Rifle Scopes bushnell elite 10x40 vs. swfa ss 10x42
- Thread starter hanovi
- Start date
Re: bushnell elite 10x40 vs. swfa ss 10x42
SWFA, I am not a fan of fixed paralax and the Bushnell is fixed, the SS has either a sided focus or rear focus (where a standard magnification ring would be). The SS is just a better value IMO
SWFA, I am not a fan of fixed paralax and the Bushnell is fixed, the SS has either a sided focus or rear focus (where a standard magnification ring would be). The SS is just a better value IMO
Re: bushnell elite 10x40 vs. swfa ss 10x42
I have the Elite 10x40 and also have a SS 6x42 (not the 10x).
The Elite is pretty good for the $200 sale price at Midway. It's also relatively small and light, and has a decent range of elevation adjustment along with turrets that are good for the price. The biggest drawback, which is significant, is fixed focus and parallax. The minimum distance to get a decent focus on the target is 40 or so yards - even 25 isn't really in focus. I wouldn't recommend the Elite for anyone regularly shooting at a target closer than 100 yards. Most .22 rimfire shooting is at no more than that distance and often only 25 to 50 yards, which is not a good distance to use that scope.
The SS I have (again, 6x) is the rear focus model and focuses down to something in the range of 7-8 yards (though the shortest distance marking on the focus ring is 10m, aka 11 yards). This makes it FAR more useful for use with a .22 or anything else you'll be shooting at shorter distances. And you'll have no parallax at any distance of 10m or more if you adjust the focus ring to the distance you're using.
The main downside to the SS is its size and weight, 14" long and 21+ ounces for the 6x (I think the 10x42 is actually lighter). The minor downside is poor low light performance. Both of these pale in comparison to the benefit, for a .22, of having adjustable parallax for the distances you're actually shooting.
So for me, I would get some flavor of the SWFA SS for your .22, though I would consider the 6x model along with the 10x. I wouldn't go higher than 10x unless all your shooting is going to be slow, at a bench, in noontime sunlight.
I have the Elite 10x40 and also have a SS 6x42 (not the 10x).
The Elite is pretty good for the $200 sale price at Midway. It's also relatively small and light, and has a decent range of elevation adjustment along with turrets that are good for the price. The biggest drawback, which is significant, is fixed focus and parallax. The minimum distance to get a decent focus on the target is 40 or so yards - even 25 isn't really in focus. I wouldn't recommend the Elite for anyone regularly shooting at a target closer than 100 yards. Most .22 rimfire shooting is at no more than that distance and often only 25 to 50 yards, which is not a good distance to use that scope.
The SS I have (again, 6x) is the rear focus model and focuses down to something in the range of 7-8 yards (though the shortest distance marking on the focus ring is 10m, aka 11 yards). This makes it FAR more useful for use with a .22 or anything else you'll be shooting at shorter distances. And you'll have no parallax at any distance of 10m or more if you adjust the focus ring to the distance you're using.
The main downside to the SS is its size and weight, 14" long and 21+ ounces for the 6x (I think the 10x42 is actually lighter). The minor downside is poor low light performance. Both of these pale in comparison to the benefit, for a .22, of having adjustable parallax for the distances you're actually shooting.
So for me, I would get some flavor of the SWFA SS for your .22, though I would consider the 6x model along with the 10x. I wouldn't go higher than 10x unless all your shooting is going to be slow, at a bench, in noontime sunlight.
Re: bushnell elite 10x40 vs. swfa ss 10x42
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Captain Kirk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SWFA, I am not a fan of fixed paralax and the Bushnell is fixed, the SS has either a sided focus or rear focus (where a standard magnification ring would be). The SS is just a better value IMO </div></div>
^What he said^
I did have the Bushnell you speak of. Sold it... Much happier with my swfa ss 16x mq
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Captain Kirk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SWFA, I am not a fan of fixed paralax and the Bushnell is fixed, the SS has either a sided focus or rear focus (where a standard magnification ring would be). The SS is just a better value IMO </div></div>
^What he said^
I did have the Bushnell you speak of. Sold it... Much happier with my swfa ss 16x mq
Re: bushnell elite 10x40 vs. swfa ss 10x42
I have not handled that exact scope, . SWFA is a much better scope compared to the other BSA's I have used...
I have not handled that exact scope, . SWFA is a much better scope compared to the other BSA's I have used...
Re: bushnell elite 10x40 vs. swfa ss 10x42
I've had both scopes and there is no comparison. The SWFA is twice the scope. It has amazing class for it's price range.
I've had both scopes and there is no comparison. The SWFA is twice the scope. It has amazing class for it's price range.
Similar threads
