Rifle Scopes SWFA SS 1-4x24HD vs Burris Tac30 1-4x24

[Wangstang]

I am in the market for a scope to mount on an 18" barreled AR15 that will be used for short and 100-200 yard shooting with some fast transitions between distances.

I had pretty much decided on the Burris Tac30. Today I came across the SWFA Super Sniper 1-4x24HD and noted several positive reviews on them.

I'd appreciate some help from someone who can provide a solid description of what advantages or disadvantages, features and options each of these scopes would to offer compared to the other.

If you guys can fill me in, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks for the help.
Wes

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA SS 1-4x24HD vs Burris Tac30 1-4x24

I've got over 1000 round through rifles using the SWFA SS 1-4X24 HD and I believe it is the best execution of the 1-4 concept on the market today,(I'll catch crap for this), regardless of price. The combination of reticle design, FFP, reticle brightness, mildot reticle, .1 mil adjustments, glass quality and overall construction make it the 1-4 to beat IMHO. It is capable of offering fast accurate shot placement over the entire range of the 5.56 cartridge's effective range. The more you ask of this design the more you appreciate it's features. I've used it from 25 yards out to 800 yards and am satisfied with it's performance. If I were shooting most of the time between 600-800 yards I would make another choice but between close range and 700 yards in a single optic it rules. With the distances you mention it is more than adequate. The Burris Tac30 uses a Bullet Drop reticle and I call these "the one size fits some" approach. They are designed to match a specific load and a specific barrel length. It is fine if it meats your needs, confusing if it does not. With a mildot you can find a good load, make drop tables out to the required range and use the mildots as a bullet drop compensator. Thus I find the SS design more versatile. The glass is also much better in the SS design. The SS also allows you to estimate range better, IMHO. Hope this helps

 

[smokshwn]

Re: SWFA SS 1-4x24HD vs Burris Tac30 1-4x24

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Prairie Dog Dundee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Burris Tac30 uses a Bullet Drop reticle and I call these "the one size fits some" approach. They are designed to match a specific load and a specific barrel length. It is fine if it meats your needs, confusing if it does not. With a mildot you can find a good load, make drop tables out to the required range and use the mildots as a bullet drop compensator. </div></div>

To be fair, if I have a muzzle velocity for my load and gun, and make a drop table using the BDC's subtensions... is it not virtually the same as using a drop table and mildot subtensions???? FWIW Both the reticle in Burris XTR line and the Tac30 match up very well across the board with most any popular .223 load. 55's @3100ish 68's @2800ish and 75's @2700ish.

Either way to compare these two scopes is really getting into Apple vs. Orange territory. About the only thing they have in common is 1-4 power. One is a SFP scope the other FFP. One utilizes a BDC to match holds from 100-500 yds in increments of approximately 100yds while the other using a milradian reticle. That doesn't even begin to account for the $400+ price difference.

I have only looked through the SS and have used the Tac30 quite a bit for 3gun type shooting. I can say without equivocation that at the $300 pricepoint there isn't anything that can compete with the Tac30 and it will definitely give a few $500 scopes a good run as well.

 

[Prairie Dog Dundee]

Re: SWFA SS 1-4x24HD vs Burris Tac30 1-4x24

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Prairie Dog Dundee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Burris Tac30 uses a Bullet Drop reticle and I call these "the one size fits some" approach. They are designed to match a specific load and a specific barrel length. It is fine if it meats your needs, confusing if it does not. With a mildot you can find a good load, make drop tables out to the required range and use the mildots as a bullet drop compensator. </div></div>

To be fair, if I have a muzzle velocity for my load and gun, and make a drop table using the BDC's subtensions... is it not virtually the same as using a drop table and mildot subtensions???? FWIW Both the reticle in Burris XTR line and the Tac30 match up very well across the board with most any popular .223 load. 55's @3100ish 68's @2800ish and 75's @2700ish.

Either way to compare these two scopes is really getting into Apple vs. Orange territory. About the only thing they have in common is 1-4 power. One is a SFP scope the other FFP. One utilizes a BDC to match holds from 100-500 yds in increments of approximately 100yds while the other using a milradian reticle. That doesn't even begin to account for the $400+ price difference.

I have only looked through the SS and have used the Tac30 quite a bit for 3gun type shooting. I can say without equivocation that at the $300 pricepoint there isn't anything that can compete with the Tac30 and it will definitely give a few $500 scopes a good run as well. </div></div>

On your first point, yes this can be done. However, I find the evenly spaced mildot and drop charts easy to work with and find the make do approach of the BDC reticles more confusing. But that may just be me as I have more experience with the mildot. How accurate is accurate? What distance are you shooting. The BDC across the board may be fine for minute of basketball but dialing in is more accurate in my experience.

Yes it is an apples to oranges comparison. That is my point, the combination of features of the SS 1-4 HD and it's high quality glass make it the superior choice within the capabilities of the 5.56 round. The FFP feature allows you to switch between a "red dot" for up close speed and at 4X you have a very usable mildot for distance. The longer the range the more precision required.

Yes, I agree the Burris would be my first choice in the $300.00 range. It is bright and well made for it's price range. In fact I would choose it over the more expensive Trijicon TR24 because it has a better reticle. But I would not choose it over the SS HD.

At the ranges the OP mentioned the Burris would serve. I have used the Burris. However, if you want the capabilities of the optic to match the capabilities of the rifle and cartridge the SWFA SS 1-4 HD is the clear choice. Obviously I see it this way or I would not have spent the difference in price.

Top to bottom: Colt M4 with SWFA SS 1-4 HD at 500 yards, close up of 500 yard target, 600 yards and 700 yards.

[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]
[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]
[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]
[img

Uploaded with ImageShack.usimg]

 

[rickster1269]

I know I am resurrecting an old thread here. I must concur. Thank you for your review, from it I now have a SWFA 1-4 HD ontop of my DDM4V7 in a ADM QD mount. I had the chance to test it while out at a friends property shooting steel @ 50 ,125, 200, 300 yards . I find I use 4x mostly as the FFP and the reticle make target aquisition easy at any range. The glass is crisp and clear. 50,125,200,300 yards was cake. Prone, kneeling, standing. Rapid fire, hit after hit. Went to the ground in a off hand sitting position against a buddy shooting rested bench with bags for time [MENTION=89035]300[/MENTION]. He had a LMT 16" mounted with a Burris PEPR and a Vortex PST 1-4, using the same ammo(AE AR223 55 gr.) for time. He lost for time and hits. The shot of the day though was a running head shot on a squirrel. I was on 1X for that one @50 yards. The next outing my buddy had a SWFA 1-4 HD on his rig. He still has that crappy PEPR though. I really like this scope and highly recommend it for the AR platform.

IMG_2078 by rickster1269, on Flickr