Pete Lincoln Swaro query?

[Guest]

Hi Pete
What is your opinion of the Swarovski 6-24 target? What price are they where you are/
I checked here yesterday and $2100 AUD or about 15-1600 USD! Seem like great optics and I want more power for long range rabbits than the 4-16.

 

[preacherman]

...I use swarovski binos, spotters and occasionally a lower power range scope, but for the higher power varmint scopes, I prefer Leupold or Nightforce...and they're cheaper than the $1600 plus swaros..


these scopes are pretty much the same price here... maybe a little more,

 

[Pete Lincoln]

The PV-S 6-24x50 is a nice scope, but it has the paralax adjustment on the objective, has the reticle in the 2nd focal plain.
The Zeiss 6-24x56 would be a better option with a side mounted paralax adjustment.
To be honest i would probably go with an NXS if i wanted more than 16x and needed a 30mm tube, otherwise a Zeis Conquest might be an option. I have found i can't use any more than 16x for shooting any way, so i'll stick with my PMII 4-16x.
Zeiss and Swarovski are quality products, but the 2nd focal plain puts me right off.
I'm pretty much set inmy S&B ways.
Pete

 

[Varmint Hunter]

Pete,

Pardon my ignorance, I'm an optic dummy.

What is the differece between the reticle in the 1st or 2nd plane?

90% of my scopes are Leupold. Also have Nightforge and a few old Redfields. What plane are their reticles in?

 

[Guest]

Thanks Pete
I like the Swaro optic quality but the front focus adds to the mounting height unnecessarily I agree.
I don't think the NF has the same level of clarity or colour rendition as the Swaro or Zeiss. Unfamiliar with S&B but most seem to think these are better again.
I understand your comments re 2nd focal plane which the Zeiss is also.
I have posted here asking for feedback from anyone re change of point of impact at different power settings but no comment as yet.
I require the higher power to engage small targets such as rabbits out to 8/900 yds in NZ - mirage is not really that much of a problem there and I am currently using 8.5-25LRT Leupold and I wish to upgrade.
APB

 

[RedAllison]

(First time poster, have been surfin this site for a month or so and finally decided to take the plunge!)

apb I have a Swarovski 6x24x50 PVS that I have had atop my Sako TRG-S Lazzeroni Warbird since I got the rifle in '99. I absolutely LOVE the scope and haven't had the first minutes trouble from it. The only negative I suppose is that I wish I had Swaries on all my other rifles now!

3 weeks ago I carried it too Wyoming for a mule deer/antelope hunt and it performed flawlessly. Our guide actually asked to use it for a spotting scope on several occasions (with the round removed of course!) because it performed better than his 20 year old and TRUSTED spotting scope.

I have the standard plex reticle in it but now wish to have the newer "TDS Plex" reticle installed. I called Swarovski USA about a reticle change and they said 4-6 weeks and that the work must be performed back in Austria. The cost was quoted at $250. I am glad I waited, not only did I not want to risk a mess up and be without my scope for my trip to WY, but I am glad I waited for the TDS Plex vs the standard TDS which doesnt have a heavy post on the top wire like the plex version now features.

With regards too the new Zeiss 6x24x56. That scope is AWESOME! It wasn't offered when I got my Swarie. Were I to start over today with my extreme range gun, I would get the big Zeiss with the added benefit of a lighted mil-dot reticle. That IMO is THE setup for smacking em long in low light.

Remember also I have had a KDF muzzlebrake on my rifle since new. With a Warbird putting that much force on the scope, if it were a piece of crap it would've already failed me!
RA

 

[Guest]

Hi Red
Welcome to LRH!
There is a lot of experience here as you no doubt will have gleaned in the last month.
Most everyone has something useful to contribute and I learn more here than am able to contribute that is for sure!
Thanks for your input.
Just curious - have you ever checked your zero with a giver load at say 200/300 yards between 6X and 24X?
There is a basic premise that 2nd focal plane scopes are not as good in maintaining this zero compared to a 1st focal plane.
I have been looking for realistic checks on this theory and wonder whether the high end 2nd plane reticle scopes are reliable in this aspect.
The next range trip I am going to apply this test to my 8.5-25 LRT Leupold.
I believe I will carry it out at 200yds to give a better than comparo than at 100yds.
APB

 

[sakofan]

VH,
the difference between the first or front focal plane reticle and a second or rear focal plane reticle is...

Front focal plane reticle when the power is increased or decreased seems to "grow or shrink". It doesnt actually.
FFP reticles allow the shooter with a mil dot or ranging reticle to range at any power level. Not just one power setting like a rear focal plane. Most Euro scopes are FFP, as well as US Optics here in the US.

