Hi all. I'm looking for a FFP scope in the $1000 range to sit on top of my 5R. I will be shooting out to 600 yards for now. I am considering the SS HD 5-20x50 and the PST 6-24x50. Both scopes receive fantastic reviews on this website and elsewhere pertaining to build quality. My main concern is clarity. Eventually, I will have the action trued and rebarreled for 260 and I don't want to regret my choice in glass. I am not opposed to buying a used scope, but I am unaware if SWFA has a transferable warranty like Vortex. Any and all gripes about either would be appreciated.
Rifle Scopes SWFA vs. Vortex
- Thread starter B.A.C.
- Start date
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
SWFA has a great warranty too...
I personally like the SWFA better, but it's probably just personal preference, people gripe about the SWFA turrets being too tight, and the Vortex turrets being too loose. I experienced the Vortex turrets moving on me in the field, so I'd rather deal with tight.
SWFA has a great warranty too...
I personally like the SWFA better, but it's probably just personal preference, people gripe about the SWFA turrets being too tight, and the Vortex turrets being too loose. I experienced the Vortex turrets moving on me in the field, so I'd rather deal with tight.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I think a better comparison of the SWFA 5x20 would be the Vortex razor not viper. In my opinion SS 5x20 is far superior. But if you want full reticle illum and jenky zero stops go viper.
Vipers truly are nice but If its one or the other than swfa 5x20 everytime for me.
I think a better comparison of the SWFA 5x20 would be the Vortex razor not viper. In my opinion SS 5x20 is far superior. But if you want full reticle illum and jenky zero stops go viper.
Vipers truly are nice but If its one or the other than swfa 5x20 everytime for me.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
If you are sure you want a mil mil scope then the SWFA is a good choice.
If you want a moa scope then Vortex is it! They are both good scopes.
If you are sure you want a mil mil scope then the SWFA is a good choice.
If you want a moa scope then Vortex is it! They are both good scopes.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I've owned both, the SWFA is much better.
If however a Razor was only a couple hundred more than the SWFA, i'd pick it up because of their reticles.... but given that it is a lot more than a couple hundred, you can't go wrong with the SWFA.
I've owned both, the SWFA is much better.
If however a Razor was only a couple hundred more than the SWFA, i'd pick it up because of their reticles.... but given that it is a lot more than a couple hundred, you can't go wrong with the SWFA.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
Have you considered the Bushnell 3.5-21x50 DMR?
Have you considered the Bushnell 3.5-21x50 DMR?
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
SWFA definitely in mil/mil. I love mine and their price is cheap for the features you get-especially a great reticle.
SWFA definitely in mil/mil. I love mine and their price is cheap for the features you get-especially a great reticle.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
With all of the "shining reviews of the SWFA" I'm assuming they fixed the issue with the turret hash marks not lining up with the clicks???
Had both....Still have my Vortex - Like the reticle on the Vortex better also
With all of the "shining reviews of the SWFA" I'm assuming they fixed the issue with the turret hash marks not lining up with the clicks???
Had both....Still have my Vortex - Like the reticle on the Vortex better also
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
Yes I've looked at the Bushnell. It too seems to have quite the following, but I'm a little skeptical of the reticle. Are there any people who prefer it to the quad reticle? I'm really dependent upon comments from those with experience. I have the ability to look through the Viper, but there are no stores relatively close which would allow me the opportunity to fondle the Bushnell and especially not the SWFA.
Yes I've looked at the Bushnell. It too seems to have quite the following, but I'm a little skeptical of the reticle. Are there any people who prefer it to the quad reticle? I'm really dependent upon comments from those with experience. I have the ability to look through the Viper, but there are no stores relatively close which would allow me the opportunity to fondle the Bushnell and especially not the SWFA.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ddavis</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The SWFA seems to be a bit brighter in low light. </div></div> +1 This has been my experience as well
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ddavis</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The SWFA seems to be a bit brighter in low light. </div></div> +1 This has been my experience as well
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
On another note, why the big price difference between the DMR and the ERS line? Many people are attracted to the DMR, but I don't think its feasible that I would ever use the 3.5x on a FFP. I'm also having a hard time finding the amount of internal adjustments for the Bushnell.
