Swarovski X5.....What are you thoughts on this?

Ksduckhntr said:

How is the durability of the swarovski? I am looking at the z5 for a hunting rifle. What's the difference between the x5 and z5?

Click to expand...

x5 is if you want true dialing. I cant imagine the x5 not being as tough as a NF but they are too nice to bang on rocks. The gearing is made with measurements in microns. pretty hi tech stuff those germans came up with for this scope. As mentioned if they had made one in mils it would get alot more press with the steel bangers.

Tesoro said:

x5 is if you want true dialing. I cant imagine the x5 not being as tough as a NF but they are too nice to bang on rocks. The gearing is made with measurements in microns. pretty hi tech stuff those germans came up with for this scope. As mentioned if they had made one in mils it would get alot more press with the steel bangers.

Click to expand...

I had a NF ATACR that I sold for the X5, and I think that the X5's glass is significantly better.

I bought Swar's Ballistic Turret marked with the yards all the way up to 1,500 so I don't understand why some guys need it in mils?

Ingwe said:

I had a NF ATACR that I sold for the X5, and I think that the X5's glass is significantly better.

I bought Swar's Ballistic Turret marked with the yards all the way up to 1,500 so I don't understand why some guys need it in mils?

Click to expand...

If you hunt in the same conditions, same altitude, same temps, same loads, etc., a ballistic turret is great for hunting out to 600-700 yards. But change your conditions, hunting location, loads, bullets, powder, speed, etc., and your ballistic turret is now off past 800 yards enough to cause a miss. Or worse, a wounded animal you might not find. A turret marked to 1500 is a misleading tool that will be wrong as conditions change.

MILs, or MOA turrets have the ability to show an exact number. So when your shooting solution changes, so does your dialing.

MILs or MOA is just a preference.

lancetkenyon said:

If you hunt in the same conditions, same altitude, same temps, same loads, etc., a ballistic turret is great for hunting out to 600-700 yards. But change your conditions, hunting location, loads, bullets, powder, speed, etc., and your ballistic turret is now off past 800 yards enough to cause a miss. Or worse, a wounded animal you might not find. A turret marked to 1500 is a misleading tool that will be wrong as conditions change.

MILs, or MOA turrets have the ability to show an exact number. So when your shooting solution changes, so does your dialing.

MILs or MOA is just a preference.

Click to expand...

Did you ever shoot a Ballistics turret past 1,000 yards? I haven't but it did at 800 and mine was pretty spot on, or actually as good as I am. I am using it on a sporter sized M700 in 7mmRemMag

I don't plan on shooting a big game animal past 500-600 anyway. Probably even that is pushing it.

So for me I prefer the turret knob

Ingwe said:

Am I missing something? Is this scope popular or is it a dud sales wise.

Just thinking...

Click to expand...

How much do they cost? That's one reason. Less popular Brand with the Sniper's Hide crowd would be another. Meaning it lacks the NF stamp of approval.

I have two Z5 Swaros for their light weight. I think they're 1/2 the price of the x5. They've been reliable and fully functionally sufficient for 3yrs and 5yrs now. Perfect fit for my backpack rifles, provided they continue to hold up to recoil on my muzzle braked rifles.

I have three X5s... all 5-25.....love them.

phorwath said:

How much do they cost? That's one reason. Less popular Brand with the Sniper's Hide crowd would be another. Meaning it lacks the NF stamp of approval.

I have two Z5 Swaros for their light weight. I think they're 1/2 the price of the x5. They've been reliable and fully functionally sufficient for 3yrs and 5yrs now. Perfect fit for my backpack rifles, provided they continue to hold up to recoil on my muzzle braked rifles.

Click to expand...

Yea I guess that the NF logo makes people feel like they are finally an "operator" lol!

All joking aside, I did own a NF and sold it after looking through the X5...again that's just me.

I do also, feel a little bit better shelling out all that money for a scope that has Austrian glassover NF"s Japanese glass

Again that's what makes me happy...we all have our likes

I have set behind an X5 a good bit...never set the turret but heard it was a chore. Nice scope—I like capped Windage, and started wil Mil/mil long ago— so takes them off the plate for me.

I recently went out on a limb and got the X5i 5-25 for my 338 rum being built. while I don't have a lot of other high end optics, it's hands down far clearer than anything I've handled. The next best thing I've got is a VX-6 3-18, and the swaro is very noticeably better. They are a lot of money, but for what you're getting, they're hard to beat. I can't imagine I'll be selling it for any reason, it's a keeper.

Distanse wise up to 2000 yards max. My 3.5-15 does well enough at 1600yrds but at times think more mag would be better. Its more of a want thsn need im thinking. Never shot with a scope with more than 15x. As far as the 5-25 not tracking, this may apply to that, spoke with swaro about adjusting after zeroing and they stated you shouldnt bottom it out or it puts too much pressure on spring and can have an effect on not tracking proper and even the recoil disrups acuracy of scope if had done so and to adjust so a few moa are left. That gave me an errie thought about the design. Would you say that is a acurate statement of the x5 and its design? Thanks.

I can say that with all my scopes, I never want to be all the way to the end stop bottomed out. That puts you right on the edge and also out of optical center by a fair mount. I'd say that most of my scope are probably 5-10MOA from true bottom, and that leaves me with more than enough "UP" to get as far as I'll ever shoot.

Same here. Every time I look through it I am happy that I spent the money

I am not sure if magnification is all its made out to be. Might be but I can say that with my x5 swaros on 18x I can identify a wine sized bottle set on a porch rail at 2475 yds on a crisp clear winter day. 1.41 miles according to google earth. Thats the only way I can measure the distance from my house then across a valley to another one.

I have never read about a 'scope resolution lineup' test! Might be an interesting one to do. Magnification dosent mean much as what detail one can discern at a set distance.


So better/best glass could mean you need less magnification and get more fov to boot.

I have a question regarding the Swarovski X5 and X5i 5-25x56 scopes. I had recently purchased and received a X5 5-25x56 rifle scope. While mounting the scope to my rifle I noticed that the crosshairs and the top of the elevation turret were not level with each other. Upon further investigation I noticed that the crosshairs were level with the flat surface on the bottom of the scope, but the elevation turret was not level with either the crosshairs or the flat surface on the bottom of the scope. I did some research online which suggested that if the elevation turret is not level with the crosshairs, it can have a bad effect when dialing the scope for long range shots. Not satisfied with the scope and thinking it was a fault from factory, I sent it back to the dealer to receive another scope. After a week I was sent another scope which was the X5i 5-25x56. Straight away, while mounting the new X5i to my rifle I noticed it had the exact same problem as the previous X5 that I had sent back to the dealer, which was the elevation turret was not level with the bottom of the scope or the crosshairs. So my question is, is this just the way these scopes are designed and put together? Or have I received two different scopes with the same fault from factory?