Swaro Z3 vs Z5

[MitchParker]

Hey all,
I'm wanting a new rifle for my 257 Weatherby. Curious if the Z5 is worth the extra coin over the Z3? I would like to shoot the rifle at game up to 400yds, and would like to regularly shoot at that range or even out to 600.

The Z3 is the 3.5-12x50
The Z5 is the 3.5-18x44

Regardless, I'm wanting to the BT with the 4w reticle.

Just don't know if the 600 bucks. I've got the money now for the Z3, but don't mind saving if the enhancements are justified.

 

[Rich Coyle]

Maybe my experience will help you. I don't have a spotting scope but had the z5 5-25X52. Once I found some antlers with the 8X42 binoculars but could not tell if it was legal. By turning the z5 up to 25X and really looking at the antlers for a few minutes I was able to determine it was legal or not.

If you are not locked in because of weight, you might give the Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 a look. They are only four ounces heavier. I purchased four z5 5-25X52 and three Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 and three 6500 2 1/-16X. All four Swarovskis are gone. All three of the 2 1/2-16X are gone and one of the 4 1/2-30X50. One of the Bushnells is definitely better than any of the z5s and matches them in low light performance. Another of the Bushnells matches during good light but two of the z5s are better than it in low light.

 

[MitchParker]

I'm lost...are you saying some of the Z5s were better, while some weren't as good? I'm sure the Bushnell scopes are awesome, but I'm wanting a Swaro. Would kick myself in the rear if I didn't get one. My real question is...is the extra money for a Z5 worth it over the Z3 for the range I expect to hunt and target shoot at?

 

[Rich Coyle]

I'm lost...are you saying some of the Z5s were better, while some weren't as good? I'm sure the Bushnell scopes are awesome, but I'm wanting a Swaro. Would kick myself in the rear if I didn't get one. My real question is...is the extra money for a Z5 worth it over the Z3 for the range I expect to hunt and target shoot at?

Here's what I know. Two of the Swarovskis were not as good as the Bushnells. Period. Two z5's were not as good as the 6500 in low light. One of the Bushnells is better than any of the z5's. Both the 6500's are better than the z5's during the day. I would not spend the money on Swarovski. When I get any optics I compare them side by side with a few of my other optics on line charts. It separates the great from the very good. I have never had the opportunity to play with a S&B.

 

[Pdvdh]

I think I'd buy the Z3 if 600 yds is the longest you'll shoot, and most normally 400 yds or less.

I have the Z5 3.5-18x44mm and like it for longer range hunting. You might PM bruce_ventura and ask him what he thinks. He's very familiar with Swarovski rifle scopes.

 

[Snowrun]

I have 3 Z5s(2-3.5-18 & 1-5-25) and am very happy with all of them. I almost bought a Z3 for my LR308 but went with the Z5 because of the parallax adjustment that the Z3 lacks. Z3 has parallax fixed at 100 meters(109yds) Probably couldn't go wrong with either, this was just my preference for longer range precision.

 

[Laelkhunter]

If you are going with the BT that means you will be doing a lot of cranking on the turret to make the shots at longer range. The main difference between the Z3 and Z5 (other than the price), is the Z3 uses one leaf spring in the erector assembly whereas the Z5 uses 4 coiled springs in the erector. The coil springs mean that repeatability should be better when making adjustments with the BT (in my opinion only).
The glass is supposed to be pretty much equal in the Z3 and the Z5. I personally went with the extra $$ for the Z5, and think it is head and shoulders above the Zeiss 4.5 X 14 that it replaced.

 

[Marine24]

I have the Z3 3-10X42 and the Z5 3.5-18x44. The Z3 is sitting on an Annie 1517, but did sit on my Weatherby Eurosport in 257 Wby. Both have the BRH reticle and have exceptional glass, but edge still goes to the Z5 in contrast and low light performance. Significance is not great though and believe you'll be happy either way. You'll be able to see fine well past legal shooting hours but the reticle is thin.

I'm looking at a scope for a Weatherby Ultralight in 338-06 that I have coming in. For me, I am going with the Z5. I don't need that high of a top end for hunting purposes, but comes in handy at the range and my aging eyes can always use it.