On another note, why the big price difference between the DMR and the ERS line? Many people are attracted to the DMR, but I don't think its feasible that I would ever use the 3.5x on a FFP. I'm also having a hard time finding the amount of internal adjustments for the Bushnell.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Togeneral99</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With all of the "shining reviews of the SWFA" I'm assuming they fixed the issue with the turret hash marks not lining up with the clicks???
</div></div>
Surely you're not serious.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Togeneral99</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With all of the "shining reviews of the SWFA" I'm assuming they fixed the issue with the turret hash marks not lining up with the clicks???
</div></div>
Surely you're not serious.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
The problem with questions like these is you don't know what you don't know. People can talk about glass clarity all day, but <span style="font-style: italic">your</span> eye doesn't know the difference yet. This question, as I've come to learn, is akin to "I drive a Ford Fiesta. What's better for an upgrade, an Aston Martin or a Porsche?" Both will suit you fine, go with the one that has features you like.
I went from a Nikon Prostaff to a Vortex Viper PST. It was as much a jump for me as I've read going from anything to a Schmidt & Bender can be. Fortunately I don't have the coin to make that jump, so I don't know how good they are and can be happy with what I have.
The problem with questions like these is you don't know what you don't know. People can talk about glass clarity all day, but <span style="font-style: italic">your</span> eye doesn't know the difference yet. This question, as I've come to learn, is akin to "I drive a Ford Fiesta. What's better for an upgrade, an Aston Martin or a Porsche?" Both will suit you fine, go with the one that has features you like.
I went from a Nikon Prostaff to a Vortex Viper PST. It was as much a jump for me as I've read going from anything to a Schmidt & Bender can be. Fortunately I don't have the coin to make that jump, so I don't know how good they are and can be happy with what I have.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
If you're having $1000 budget then the SS 5-20 HD can usually be had in the optics for sale forum here. I've been seeing them for 1100ish there frequently.
Illuminated probably a hun or so more. Vortex I don't think so.
If you're having $1000 budget then the SS 5-20 HD can usually be had in the optics for sale forum here. I've been seeing them for 1100ish there frequently.
Illuminated probably a hun or so more. Vortex I don't think so.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
SWFA has a test drive program. At least they used to. If you talk real nice to Chris Farris, he may send you one to look at. Also, don't forget to check out samplelist.com. That is where SWFA puts their used, and demo inventory. I've bought scopes off of there, and couldn't tell they'd ever been out of the box. Both scopes were labeled "demo b, stating there may be cosmetic wear, but I could find none. Scopes looked brand new.
As to the original question, the SWFA is a very nice scope for the money. If it had a zero stop, I'd probably have to have one. Zero stop is a must have on my current build, so I'm going the Nightforce route.... At twice the money though.
SWFA has a test drive program. At least they used to. If you talk real nice to Chris Farris, he may send you one to look at. Also, don't forget to check out samplelist.com. That is where SWFA puts their used, and demo inventory. I've bought scopes off of there, and couldn't tell they'd ever been out of the box. Both scopes were labeled "demo b, stating there may be cosmetic wear, but I could find none. Scopes looked brand new.
As to the original question, the SWFA is a very nice scope for the money. If it had a zero stop, I'd probably have to have one. Zero stop is a must have on my current build, so I'm going the Nightforce route.... At twice the money though.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I have the both, and love them both. But if I was to get another, I think I'd go SS just to keep my collection consistent.
I have the both, and love them both. But if I was to get another, I think I'd go SS just to keep my collection consistent.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
Another vote for the SWFA hands down. The best scope on the market for what it is in that price range. I love my 5-20 and am wanting another one soon. And I cant wait for the 1-6 to come. It will be sweet too I would imagine.
