Rifle Scopes SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

For the past two weeks I’ve been checking out the newest addition to the SWFA SS line, the 1-4 HD and it is a remarkable device. I’ve owned an original 10X SS for years and have recently purchased two of the SS 3-9X42 scopes and have lots of respect for the SWFA SS line. I have not seen the new SS10X42 HD. When I was offered a “test drive” I expected to see a high quality optic. My expectations were not near high enough for the HD line.

I would like to point out that the opinions stated here are my own. My relationship with SWFA is that of customer. I have never met anyone from SWFA or even talked to them on the phone. I have been vocal on the boards in my support of the SWFA SS product line because I appreciate the quality and value they offer. I was very surprised to receive a PM from Chris Farris offering me a test drive of these scopes. I’m not an optics expert. While I own a spotting scope, range finder, binoculars and a dozen or so scopes I’m just “Joe Shooter”. I’m a slow speed, high drag 59 years old who has been hunting and shooting for 50 years. My only formal weapons training involved an M16 with a triangular hand guard and a 1911A1, so it’s been awhile, (I do the Rifles Only on line training here on the hide and it has improved my long range shooting). However, I have taken dozens of game animals, literally thousands of varmints and put more than my weight in lead down range. Just like a lot of guys reading this.

The reticule designs had lots of input from Hide members and are the most practical I have seen on an optic of this type. (For excellent photos of the reticules please see this post which compares them to a NF and a Short Dot in all lights. Scroll down on this link. http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1737090&page=4)

Illumination
When you read about 1-4X scopes you see the term “daylight visible”. After looking through many different 1-4X scopes I’ve decided not to use this term. Many reticules are in fact daylight visible but are to small or to thin to be “practical”. Aimpoints, EOTechs, and Trijicon TR24s are daylight practical. That is to say that they are bright/bold enough that they find your eye. Your eye does not have to go looking for them. I would place the new Super Snipers in the daylight practical group. The reticules are bright enough, large enough and designed well enough that they are practical in all light conditions. Another factor to consider the design of the reticule if the battery dies. Keep that in mind when viewing the photos in the above thread.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Reticule designs
There are two designs that will be available, a circle with a mildot reticule in the center, (the circle and crosshairs remind me of a wagon wheel so I think of it as a Farris Wheel, my term, not SWFAs) and a “Tee” within a “Tee” with a mildot reticule in the center of it. Both of these designs center your attention towards the center of the scope. They are thick enough to be usable in most light without illumination at 1X. When the magnification is increased the Tee or Circle become larger because of the FFP feature, as they “grow” they move back out of the way as the mildot reticule becomes larger and more useful. To me that is the ingenious part of this design. Because of the FFP feature you, functionally, have two different reticules. I think of this scope as a “two position” variable rather than 1X through 4X variable, I think of it as a 1X OR 4X optic similar to the IOR Pitbull or Elcan Specter DR. At 1X both designs offer a sight picture as dim or bright as you need it when illuminated and heavy and dark enough to grab your eye when not illuminated. I had excellent results with it at ranges under 150 yards shooting and switching between targets as fast as I could move. I did this on a bright day, at dusk and on an overcast day. At 4X all this good close range stuff moves to the outer edge of the center of your vision and the mildot takes center stage. This mildot reticule is perfectly proportioned. It is fully visible and well defined yet thin enough that on 4X, I was able to “quarter” the 4-¼ inch square “head” on a steel silhouette target at 500 yards. Yet on 1X it is small and not a distraction in the “circle” or above the “Tee” yet visible enough to be used for a precision shot if needed. It works much better than a “red dot” for close precision shots at 1X.

Adjustments
Both elevation and windage adjustments are in .2 mil increments with 10 mils per rotation. The adjustments are crisp with just enough resistance. They are not audible to me but my hearing is not the best. The knobs are lower profile target type. Both reticule models will be available in both capped and bare turret styles. The reticule focus is at the ocular lens as is the lock. The illumination brightness adjustment of the production models will have 10 positions and will have an off position between each setting. All of the adjustments have the feel of a well-made precision instrument, which is exactly what they are. The indexing marks on the turrets line up exactly with the line on the barrel of the turret.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Glass
I’m not sure what HD means but I want to see more of it because I see more with it. The resolution on this scope allowed me to shoot sub MOA groups at 500 yards, MOA groups at 700 yards and 80% hits on a 12” circle at 800 yards. How many low power variables are truly practical at these ranges? Most are not because of design or glass quality limitations. Many do not have a reticule that will assist you in estimating these ranges or a means of quickly and accurately adjusting for them.

