit in what most people consider to be a "sniper" or tactical scope. The basics that are/were needed: good build quality, repeatablity and accuracy in adjustments, knobs that can be finger adjusted easily (with gloves on), with felt or audible clicks, marks for turret turns/counting, mildot rectical, enough elevation adjustment to allow a 308 rifle with a 100yd zero to reach 1000yds with 168gn match loads. Things have changed, like flatter shooting 155gn loads for 308, use of flatter shooting rounds for that distance, many other makes of scopes. |
|
I would buy one of the Vortex Viper scopes. I have a couple Vipers and they have better glass and turrets than my SS 10X. The SS is an ok scope, but I enjoy target shooting with more magnification. The turrets on the SS are kind of mushy and they don't have the tactile feedback of the Viper turrets. I recently purchased this model on sale for $450 http://www.midwayusa.com/product/183567/vortex-viper-hs-tactical-rifle-scope-30mm-tube-5-15x-44mm-side-focus-1-10-mil-adjustments-mil-dot-reticle-matte?cm_cat=Cart&cm_pla=ProductDesc I also have the PST 2.5-10X and a 6.5-20 viper. All of them are better than the SS and IMO worth the extra money. ETA: if I was on a tight budget I would look at one of these two scopes and use the $30 coupon. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/928807/vortex-viper-rifle-scope-30mm-tube-65-20x-44mm-side-focus-mil-dot-reticle-matte http://www.midwayusa.com/product/772363/vortex-viper-rifle-scope-30mm-tube-65-20x-44mm-side-focus-dead-hold-bdc-reticle-matte |
|
Quoted:
I would buy one of the Vortex Viper scopes. I have a couple Vipers and they have better glass and turrets than my SS 10X. The SS is an ok scope, but I enjoy target shooting with more magnification. The turrets on the SS are kind of mushy and they don't have the tactile feedback of the Viper turrets. Thanks, but . . . The 2nd sentence of my OP might have been easy to miss; "I want to stay with a fixed power scope only" so I put it in bold. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I would buy one of the Vortex Viper scopes. I have a couple Vipers and they have better glass and turrets than my SS 10X. The SS is an ok scope, but I enjoy target shooting with more magnification. The turrets on the SS are kind of mushy and they don't have the tactile feedback of the Viper turrets. Thanks, but . . . The 2nd sentence of my OP might have been easy to miss; "I want to stay with a fixed power scope only" so I put it in bold. You can stay with a fixed power all you want, but a variable is better. I would choose the Viper over the SS even if I glued the variable knob in place so I couldn't adjust the magnification. Both the turrets and glass are better. |
AR Sponsor