R700 scope and mounting selection

[jmf_tracy]

my advice is to buy a used variable power scope.
i would look for a used:
Bushnell Elite Tactical 3.5-21x50
Vortex
Burris XTR II

[tuncas]

So it seems everyone can vouch for swfa. But it's pretty spread about variable vs. the fixed power.

I understand that the fixed mag scope is stronger, lighter, and clearer due to less lenses. Also because there is less inside, it has more adjustment for elevation. These are the things that are making me kind of lean toward the fixed.

I don't think I'll ever want to shoot anything closer than 50 yards with this gun so I'm not super worried about not having low enough magnification, only that at far ranges I might want to zoom in more than 10x


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JMP]

The SWFA fixed 10x doesn't have good glass; it has good glass and reliable tracking FOR $299. If your budget is strickly $700, I might give that SWFA 3-15x a try or look for a used scope. One thing to note is that with better scopes, lower powers will have the same effective magnification as you'll see things more clearly and you have the benefit of a larger field of view. Unfortunately, there are no free lunches.

[ar15barrels]

I don't think I'll ever want to shoot anything closer than 50 yards with this gun so I'm not super worried about not having low enough magnification, only that at far ranges I might want to zoom in more than 10x

The lower magnification is actually more important for when you want to quickly aquire targets.
It's also useful for when you are shooting unsupported.
5x-8x is about perfect for standing/sitting.
Contrary to popular belief, more magnification does not really make you any more precise or more accurate if you have something big to aim at.



More magnification only helps when you have a VERY small target to aim at.

[Rickmcu]

The SWFA fixed 10x doesn't have good glass; it has good glass and reliable tracking FOR $299. If your budget is strickly $700, I might give that SWFA 3-15x a try or look for a used scope. One thing to note is that with better scopes, lower powers will have the same effective magnification as you'll see things more clearly and you have the benefit of a larger field of view. Unfortunately, there are no free lunches.

The glass is absolutely good enough in the 10x. Kinda contradicted yourself there.

[JMP]

The glass is absolutely good enough in the 10x. Kinda contradicted yourself there.

Nope, at the price point, the glass will be sacrificed. I just think with a $700 budget, the SWFA 3-15x with FFP warrants the extra price.

Go look through a Schmidt or USO 10x fixed, then a SWFA 10x fixed. It's night and day. When selecting a scope, one must take into account the user's objective and budget and generally make compromises.

There is also no one scope that is going to work universally well on all rifles. I think SWFA does a good job for the money. I'd use that over a Chinese POS any day.

[JMP]

Contrary to popular belief, more magnification does not really make you any more precise or more accurate if you have something big to aim at.

More magnification only helps when you have a VERY small target to aim at.

I will add to that. This only true with FFP scopes IF you have a reticle designed for high precision or extreme long distance. The regular crosshairs can completely block out a very small target with high magnification on an FFP scope.

[weaverftw]

I was torn between the SWFA 10x fixed and the Weaver Grand Slam Tactical variable power, butI chose the SWFA. I took it out for the first time yesterday and I'm veryhappy with mychoice, some of the guys at the range with much more expensive scopes looked through it and were impressed with the clarity for the price. I cranked the HELL out of the turrets and they tracked true.

Keep in mind that mounting hardware isn't cheap so you may want to figure that into your $700 budget. I went with a Seekins Precision 20moa base and Seekins low rings ($200 total), they give me plenty of height on my Rem 700 LTR even with Butler Creek caps. You don't want to cheap out on the base/rings or you will be wondering if it's your scope when your zero is walking all over the place.

I had to be realistic... I have a lot of practice/training until I can hit targets reliably past even 600 yards, let alone 1k. The 10x is plenty for that and will give me a long time to figure out if I really want to spend north of $1k on a better, variable power scope in the future.

[Justintoxicated]

Swfa scope of your choice
Tps rings
Tps base

Best bang for your buck new

Of the two I would go with SWFA as well.

Whats wrong with an aluminum base? I haven't heard of any problems with an aluminum base if you use aluminum scope rings.

I don't think you would want steel rings and aluminum base if you can avoid this though.

I used seekins base and rings on mine.

R700 Milspec by Glamisduner, on Flickr

Magnification and glass are only part of the equation, having a scope that will hold zero, track, and stay true at any magnification is just as important if not more so. An easy to use reticle is also important for measuring adjustments and dialing, or just using a hold over.