Another vote for the SWFA hands down. The best scope on the market for what it is in that price range. I love my 5-20 and am wanting another one soon. And I cant wait for the 1-6 to come. It will be sweet too I would imagine.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I currently have a SS 5-20 on my OBR. The adjustments and glass are very nice. Was able to take a low light shot with it that I found impressive. However, it's not mine, I borrowedit from a friend. The scope performs as advertised but I won't buy one. The eye box is way to picky for my taste and difficult to get on target fast for my needs. It's a nice scope and built like a tank.
I currently have a SS 5-20 on my OBR. The adjustments and glass are very nice. Was able to take a low light shot with it that I found impressive. However, it's not mine, I borrowedit from a friend. The scope performs as advertised but I won't buy one. The eye box is way to picky for my taste and difficult to get on target fast for my needs. It's a nice scope and built like a tank.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I got rid of my PST to get into another SSHD, and I believe the comparison would be most appropriate if the SSHD were against the Razor. The only reason I'll sell my SSHD's is to get into a Razor or another top-tier optic. Both of my SS's are damn near perfect in terms of tracking, clarity (at least for my eyes) and reliability. In fact, "upgrading" to a Razor would only be because I like that 2B reticle. SWFA, if you're listening...ehem...cough...
I got rid of my PST to get into another SSHD, and I believe the comparison would be most appropriate if the SSHD were against the Razor. The only reason I'll sell my SSHD's is to get into a Razor or another top-tier optic. Both of my SS's are damn near perfect in terms of tracking, clarity (at least for my eyes) and reliability. In fact, "upgrading" to a Razor would only be because I like that 2B reticle. SWFA, if you're listening...ehem...cough...
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AutoEssentials</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you considered the Bushnell 3.5-21x50 DMR? </div></div>
I like the look of these for the price any mor info would be great!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AutoEssentials</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Have you considered the Bushnell 3.5-21x50 DMR? </div></div>
I like the look of these for the price any mor info would be great!
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Remmy5R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is Chris Farris a member? How would I contact him? </div></div> Easiest to call SWFA, and ask to talk to him. He's the big dog over there. You could PM him on the opticstalk forum too. Chris Farris is his member name over there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Remmy5R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is Chris Farris a member? How would I contact him? </div></div> Easiest to call SWFA, and ask to talk to him. He's the big dog over there. You could PM him on the opticstalk forum too. Chris Farris is his member name over there.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
If you can save a little bit, go with the Razor. Vortex has an absolute bulletproof warranty. If you need a scope right now and only have a tad over $1K, go with the Bushnell 3-21 HDMR.
If you can save a little bit, go with the Razor. Vortex has an absolute bulletproof warranty. If you need a scope right now and only have a tad over $1K, go with the Bushnell 3-21 HDMR.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
It sounds like the general consensus is that the SWFA is better than the PST but inferior to the Razor. Is it worth my time to save some more money and get the Razor? My main thing is that I don't want to have any regrets down the road when I do the rebarrel for a 260. I live and die by the principle of "buy once cry once." I would much rather justify the price than apologize for something less. Being that I'm in college, I don't get to shoot as often as I would like. It's much more important to me to have top notch equipment than to have a usable sub-par setup. I noticed in the recent "what the pros use" thread that not one contestant was using SWFA.
It sounds like the general consensus is that the SWFA is better than the PST but inferior to the Razor. Is it worth my time to save some more money and get the Razor? My main thing is that I don't want to have any regrets down the road when I do the rebarrel for a 260. I live and die by the principle of "buy once cry once." I would much rather justify the price than apologize for something less. Being that I'm in college, I don't get to shoot as often as I would like. It's much more important to me to have top notch equipment than to have a usable sub-par setup. I noticed in the recent "what the pros use" thread that not one contestant was using SWFA.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I haven't owned the swfa, but i have owned a couple millet trs-1s and a nightforce and a weaver tactical prior to just receiving my vortex pst 4-16ffp. I gotta say, i wish i still had my millet, because i am pretty sure the pst glass is no better. Rather disappointed in the glass quality to be honest. All the other features that vortex boasts live up to the hype, but the glass - major shortfall.