 

[WRO]

I'm lost...are you saying some of the Z5s were better, while some weren't as good? I'm sure the Bushnell scopes are awesome, but I'm wanting a Swaro. Would kick myself in the rear if I didn't get one. My real question is...is the extra money for a Z5 worth it over the Z3 for the range I expect to hunt and target shoot at?

Yes, the Z5 is worth if.. Better turrets and parallax adjustment.

 

[GoosePilot]

Yes, the Z5 is worth if.. Better turrets and parallax adjustment.

I have both and the z5 is hands down better at gathering light and clarity at max power

 

[huntaxhunta]

I purchased four z5 5-25X52. The first one was better than my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 during low light. The next two were equal to but no better than than the 6500 and the next z5 was much better than the 6500 in low light only. My criteria was on what magnification setting could I see the fork antlers 131 yards away well enough to shoot at the buck growing them.

I will include a small comparison of the z5 with a Bushnell 4200 4-16X40. This morning, December 13, 2011, there is fog but not so much I couldn't see the woods beyond the pump house. So of course I laid out a couple sand bags on the porch edge. (The temperature is a chilly 25 degrees.) I put the Bushnell 4200 and the Swarovski z5 on them. I set them on their lowest settings: Bushnell on 4X and Swarovski on 5X. I could not make out the antlers which are about 131 yards away with either. I could see the antlers but could not make out the forks on either side. I turned them both up to 6X. With the Bushnell I could distinguish the forks but I could not with the Swarovski.

Dispite the 6500 starting at 4 1/2X and the z5 starting at 5X the field of view is larger in the z5. The field of view in both of my 4200's is larger than the z5.

According to Swarovski customer service the z5 and the z6 use the same lenses. I never tried the z6 because they weighed too much for my criterial of less than 18 ounces. I didn't consider the 3 1/2-18X because it was about the same weight as the 5-25X.

 

[WRO]

I purchased four z5 5-25X52. The first one was better than my Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 during low light. The next two were equal to but no better than than the 6500 and the next z5 was much better than the 6500 in low light only. My criteria was on what magnification setting could I see the fork antlers 131 yards away well enough to shoot at the buck growing them.

I will include a small comparison of the z5 with a Bushnell 4200 4-16X40. This morning, December 13, 2011, there is fog but not so much I couldn't see the woods beyond the pump house. So of course I laid out a couple sand bags on the porch edge. (The temperature is a chilly 25 degrees.) I put the Bushnell 4200 and the Swarovski z5 on them. I set them on their lowest settings: Bushnell on 4X and Swarovski on 5X. I could not make out the antlers which are about 131 yards away with either. I could see the antlers but could not make out the forks on either side. I turned them both up to 6X. With the Bushnell I could distinguish the forks but I could not with the Swarovski.

Dispite the 6500 starting at 4 1/2X and the z5 starting at 5X the field of view is larger in the z5. The field of view in both of my 4200's is larger than the z5.

According to Swarovski customer service the z5 and the z6 use the same lenses. I never tried the z6 because they weighed too much for my criterial of less than 18 ounces. I didn't consider the 3 1/2-18X because it was about the same weight as the 5-25X.

New Moniker?

The z6 and z5 have different glass in them, the z6's are in most part HD.

 

[werth338]

The Z6 has HD glass on scopes with magnification over 15x. I have a Z3 and Z5. Both are great but if you can afford it, the Z5 is the way to go.

 

[scottishkat]

Mitch I think the biggest question in the Z3-Z5 discussion is do you want paralax? If you are going to do more target shooting than hunting go with the Z5 you will be able to focus fine tune better at 600 see targets better etc.

If you are going to hunt more and that to me is what the 257WBY is all about the Z3 is plenty. Zero at 250 and your on hair to 300 and -9 at 400 with 100 grain bullets.

IMO you don't need a Z5 to do that. If you want to shoot accurately at 600 that's a different story. Also my opinion but the 257 WBY is not the rifle I would want to use at 600. The little bullets get shoved around too much in the wind for target hunting at that range.

They're both really nice scopes so its hard to go wrong and my belief is that Swarovski only cares about 2 things your satisfaction with their product and the hunt-ability of it.

Good luck and shoot straight