This is a true 1X, which is more complex and costly to make than a 1 point something X. To some shooters this is not an issue to most it is. Personally, I can use both eyes open with a 2X with my right eye but can’t with my left. Regardless I’m much more comfortable with a true 1X.




Range Time

I wanted to check these optics out with a good DMR rifle and weapons as close to what is being issued to the average troop as I could. To that end I used a LMT MWS, a Colt AR15M4 and a Colt AR15A4. The M4 is a stock ban era Colt with a Colt brake. The A4 is a stock Colt lower with a Colt M16A4 upper. The LMT has an A2 stock other than the stock and buffer assembly it is stock. No fancy triggers, all are stock. I also met a fellow Hide member at a local indoor range and he tried both scopes on his Department issue HK piston driven, full auto. I’ll let him chime in if he likes and give you his impressions. I watched him shoot the combination and it worked. Whoever pays for his weapons training is getting their monies worth.

As this is a dual-purpose scope I tested it as closer range using IPSC targets and further out using steel reduced size IPSC targets. I did not use the LMT up close or the two Colts past 600 yards other than casually.

I did these tests to see how this old shooter using his rifles and these scopes could do. They are not intended to prove anything. I’m simply sharing my experience with those interested in reading about it. I had lots of fun with two full days in the desert, three indoor range sessions and just under 600 rounds of ammo used in test-driving these scopes.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Close Range

I set up targets at 25 yards, 50 yards, 100 yards and 150 yards. Using a CED7000 timer I tested an Aimpoint and both SWFA SS1-4 HD scopes using the M4 carbine. I gave 5 points for A zone hits and three for hits else where on the target. I fired two shots at each target three times using all three scope combinations as fast as I could. Now keep in mind I have never shot three gun or IPSC in my life. When I say as fast as I could I’m talking 26-degree day, old guy, in layers of cloths fast. I fired the 25 and 50-yard targets off hand, the 100-yard kneeling and the 150-yard prone. The possible score is 40. All these scopes were about equally quick to put into use. My best time was 17.6 seconds with the Aimpoint, 18.4 seconds with the Farris wheel SS and 18.8 with the Tee SS. Scores were 29, 34 and 36 with the Aimpoint. The Farris wheel scored 38, 36 and 38 and the Tee scored 40, 38 and 38. Breaking it down, all three optics maxed the 25-yard targets all three times. At 50 yards I dropped one round outside the A zone but still on paper with all three optics during one round and maxed the other two rounds. At 100 yards with the Aimpoint I missed the paper with one round and got an A with the other one on the other targets I scored an 5 and 3 hit on both. With the SS 1-4 HD Farris wheel I maxed all targets at 100 yards. With the SS 1-4 HD Tee at 100 yards I maxed two targets and scored a five and three on the other. At 150 yards I scored; two targets with two 3s and one target with a five and a three with the Aimpoint, all three targets score a five and a three with the Farris wheel and the Tee reticule maxed out with all three targets getting two five point hits. Now I’m sure some of the highly trained, young gun, professionals that frequent this board could max this simple drill in half the time it took me, but I had fun.

This was an interesting exercise. At 50 yards and under all three optics scored the same with the Aimpoint being slightly faster. At 100 and 150 yards I was losing precision with the Aimpoint but still making hits with the SS 1-4 HD. I’ve owned am Aimpoint for about seven years and it has been setting on the M4 I used in testing the whole time. It is fast and simple to use. You have a bright ruby red dot that you superimpose on the target and fire. The SWFA SS 1-4 HD requires a little different style. The circle or the Tee grabs your eye and you center it on the target. In the case of the circle you look through it at the target. Up close this is fast. However when you get out further you have that fine miniature crosshair for fine-tuning your sight picture. In my opinion this is the ingenious aspect of this design. Rather than using the FFP function to make the mildot accurate for ranging at all magnifications it has been used to give you two very functionally different reticules. At 1X you have a small yet bold circle or Tee with a small crosshair in the center. Because of the mildots the crosshair is thicker in appearance. For want of a better word I’ll call this a “ghost” crosshair. As small as it is, it is proportioned well enough to be very practical, this is true with the illumination on or off. This gave it an advantage over the Aimpoint at 100-150 yards for my old eyes. (Look at the excellent photos in the link above to see what I mean). At 4X, because of the FFP feature, everything gets bigger and you have a plain, crisp mildot reticule. This reticule design used with the FFP is what really sets these scopes apart from others. Without it these scopes would be another professional grade, precision 1-4X optic. With this design you have a scope that I’ll take over anything I’ve seen regardless of price.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Medium Range

