If the SWFA 3-15x42 was illuminated, I would have 6 of them.

[PaulB84]

Why oh why didn't they illuminate that model. It's literally the perfect scope otherwise.

#endrant

 

[BLJ]

Agree. A half MOA floating dot would go a long way.

 

[Mountain_Life]

Also the lack of zero stop, the long exposed windage turret, mediocre glass quality and lack of numerical ID in the reticle...

I know there's work arounds for some of this. I used to own 3 of these and now I'm just down to 1. I will say that I've never had a gun lose zero with them, but over the last year I've started to look around at other stuff.

 

[ElPollo]

Why oh why didn't they illuminate that model. It's literally the perfect scope otherwise.

#endrant

This is not intended to be critical of what you are saying, but can you tell me what sort of conditions your are needing that illumination for? The SWFA reticle is one of the best designs out there for use in low light. If you can’t make out that reticle, it’s too dark to legally shoot.

I’ve got the 3-15, 6x, and 3-9 and have hunted extensively with them. I’ve never had an issue using them up to the 30 minutes before sunrise or after sunset. In fact, I shot a doe last fall in dense shaded woods with the 6x at about 3 minutes after the start of legal shooting light.

Honestly though, I find most illuminated reticles to be a hindrance than a help. Most illuminate too much, and the bloom makes it harder to see your target. I’ve owned 3 Illuminated scopes and have not felt the need to use the illumination in hunting conditions unless their reticles were too fine to make out. My personal take is that illumination is an extra complication that we aren’t as likely to need as we might think.

 

[flyfisher117]

Also the lack of zero stop, the long exposed windage turret, mediocre glass quality and lack of numerical ID in the reticle...

I know there's work arounds for some of this. I used to own 3 of these and now I'm just down to 1. I will say that I've never had a gun lose zero with them, but over the last year I've started to look around at other stuff.

Gen 2 has entered the chat.

But realistically a budget scope can’t hit every damn feature under the sun. At least not with reliability.

 

[nm.otter]

the long exposed windage turret

Still an issue with the Gen2 variants, unfortunately.

lack of numerical ID in the reticle.

I'm not clear what this is -- numbers next to the subtensions?

 

[Mountain_Life]

Gen 2 has entered the chat.

But realistically a budget scope can’t hit every damn feature under the sun. At least not with reliability.

I agree. I've been intending to order a gen 2.

 

[Mountain_Life]

I'm not clear what this is -- numbers next to the subtensions?

Yes. I really like being able to verify my windage holds during crunch time. Triangles and lines aren't hard to remember while practicing but my brain tends to get pretty fuzzy when I have very limited time to shoot. Numerical references make me feel better.

 

[Quandary]

I have a gen2. The glass is fine, not great not bad. The reticle however is too thick. Add illumination and the Eagleman reticle that is in the Tract Toric HD and you would have a great scope.

 

[Schmo]

Also the lack of zero stop, the long exposed windage turret, mediocre glass quality and lack of numerical ID in the reticle...

Gen 2 has awesome zero stop, windage is long, but they added the capped feature. Glass is good enough. And you don’t need numerical ID in a reticle. And no, the Eagleman reticle is not a good hunting reticle. What else would you like in a reliable, drop-proven scope for $750 that’s made in Japan?

 

[Mountain_Life]

Gen 2 has awesome zero stop, windage is long, but they added the capped feature. Glass is good enough. And you don’t need numerical ID in a reticle. And no, the Eagleman reticle is not a good hunting reticle. What else would you like in a reliable, drop-proven scope for $750 that’s made in Japan?

Not interested in lacing up the gloves. I just merely commented on some other features that I think were lacking from the OG 3-15 SWFA. Not looking to ruffle some Team SWFA feathers here. I've spent a lot of time with them. At one point I had a SWFA on every rifle I owned.

 

[Schmo]

Not interested in lacing up the gloves. I just merely commented on some other features that I think were lacking from the OG 3-15 SWFA. Not looking to ruffle some Team SWFA feathers here. I've spent a lot of time with them. At one point I had a SWFA on every rifle I owned.

Man I wasn’t putting on the gloves either. Just asking, how much do you want from one of the best values on the market?

 

[Mountain_Life]

Ok so here's where I'm at (I haven't tried the gen 2 yet), the glass is "good enough" and I made it work for years. But I've looked through enough scopes of similar or less price that had noticeably better quality in low light. I capped my windages with a rubber cap so that was a non issue. I put plastic washers under the zero stop so that solved that. I drew a little diagram of the reticle on my backup drop chart so I could double check. I wrapped tape around the turret for a BDC.

It just started feeling cobbled together. I kept one so I can go back if needed, but I'm currently dabbling around to see what else is out there.

I picked up an Arken EPL-4 for $313 to play with. So far it's awesome. The zero retention is still TBD. It's riding on my 22 creed that gets hauled around all fall for deer or predators. I'll see how it fares. So far it's held zero....

Kinda waiting on the S2H scope to come out to see what that's all about.