I haven't owned the swfa, but i have owned a couple millet trs-1s and a nightforce and a weaver tactical prior to just receiving my vortex pst 4-16ffp. I gotta say, i wish i still had my millet, because i am pretty sure the pst glass is no better. Rather disappointed in the glass quality to be honest. All the other features that vortex boasts live up to the hype, but the glass - major shortfall.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
I must admit, Ive heard that about the 4-16s on more than one occasion. I think the 6-24 glass is pretty nice though, and I own a Razor/spend a lot of time behind Nightforce gear (my buddy has a bit of a collection).
I must admit, Ive heard that about the 4-16s on more than one occasion. I think the 6-24 glass is pretty nice though, and I own a Razor/spend a lot of time behind Nightforce gear (my buddy has a bit of a collection).
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
viper VS SS
ss+ more adjustment..
ss+ 10 mil turrets
ss+ glass
V+ zero stop
V+ crosshair
V+ no bs warrenty
v+ no slip control surfaces.
used razor VS SS
i see no + for the SS vs a razor...
viper VS SS
ss+ more adjustment..
ss+ 10 mil turrets
ss+ glass
V+ zero stop
V+ crosshair
V+ no bs warrenty
v+ no slip control surfaces.
used razor VS SS
i see no + for the SS vs a razor...
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Remmy5R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I noticed in the recent "what the pros use" thread that not one contestant was using SWFA. </div></div>
The 'pros' aren't college kids on college kid budgets.
If a grand is about the max you can reasonably afford a super sniper 5-20 or vortex pst 6-24 is the best you're going to get so you're on the right track with that.
Look at the reticules, knobs, options, try them out in real life if possible and go from there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Remmy5R</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I noticed in the recent "what the pros use" thread that not one contestant was using SWFA. </div></div>
The 'pros' aren't college kids on college kid budgets.
If a grand is about the max you can reasonably afford a super sniper 5-20 or vortex pst 6-24 is the best you're going to get so you're on the right track with that.
Look at the reticules, knobs, options, try them out in real life if possible and go from there.
Re: SWFA vs. Vortex
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bodywerks</div><div class="ubbcode-body">vortex pst 4-16ffp. I gotta say, i wish i still had my millet, because i am pretty sure the pst glass is no better.</div></div>
This is why I ended up not buying a 4-16. The 6-24 glass is much better. Like night and day difference.
The 4-16 had a ton of chromatic aberration, colors were very flat, just looked plain shitty. The 6-24 had none of those problems. Only explanation I can think of is the design of the tube, the 4-16 seemed a little shorter than the 6-24. Maybe the distance between the lenses?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bodywerks</div><div class="ubbcode-body">vortex pst 4-16ffp. I gotta say, i wish i still had my millet, because i am pretty sure the pst glass is no better.</div></div>
This is why I ended up not buying a 4-16. The 6-24 glass is much better. Like night and day difference.
The 4-16 had a ton of chromatic aberration, colors were very flat, just looked plain shitty. The 6-24 had none of those problems. Only explanation I can think of is the design of the tube, the 4-16 seemed a little shorter than the 6-24. Maybe the distance between the lenses?
I realize this is old, but if you're not in a hurry, Brownell's usually does 10% off for Black Friday, plus you can sign up for ebates and use that to get a Razor for $1755 + shipping assuming they do the Black Gun Friday again. I know it's a ways off, but if you're saving anyway .....
or you can always buy a used one from sample list or here
Also, consider the fact you're asking these questions (not condescending, but mirroring my realization about 2 weeks ago). If I'm asking these questions, I prob can't pick these details out from one to the other. I just got my 2.5-10 FFP PST a couple weeks ago. That is the best scope I have to date. I can tell you that the quality is pretty darn good. I realize it's not in S&B territory, but I'll never have one side by side to look to make me realize that either.
I'm in the same boat for my .338 Lapua build. For me, the main deciding factor on an SS HD vs Viper PST is the travel. If the PST will get you there, I go that way realizing I'm giving up some optically, but for the difference I can get set up to re-load. As far as I'm concerned optically, there's only so much that matters. If one scope takes me from the 6 down to a 7 on the comp. chart, that's just not worth an extra $550 to me. Once I get to the point where I can see functionally well, I'm OK missing a minor detail. YMMV
I'm also not sold on the mil-quad reticle. That's why I'm going to "test drive" a 16x fixed power so I can see how it works for me.