As I understand it the role of the Designated Marksman Rifle and the Special Purpose Rifle is to provide accurate fire out to 600 yards. That is an over simplification and I’m sure I am not the most knowledgeable on the subject but that is the perspective I worked from. Again this testing does not prove anything. It is just me sharing my experience and thoughts regarding these rifles and scopes.

Shooting, what is as close to standard issue as I own, the M4 and A4 Colts was not too remarkable compared to the LMT MWS. I could consistently make hits on ¾ size steel IPSC targets out to 600 yards and averaged between 1 1/2-2 1/2 moa. I pulled a few and think with upgraded triggers I can do better. I did about as expected which is about as well as I can do with my ACOG, which is a TA50-4, (3X compact with amber crosshair). Accuracy was similar but I was able to adjust the poa much more accurately and quickly for different ranges with the SS. When the SS 1-4 HD is available I’ll be pulling the ACOG off of the A4 and the SWFA SS will go on. I’m not trashing ACOGs, they are tank tough, have great glass, people I respect swear by them and nobody I know swears at them. Trijicon is a great company. However, I like the close range capabilities of the SWFA SS coupled with the mildot reticule and the .2 mil exposed knobs for this rifle. The SWFA SS is just more versatile. Ammo used was Hornady 75 grain practice ammo.

The LMT MWS 7.62 is my pet DMR. As most of you know the British are issuing this rifle in Afghanistan, (with a different barrel) as a DMR. I’ve only owned this rifle for a few months but have managed to put over 1,800 rounds through it using the SWFA SS
3-9X42 HD scope and I truly respect the capabilities of both the rifle and the scope. Using the SWFA SS1-4 HD on this rifle allowed me to push it beyond my expectations.
At five hundred yards I shot the first five rounds at a steel IPSC target. I heard the first two shots hit steel but could not see the bullet splash. I figured I was just catching the edge so I moved my POA to the left, again I heard it but did not see it. On the forth round I noticed the hit on the bottom of the target. I fired the fifth round to verify and used the mildot and .2 mil turret to adjust my POI. I loaded five rounds and fired the first shot into the blue circle. I then quartered the 4-1/4 inch square “head” of the target and put the last four rounds into a 4-1/2 inch group. The first group hitting low concerned me. I thought I had the “come ups” memorized for this load and rifle so I checked my notes. It was colder than the last time I shot but not that much colder. Sure enough it was a shooter headspace problem, I misdialed a bit short. I could see so well at 500 yards that I skipped 600 yards and went to 700 yards. I put the first five rounds into a group measuring 7-1/2 inches switched scopes and zeroed it then shot a slightly larger group with the other scope. At 700 yards I could see the bullets strike but could not see individual marks unless they were out from the group. Next I tried 800 yards. It was late in the day and the light was fading and I had a 5 mph breeze intermittently from 9 o’clock. However, I did manage to get 8 out of ten shots on a 14” in diameter steel target with the Farris wheel reticule and nine of ten shots on a steel IPSC target with the Tee reticule. At this range I could not see my bullet strikes. I could see the steel disc dance under the impact but not the strike. In better light maybe, but the sun was going down. Will I trade my SS 3-9X42 for the SS 1-4 HD? Probably not, I can see the bullet strikes at 800 yards and beyond with the 9X. If I were going in harms way in an urban environment I would prefer the SS1-4 HD. But I’m not, I’m an old fart who likes to shoot steel in the desert so I’ll keep the SS 3-9X42 scopes on my semiauto 7.62 rifles. Ammo used was a M118LR equivalent using a 175 SMK, LC brass, 43.1 grains of RL 15 and a Fed match primer loaded to a COL of 2.81”.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Box testing