 

[PaulB84]

This is not intended to be critical of what you are saying, but can you tell me what sort of conditions your are needing that illumination for? The SWFA reticle is one of the best designs out there for use in low light. If you can’t make out that reticle, it’s too dark to legally shoot.

I’ve got the 3-15, 6x, and 3-9 and have hunted extensively with them. I’ve never had an issue using them up to the 30 minutes before sunrise or after sunset. In fact, I shot a doe last fall in dense shaded woods with the 6x at about 3 minutes after the start of legal shooting light.

Honestly though, I find most illuminated reticles to be a hindrance than a help. Most illuminate too much, and the bloom makes it harder to see your target. I’ve owned 3 Illuminated scopes and have not felt the need to use the illumination in hunting conditions unless their reticles were too fine to make out. My personal take is that illumination is an extra complication that we aren’t as likely to need as we might think.

No offense taken or intended in my response:

I guess I just disagree with the core tenant of what you're saying. I think the MQ reticle is awesome for daylight target shooting but lacking in exactly the situation you describe. I hunt thick woods where "last shot" is substantially earlier (or later in the AM) than when I'm in a field or something. I would prefer the entire reticle not be lit up, but as a poster above said, a single "firedot" style would be amazing in my opinion.

I will look at it again with new eyes and try your method. Maybe I'm overthinking it and those thick exterior lines are enough to guide the eye to the center even if you can't perfectly make out the reticle per se. I also have the vaunted original fixed 6 and have never seen what all the fuss was about. Maybe I'll give it another shot on a hunting gun. It's just sitting in the safe currently

I have one of the original 1-4x illuminated and it's my absolute favorite hunting scope. At low mag it's basically a red dot. At high mag the subtensions are easy to use for drop when shooting "rainbow rounds" like a 450 Bushmaster, 350 legend, 300 Blackout subs etc

I also have the original 5-20x w illumination and love that one as well

All my Leupolds (gasp) have the firedot as well, and I cut my teeth on aimpoints and RMRs. Maybe I'm just overly used to red dots.

I'll reevaluate my thinking and needs. Thanks

 

[ElPollo]

No offense taken or intended in my response:

I guess I just disagree with the core tenant of what you're saying. I think the MQ reticle is awesome for daylight target shooting but lacking in exactly the situation you describe. I hunt thick woods where "last shot" is substantially earlier (or later in the AM) than when I'm in a field or something. I would prefer the entire reticle not be lit up, but as a poster above said, a single "firedot" style would be amazing in my opinion.

I will look at it again with new eyes and try your method. Maybe I'm overthinking it and those thick exterior lines are enough to guide the eye to the center even if you can't perfectly make out the reticle per se. I also have the vaunted original fixed 6 and have never seen what all the fuss was about. Maybe I'll give it another shot on a hunting gun. It's just sitting in the safe currently

I have one of the original 1-4x illuminated and it's my absolute favorite hunting scope. At low mag it's basically a red dot. At high mag the sun tensions are easy to use for drop when shooting "rainbow rounds" like a 450 Bushmaster, 350 legend, 300 Blackout subs etc

I also have the original 5-20x w illumination and love that one as well

All my Leupolds (gasp) have the firedot as well, and I cut my teeth on aimpoints and RMRs. Maybe I'm just overly used to red dots.

I'll reevaluate my thinking and needs. Thanks

I was not trying to say that all illumination is bad. A tiny subtle dot like the Trijicon Accupoints can be helpful, but the trend is for “daylight bright” and lighting up large portions of the reticle. That results in blooming that makes it harder for me to actually see my target in low light conditions and complex backgrounds. I would rather have the MQ non-illuminated, than an illuminated tree reticle, any day. It also just adds weight and extra stuff to fiddle-fart with. The Accupoints are the best in that regard with their always-on approach and relatively light weight. Would love to see Trijicon up their game on that series with a mil reticles and turrets.

 

[Choupique]

I really like my 3-15 gen 1, easily my favorite scope ever and pickup up for a fair price used. I wish I had 6 of them.

I"m jonesing bad bad for a gen 2. The only issues I have with the gen 1 are the uncapped windage and no zero stop. Can't wait to get me a gen 2.

I disagree with the illuminated reticle. It'd be nice I guess, but the thing is so big and heavy already. An accupoint style pin prick light at the center would be ok I guess but I'm not a fan of bright reticles from the few I've used.

 

[PaulB84]

I was not trying to say that all illumination is bad. A tiny subtle dot like the Trijicon Accupoints can be helpful, but the trend is for “daylight bright” and lighting up large portions of the reticle. That results in blooming that makes it harder for me to actually see my target in low light conditions and complex backgrounds. I would rather have the MQ non-illuminated, than an illuminated tree reticle, any day. It also just adds weight and extra stuff to fiddle-fart with. The Accupoints are the best in that regard with their always-on approach and relatively light weight. Would love to see Trijicon up their game on that series with a mil reticles and turrets.

Same re Accupoints but I think they think they did that with the Tenmile/Credo.

Also this isn't that big a deal but I've heard the Accupoints are wire reticle and the newer lines are etched. But I'm with you. I would love to see an Accupoint with turrets or FFP