Last edited:
I have the swfa.. If used the PST.. The swfa has better glass and more adjustments...
The parallax and zoom controls BLOW... They are stiff as shit and the knobs have zero grip...
I would look at the HDMR...
The parallax and zoom controls BLOW... They are stiff as shit and the knobs have zero grip...
I would look at the HDMR...
I owned both, and although I love Vortex as a company, there is no comparison between the SSHD and the PST's. IMHO, the SS's are more appropriately compared against the Razors (which I also own). For the dough, the SS's just have outstanding glass. Some folks either love or hate the mil-quad reticle, but once you learn the little nuances of it, it is actually very valuable.
The SS is a very close competitor with the Razor, it really outshines the PST. The only feature that the Razor has on the SS is its zero-stop. But since mine is mounted on a rifle that only takes 7.6 mils to 1000yds, that didn't matter.
I am an optics junkie and have the SS and the Razor and my wife has the 4-16. I am over 45 and perhaps do not have the best eyes but as for glass clarity I rate them:
SS
Razor (actually can go back and fourth here)
4-16
All three hold zero well, have excellent tactile adjustments and I and my wife have used all three in competition and for work (both LEO) but if I had to pick one it would be the SS. I love my Razor, and it does have a few more features, I just like the SS a tad more. The only time I am disappointed with the 4-16 is when I bring one of the other two to the range and go from the Razor or SS to the 4-16. IF you don't have access to both at the same time I doubt you would be let down with the 4-16, it is a very good scope and half what the others go for.
Sully
SS
Razor (actually can go back and fourth here)
4-16
All three hold zero well, have excellent tactile adjustments and I and my wife have used all three in competition and for work (both LEO) but if I had to pick one it would be the SS. I love my Razor, and it does have a few more features, I just like the SS a tad more. The only time I am disappointed with the 4-16 is when I bring one of the other two to the range and go from the Razor or SS to the 4-16. IF you don't have access to both at the same time I doubt you would be let down with the 4-16, it is a very good scope and half what the others go for.
Sully
If your just going to be shooting paper I'd go with a fixed power scope myself. I've noticed I'm at 15x on my Viper even when I'm shooting at 50yds. The more mag. the better. I've been thinking hard about running fixed SWFA 20x scopes on my next two builds. They'll be shot between 100-800yds.
Just to chime back in on this thread, which I never thought I'd do, I'm highly considering the PST. I spoke with lazy21 who quoted me an awesome price. My reason being that I will only be shooting out to 600 yards with my 5R and the Vortex will do just fine. I'm sure my rifle is capable of further distances, but I don't have frequent access to that kind of acreage. My idea is that I don't want to invest too much into this setup. After I get through school (10-12 years from now) I'm going to BALL HARD. I will ditch the 5R, purchase a GAP-10 in 308, and for really stretching out I will get a TRG in 300WM. Both guns of which will wear some top shelf glass.
M6Z, not to sound critical but are you serious, "more mag the better"? If so I strongly disagree. In fact I find 5x too much at 50 yards let alone 20! In fact I usually never go over 10 unless I am checking my shot fall after shooting a string. I find more mag can actually lead to worse groups not better.
5R, nothing wrong with the PST, and like I said above if I don't bring the Viper or SS or my Premier to the range I don't even notice it is not the same level of scope. It should serve you fine.
Sully
5R, nothing wrong with the PST, and like I said above if I don't bring the Viper or SS or my Premier to the range I don't even notice it is not the same level of scope. It should serve you fine.
Sully
I guess I'll be the odd ball here. I like my Vortex Viper 4-16. Paid under a $1000 for the FFP model and it does everything I need it to on my m14.
Im glad I read this thread, I was highly considering the 4-16 for my 308 5R, looks like Ill spend the extra coin for the 6-24 or the SS. That's weird that there is that much difference in glass of the same manufacturer and line but just different power, even with the same objective diameter.
Similar threads