In box testing I simply fired a round at a paste on dot in the lower left corner of two IPSC targets stapled one above the other. I dialed up ten mils and used the same POA and fired then dialed in two mils right repeated, dropped ten and repeated then dialed two mils left and repeated. I then went around and did it again. This left me with a sub-moa three shot group in the past on target. I used the reticule to measure the other two shot groups and they were where they should be and within the accuracy limitations of the rifle and ammunition I was using. Even more telling, I used the drop charts I made while using the LMT with the SS 3-9X42 scope when shooting the 800 yard targets with both the SS 1-4 HD scopes. Before shooting I zeroed the scopes at 100 yards and I did not reset the zero markings on the turrets, I just kept notes. I dialed in the settings from the chart I developed and scored first round hits at 800 yards with both SS 1-4 HD scopes. Simply stated three scopes agreed when using the same rifle and ammunition at 800 yards. Speaks pretty well of the quality control at SWFA.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Specs

You will have to wait for most of the spec information. The scopes I test dove are prototypes and it is not my place to speak for SWFA regarding field of view, weight, and eye relief etc. on the final product. I will tell you what I know. Both reticule styles will be available and both will be available with exposed or capped turrets for a total of four models. The illumination adjustment will be have ten levels of illumination with an off position between each setting. The price is tentatively set at $799.00. I don’t know when the production models will be available. I don’t have any “insider” information as I mentioned above the opportunity to test these scopes came out of the blue via PM and I’ve never even spoken to anyone at SWFA.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Misc. Thoughts

The SWFA SS 1-4 HD is not your Grandfathers Super Sniper. I know because I’m a Grandfather and I’ve owned one of the original SS 10X scopes for about eight years. How many times have you read a recommendation that says “great scope for the money”? I now own two of the SWFA 3-9X42 scopes and have over 3000 rounds of ammunition fired using them. I paid $599.00 for one and got the second one for $500.00 off the Sample list. I can’t think of a scope that sells for less than $1,200.00 that I would trade for my SS 3-9X42 scopes, again “great scopes for the money”. We all know you get what you pay for. How does SWFA do it? I have sold very expensive automation systems for over 25 years, I have worked directly for the manufacture and for distributors. From a business viewpoint my thoughts are most scopes are brought to market in the traditional way. You have the manufacture that sells to a distributor who sells to a wholesaler who sells to a retailer who sells to the public. That is five steps and each step has overhead to cover and profits to make. There are also R&D costs and many products are designed by a staff, (remember the saying that a Camel is a horse designed by a committee?). At SWFA you have very optics savvy people who listen to their customers. They know where scopes are made and the quality of the products they make. So a few people or maybe just one person, (I don’t know how they do it), can design a scope and get it made to their specifications. They then sell directly to the public skipping three of the above-mentioned levels of overhead and mark up. That is how I think SWFA consistantly offers the most value at a given price point. Another question is why is SWFA spending their time and money developing scopes for the Tactical market? There are far more hunting scopes sold in America than Tactical scopes. The only clue I have is a comment made by Chris Farris, (who I believe is the owner and/or CEO of SWFA), in a thread right here on the Hide. I am paraphrasing “ I cringe every time we ship a (brand name deleted, but range toy quality Tactical scope) to an APO address”. Could this be corporate patriotism? Could there be a company who cares about offering professional grade Tactical optics at a price that a G.I. can afford? Call me corny, call me naïve, call me old fashioned but I think that is what it is. Yes I know all about introductory pricing and capturing market share. Ask your self how long the original SS 10X has been priced at $299.00. That statement by Mr. Farris is why I’m willing to take the time to write this review. Oh give me an offer to test drive high-end tactical equipment, I’ll do that all day, every day and grin while I do it. But to spend a day organizing my thoughts and writing about it, I think I bruised my left-brain cell and the middle one doesn’t seem quit right either. If my Son were still on the two-way range in Iraq, the “Farris wheel” reticule SS1-4 HD scope with exposed knobs is the scope I would send him. He is a savvy shooter. I started him when he was just tall enough to keep both ends of a rifle out of the dirt at the same time. He would appreciate the design and quality of this scope.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

These are the rifles discussed in the text.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

This is the “close range” target set up. I replaced the blue steel target with another cardboard IPSC target because the small steel target messed up my scoring.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

Shown is the 500-yard target discussed.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

The 700-yard target shot with the “Tee” reticule.