Rear focal plane reticles are restricted to true ranging at a predetermined factory setting. Usually the max power settings, but not always.
The most obvious way to tell a RFP reticle scope, is that the reticle stays the same size at any given power setting. Your Leupold, NF, Redfield scopes are RFP.
They are cheaper to make as well.

This is the short version to reticle placement, it's early so I may have missed somethings..sakofan..

 

[brian b]

I have two pair of Swarovski binos (10x42's & 15x56's) nephew has there spotter and they are absolutely awesome first rate,with that said there rifle scopes are over priced junk I worked on two guns last year that my customer could not get to shoot to his satisfaction he dropped them in my lap and said do what ever you have to do to make them shoot sub .5moa ,on both guns I found exactly the same problem. You can crank the
elevation dial up for a long shot then crank it back down to your origional zero, not once on either gun did it return to zero,they were both swarovski's. I changed both to leupold's 4.5x14 did minimal load developement and both shot sub .5moa.
If you dont like leupold that is fine go to Nightforce,S&B,Zeiss but Swarovski is not the answer for a rifle scope.IMHO
B

 

[RedAllison]

apb I cant say that I have had any problems of the sort you are talking about. But to be honest I havent shot the gun on the range other than at 100 and 400 yds (+2.5" @ 100, -3.5" @ 400 with the 150grn Lazerhead). I have shot many animals in the 150-350 yard range with it (I would say the majority are in the 200-300yard range) and if it wasnt exact I didnt notice any problems.

brianb that is the first time that I have actually seen someone call Swarie riflescopes "junk" and recommend Leupolds over them. I have a VariX II 3x9x40 atop my Savage smokeless muzzleloader, a VariX III 3.5x10x50 atop a 7mag Abolt and a VariX III 4.5x14x50 atop a custom 700 280. They are "good scopes" but I wouldnt personally wouldnt rate them remotely close to performing like my PVS Swarovski. But I suppose we all have our opinions.

I dont move the crosshairs once sighted tho so your experience might be accurate. My scope has the target turrets and fine adjustments but I just dont bother with it. I CAN happily say that I have NEVER had to re-sight are fine tune the adjustment on this scope once it was initially sighted-in. I shot the 130X bullet load from 2000 until last summer (03) and I ALWAYS check the zero each fall before season but I NEVER had to re-adjust the Swarovski. I only moved it slightly when I changed too the 150Lazerhead and it has held since. Including the trip to WY earlier this month.

Thats all the more reason I want the TDS Plex. I like a "set it and forget it" type setup vs a "dial it in" type arrangement. Sittin in a treestand and waitin on mossy horns to popout at dark isnt the time to be dialin and adjustin. I just wanna...

BUST HELL OUTTA SUMPIN,
RA

 

[Varmint Hunter]

Sakofan,

Thanks for the feedback on the focal plane question.

VH

 

[Pete Lincoln]

Well since the difference between 1st n 2nd focal plain has been explained, i like the fact that with the 1st focal plain scopes i can use the reticle on any power setting to range with the reticle, it is no use to me to have to use the scope on 12x to range when the light is so low that i find i can see better on 8x. Also with the 1st focal plain scopes there is absolutely no dangerof a wandering zero when you go up and down through the X's, most good quality 2nd focal plain scopes will track through the magnification ok, that is most shooters and most rifles will not be capable of noticing any deviation, but simply knowing it is possible for the scope to wander the zero does not instil confidence, i have seen examples of the best makes which would shoot a different POA at 6x, at 12x and anywhere in between. That doesn't happen with a 1st focal plain scope.
When it comes to optical quality and reliability we are all to poor to buy a cheap option,like i said before, The after taste of poor quality, or for that matter, unreliability lasts a lot longer than the joy at buying for a bargain price.
Luckily the difference in the price of the S&B and the Zeiss, Swarovski isn't all that much, and here in Europe its cheaper than the NXS due to import duty.
Me i want a scope i can trust my life to, and you owe it to that magnificent game animal to trust its life to it also.
which ever scope you decide on, test the thing, test it test it and test it some more.
Pete

 

[Guest]

Thanks again Pete
just out of curiousity how much is a 6-24x56 Zeiss over there where you are?
APB

 

[sakofan]

Pete summed up my feelings toward a FFP pretty well. Exactly, as a matter of fact.

Shooting known distances, the difference between FFP or RFP reticles becames less of an issue. For me. I'll still take a FFP scope though. I feel they are superior.

For me, a 3-9x40 something hunting scope with a duplex reticle in the RFP serves my purpose. No real need for it to be FFP where and how I hunt, but it's certainly a nice addition...sakofan.....