After trying the G2 reticle I am a believer. But you won't get this in your price range. You should still be able to make some measurements with mil dots though. I certainly prefer the vertical hashes (lines) over dots when possible.


For SWFA 10x I think I would prefer this model.

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-10x42M-Tactical-Riflescope-P53713.aspx

or if more magnification is important and side focus is not, then this one:

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-12x42-Tactical-Riflescope-P53714.aspx

Reticle information:

http://www.opticstalk.com/uploads/298/10XReticle.jpg

[tuncas]

Nice rifle. The more I learn, the more I realize that 5r mil spec is a good deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Justintoxicated]

Nice rifle. The more I learn, the more I realize that 5r mil spec is a good deal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks, I'm still new to the game as well, but it didn't take but a few trips to figure out how everything works, it sucked buying the rifle and then having to wait so long to save for glass. Actually I took the scope off another rifle because I couldn't wait anymore. Read a a lot of information before deciding on the setup, but that only goes so far I suppose.

I have read both good and bad things about TPS rings and base, so I opted for seekins, but I would imagine TPS is fine if you get a good set, and would do the job as well. If on a real tight budget go TPS over seekins, but the savings wasn't all that much in the end. If you have more money go badger, etc.

A non Variable scope will be fine to learn on and 10x or even 12x is pretty good do it all magnification for a bolt gun. I love to zoom in to 30x on the XRS, but then the eye relief starts to suck and I really don't shoot much better than at around 15x at 300 yards. (I think it is helping me as a newb to time my heartbeat since you can really see the rifle shaking like crazy at 30x).


I haven't shot to 1000 yards yet, only 800 something. 10x is going to be difficult at that range, but hey my buddy was able to hit the gong with his garand, so it is doable. I wouldn't worry about 1000 yards until you get some use out of the thing and then you will be able to decide what you need to change first to make that easier.

[Rickmcu]

Nope, at the price point, the glass will be sacrificed. I just think with a $700 budget, the SWFA 3-15x with FFP warrants the extra price.

Go look through a Schmidt or USO 10x fixed, then a SWFA 10x fixed. It's night and day. When selecting a scope, one must take into account the user's objective and budget and generally make compromises.

There is also no one scope that is going to work universally well on all rifles. I think SWFA does a good job for the money. I'd use that over a Chinese POS any day.

Wait... Just wait a second. You mean an SB is gunna be a better scope than a SWFA 10x? thanks for enlightening me lol

[tuncas]

Is it not a good assumption that between the swfa 10x fixed and the swfa variable, that they probably have the same quality glass, and hence a lower price and better clarity through the 10x due to less lenses and parts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JMP]

Is it not a good assumption that between the swfa 10x fixed and the swfa variable, that they probably have the same quality glass, and hence a lower price and better clarity through the 10x due to less lenses and parts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe the glass will be the same. SWFA uses two types of glass, its regular and its HD. The HD is actually also pretty darn good for the price, on par with some of the mid-market scopes. The question is whether you will lose some clarity or function with more moving parts with the variable; I doubt it. I haven't seen the 3-15, but I am familiar with the HD 5-20x50--it's a good scope. The negatives are that the adjustment knobs (primarily parallax) require a bit too much tension to turn, and I think their reticle is a bit too thick for 20x.

[ExtremeX]

Correct... its the same glass, at least that's what SWFA has told me in the past, so I would also give an optical edge to the fixed 10. That said, I haven't used the 3-15, but I do have a classic 10x and a buddy with the 10x HD.

The 5-20x50 HD mentioned above is a huge step up from the classic line... I know you have a strict budget mentioned above, but if you plan on spending $700 for a new 3-15x, I would also keep an eye out on the used market for that 5-20x50.

One listed here on calguns...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1016936

I have one, IMO, WELL worth the extra $200 for a used 5-20, to the point where its a no brainer. I do agree with what JMP says about the stiff parallax knob, but at that price, you cant have it all.

Unless you are doing a serious side by side, I can't tell a difference between the Vortex Gen I glass. If anything, my eye actually agrees with the SWFA optic a little more. Seems to provide a little bump in edge sharpness and color saturation which gives it a nice POP.