[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

The same 700-yard target after shooting with the “Farris wheel” reticule. It was too cold to repaint the steel targets.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]



800-yard target using the “Tee” reticule.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

800-yard target using the “Farris wheel” reticule.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

 

[Ed-G]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Thank You Sir for an outstanding evaluation!

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Very very cool!!

I think I may need to get one of these, one of these days. I love my USO's but for the amount of 1-4 type shooting I do I can't justify the cost of an SN4 right now.
However, this optic would probably get me shooting more 3gun type stuff.

Great review, thanks so much for the time and effort to share the great info!

 

[stinkyDrunk]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Excellent review. Can't wait to get one of these optics.

 

[Blackhalo]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Thanks for the review, starting to save my pennies now for when this is released.

 

[LAR Dragoon]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

WOW!

 

[showlow50]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

You are killing me I have been saving up for the viper pst and now I have to save up for the SWFA 1-4. I already have a 10 power ss and it is a great scope. Very in depth article thanks for your efforts. When my wife kicks me out of the house can some one rent me a room cheep, just big enough for me and my guns.
.

 

[juniorARshooter]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Sir
great review! Thanks for taking the time to do this and to post it of us.

 

[mauritz45]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

nice review, thank you.--cam

 

[Heltsley]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

I am all in!

Thanks for the info.

 

[lrrifle]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Dundee,

Thanks for letting me share some time with you at the range, and for the kind words. To say that I was impressed with the optics would be an understatement! I'll post my detailed observations in the next day or two, but again, very impressive scopes, and very decent of you to take some time to let me check them out at the range!

More to follow!

(Great review and pics, btw!)

 

[steve m]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

PDD

Thanks for taking the time for an honest evaluation, did they give you any indication of time frame of availability, cost, or where we could see the reticle designs?

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tiger222</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PDD

Thanks for taking the time for an honest evaluation, did they give you any indication of time frame of availability, cost, or where we could see the reticle designs?

</div></div>

JonA posted some excellent photos on an older thread. He is a better photographer than I. Just scroll down on this link http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1738494&page=4

Price is tentatively set at $799.00 as to availability I don't know, wish it did.

 

[Redmanss]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

I really like this evaluation and assessment, especially the differentiation between "daylight visible" and "daylight practical" illumination. That is something I've been looking at in choosing an optic for my carbine(s), and isn't something that is often mentioned by the manufacturers.

Between this power range, positive initial reviews, and reticle options being offered, I will DEFINITELY be getting one of these scopes when they come out if not two of them.

Thanks for a great assessment and explanation.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Redmanss</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I really like this evaluation and assessment, especially the differentiation between "daylight visible" and "daylight practical" illumination. That is something I've been looking at in choosing an optic for my carbine(s), and isn't something that is often mentioned by the manufacturers.

Between this power range, positive initial reviews, and reticule options being offered, I will DEFINITELY be getting one of these scopes when they come out if not two of them.

Thanks for a great assessment and explanation. </div></div>

Thank you for the kind words and your service to our country.
The "holy Grail" of tactical optics design for some time has been for an optic that is fast up close in all lighting and precise at the far edge of a weapons capabilities. Lots of time and money has been spent seeking this functionality. The Aimpoint and EOTech are great close range and they both have magnifiers that can be flipped into place which can extend their range. They are great up close but how precise are they at ranges past 300 yards? How do you dial in? I owned a Trijicon TR24 for a while. Great optic great glass, rugged and very well made. I loved it up close but at longer range that thick post that supports the bright triangle got in the way of hold overs. I own an ACOG and have used several models. Great optic. The hold over marks calibrated for specific ammo is a great innovation. The ACOG is a good example of a good design well executed. I can use the Bindon system with my right eye and it works. However,in my openion I'll take Aimpoint fast over Bindon fast at indoor conflict ranges, no question. At longer range the hold over reticules are good but they don't offer the precision you can get with a mildot coupled with .2 mil elevation adjustments. I've played with the Leupold CQ/T and up close I really like it but at distance it leaves much to be desired. The pattern hear is obvious. Most of the current offering excel at close range and compromise at long range or excel at long range and compromise up close. The SWFA SS 1-4 HD is the only optic I know of that excels and I do mean excels up close and at longer range in daylight or dim conditions. The SS 1-4 HD has a bright/bold Circle or Tee for across the room ranges at 1X. Also at 1X you have a "ghost" cross hair that allows precision shots inside 150 yards. No "red dot" that I'm aware of offers that versatility. At long distance you have a mildot with .2 mil adjustments at your disposal. I made 500 yard "head" shots with it and first round hit on a 14" plate at 800 yards. Will the conventional hold over reticules allow that? That is not a rhetorical question. I've never tried it so I'm not sure. However, most precision long range scopes use mildots and turret adjustments rather than holdover reticules. The exception being Horus. As to daylight visible VS daylight practical. I think pictures are better than words. Top photo is the SS 1-4 HD and the Bottom is the new $4,000.00 Leupold. Redmanss, I think this scope was designed for men like you. Thank you again for your service and stay safe.
[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

 

[Redmanss]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

One thing I was wondering about. Can you speak at all about the battery life in the scope? Just wondering if it eats them for lunch or not.

I'm not looking for something that matches an Aimpoint here, just wondering if a single battery would last a multi-day hunting trip or the like.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Sorry I can't give you a good answer on the battery life. Keep in mind that the scopes I tested were not production models and I know the illumination adjustment knob will be different on the production models. The scopes had batteries in them when I got them but I don't know how long they had been installed. I did change the batteries just before I sent the scopes back because they died. I spent over 20 hours using the scopes and did not remember to turn them off after one range session.

 

[Redmanss]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Thanks. The high level of brightness got me wondering, but that sounds good enough to me. I just wanted to make sure they weren't going to be one of these 5hr wonders.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Not five hour wonders for sure. If you look at the photos in the link I gave, you can see that the reticules work very well in daylight with no illumination, including the "ghost" crosshairs I mentioned.

 

[Jon A]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

I had really abused those batteries--as in leaving them on for days at a time.... Unfortunately I didn't keep a scientific tally of hours it was more just making sure there was nothing wrong with them (a five hour wonder).

I meant to put new ones in before sending them back but I just forgot, sorry about that.

Anyway, fantastic test. Nice range setup. Testing on an actual shot timer against a red dot--excellent job!

 

[bcw1284]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Do we have an ETA on the production version? I'm in the market, as it were...

 

[rc2125]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Called the other day to ask when they'd be available. Sounded like some time in January.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I had really abused those batteries--as in leaving them on for days at a time.... Unfortunately I didn't keep a scientific tally of hours it was more just making sure there was nothing wrong with them (a five hour wonder).

I meant to put new ones in before sending them back but I just forgot, sorry about that.

Anyway, fantastic test. Nice range setup. Testing on an actual shot timer against a red dot--excellent job! </div></div>

No problem on the batteries. I thought about putting new batteries in and letting them expire but decided against it as these are prototypes. I will do it after I buy my own. Were you as impressed with these as I was? There is alot happening with low range Tactical variables right now and I have not seen anything I like better. If Vortex had put the reticule and mil adjustments of the Viper into the 1-4 HD Razor they would have come close but at twice the price. With our military looking for a new Multi Functional Optic we may see more happening in low range variables. If you have not seen it check it out https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&...48&_cview=0

The testing was a hoot. I had two other shooters lined up for that test but between the weather and needing to get the scopes back we could not get together. I know I was slow but at least I was consistently slow with all three optics.

Hope you did not mind my "stealing" some of your photos. Your a better photographer than I am.

Thanks for the kind words. Have a happy holiday.

 

[lrrifle]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

Observations from about 1 hour of (indoor) range time with the two prototypes:
1) Scopes feel solid, appearance is good, magnification adjustments smooth and fluid, turrents feel solid with tactile and (slightly) audible clicks
2) Bobro mount is very sturdy and feels rock solid
3) Reticles are great, illumination seems to be "daylight practical" as PDD suggests
4) Glass seems very clear and i noticed no discoloration or abberation (granted i was on a 25-yd indoor range) Note: For comparison, I have a variety of optics ranging from Nightforce, US Optics, Leupold, IOR, Eotech, Aimpoint, Weaver, Bushnell.
5) In my opinion the feature that sets these scopes apart and makes the infinitly usable is the FFP reticle. This allows rapid target acquisition at CQB distances when on 1x and great reticle detail (for medium to med/long range as evidenced by PDD's 800 yd work) when dialed to the 4x.
6) When running close work at 1x, i found the circle reticle to be the most useful to my eye and experience... and found that my times were almost identical when compared subjectively to my Aimpoint/Eotech drills. (Running an issued HK416D)
7) When dialed to 4x, reticle seems very usable with the hash-marks - i have high expectations for this in the 2-600+yd ranges
8) Summary - these scopes rock!! My favorite is the circle reticle. I think these will be well recieved by the shooting industry, and plan on running one or two on a couple of my sticks! Dundee, thanks again for the opportunity to test these out. I owe you one... Merry Christmas all!

 

[glock24]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lrrifle</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
5) In my opinion the feature that sets these scopes apart and makes the infinitly usable is the FFP reticle. This allows rapid target acquisition at CQB distances when on 1x and great reticle detail (for medium to med/long range as evidenced by PDD's 800 yd work) when dialed to the 4x.
</div></div>

Exactly!

The amazing part is that it is such a difficult concept for optics makers to understand. Congrats to SWFA for <span style="font-style: italic">finally</span> listening to reason.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: glock24</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lrrifle</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
5) In my opinion the feature that sets these scopes apart and makes the infinitly usable is the FFP reticle. This allows rapid target acquisition at CQB distances when on 1x and great reticle detail (for medium to med/long range as evidenced by PDD's 800 yd work) when dialed to the 4x.
</div></div>

Exactly!

The amazing part is that it is such a difficult concept for optics makers to understand. Congrats to SWFA for <span style="font-style: italic">finally</span> listening to reason.

</div></div>


Well stated, both of you. Frankly I don't think it is just the manufactures, I'm surprised there have not been more comment like yours. From "Red Dot" to Mildot in one package via the creative application of the characteristic of FFP is rather revolutionary. This is not the only place that SWFA got it right. The proportions of these reticules where the mildot at
1X creates the "Ghost crosshair" which aids precision shots beyond typical red dot range is very significant. An added plus is they are not dependent on illumination to work in daylight, but it is "daylight piratical". The overall quality of the construction, glass and adjustments truly make this a professional grade optic. The overall quality compares to scopes costing twice as much. But none of the scopes costing twice as much have these features. Take for example Vortex's new 1-4 PST, it has a mildot reticule and mil adjustments and it is illuminated <span style="text-decoration: underline">but it does not have FFP</span>. It will have the same reticule at 1X as it will have at 4X. With a MSRP of $599.00 it will probably sell well but not have the same dual functionality as the SWFA 1-4 HD. If you move up the scale on the Vortex you have the 1-4 Razor HD which is FFP with moa/moa or mil/mil but the reticule is not near as bold as the SWFA SS 1-4 HD. The Razor 1-4 HD like the SWFA SS 1-4 HD is a professional grade optic but has a MSRP that is twice the price of the SWFA SS 1-4 HD. I'm not putting down Vortex, in fact I have a lot of respect for the line. I own a Vortex Viper 6.5-20X44 and it has found a home on a RRA 24" Varminter. But it is no where near the quality of the new SS 1-4 HD.

Red dot to mildot via the FFP will probably have a major impact on the optics design in the future. SWFA got it right the first time.
At 1X illuminated


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

At 4X no illumination


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[gglass]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

A SWFA 1x4HD will definitely be on my next build!

Kudos to SWFA for actually listening to the the desires of their customers.

 

[Ed-G]

Re: SWFA 1-4 HD Field Test (long w/photos)

SWFA has these on their website now. Last time I looked a couple of weeks ago they were not. Looks like the PST's and SS's are in a neck and neck race for actually being able to buy one!

Anyone know on the SS if you will be able to switch from caps to turrets and turrets to caps?