Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Kahles Helia CL or Swaro PH |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
Browning
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/19/2010 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: February/24/2010 at 08:50 |
I've been doing some searching and I have found a Kahles CL 3-10x50 and a Swaro PH 3-12x50 at decent prices. The Kahles is NIB and the Swaro is factory demo. The Swaro is four bills more than the Kahles, but I also understand why the Kahles can be had somewhat cheaper right now than usual. I also know that the Kahles is a 1" and the Swaro is a 30mm tube. Should I just jump on the Kahles and stop trying to analyze this so much? Is the Swaro that much better optically for the price difference?
|
|
lucytuma
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: November/25/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 5389 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Optically, I think they're very comparable. At $400.00 less, the kahles is by far the better deal on paper. The biggest thing that scares me about kahles is their lack of CS in the USA.
|
|
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
SVT_Tactical
MODERATOR Chief Sackscratch Joined: December/17/2009 Location: NorthCackalacky Status: Offline Points: 31233 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Gamo has taken over the CS in the USA, think its fine now, they said something at SHOT about it. |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yes, Gamo has taken over the CS role for Kahles, but whether that is a good thing or a bad thing remains to be seen, as the relationship is too new.
As for the comparison, you won't likely notice a nickel's worth of difference between those two scopes optically. So, it comes down to whether you're more willing to save the money and risk the CS ramifications that may or may not ever become an issue, or if you'd feel more comfortable knowing if you ever do need service, you'll be in very good hands, as Swaro has very good CS. If it were me, I'd probably get the Kahles. Though there are no guarantees in life, chances are pretty good that you'll never need any service on the scope. |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Rancid Coolaid
MODERATOR Joined: January/19/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 9318 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I've not owned Kahles, I but I do own Swaro, it is a fantastic scope. If Kahles is as good optically, I too would probably go that route.
Get what you want; if you don't, you'll always wonder - and probably regret. |
|
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn. Equality is something you whine about not being given. |
|
Browning
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/19/2010 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have not owned either one myself, but I did look at a Kahles last weekend and was AMAZINGLY impressed by the optics. It has been many years since I have looked through a Swaro, but if they are far better than the Kahles I looked at then I'd be willing to look at purchasing one.
|
|
Browning
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/19/2010 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
So basically that is why I'm asking for your guys opinions on this decision. I know that my wallet would be a lot happier, but I'd be willing to dig in if the Swaro is far superior. Thanks for your opinions so far! |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I own scopes from both series. The Swaro is not far superior. To my eyes, it isn't even superior; they are about the same. But, everyone sees things differently.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
atvalaska
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/02/2009 Location: FBKS Status: Offline Points: 13 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Kahles. take the 4 bills an spend it on ammo,u will have a great scope ,and shoot better to boot!
|
|
tls
|
|
YakAk
Optics Apprentice Joined: November/22/2009 Location: Alaska Status: Offline Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well if Gamo is the new distributor, I see Kahles problems will persist. I have tried to contact Gamo numerous times by email and phone for over a month. I still have not heard anything back. Its been very frustrating. I was going to buy a Kahles but I am almost ready to spend the extra money and buy a Swari.
Steve |
|
lucytuma
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: November/25/2007 Location: Wisconsin Status: Offline Points: 5389 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I own two Kahles scopes and one Swaro, optically they are a wash. I've never had to use either CS, but if I were to buy one of these scopes today, I'd have a hard time buying the Kahles knowing they lack any CS. If kahles gets their act together, it would be a different story, but for now it scares me.
|
|
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
brodeur272
Optics Journeyman Joined: September/23/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 609 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Have both the CL and the PH. I like them both. I am starting to prefer the first focal plane reticles of the Kahles C/CB/CBX and Swaro PH series over the second focal plane reticles of the CL. Optically, they are the same to my eyes.. Depending on what caliber rifle you're putting it on, the Swaro has the recoil proof eyepiece, but it also has about 3/8-1/2 inch less eye relief.
|
|
Texas
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/11/2008 Location: Texas, USA Status: Offline Points: 211 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Kahles CL-line glass is fantastic. Swarovski glass is also fantastic. The Kahles CL is a bit more compact than the PH.
I would buy the Kahles for $400 less, unless you absolutely need the 12X top end.
I own and operate both Swarovski and Kahles scopes. I have Kahles CL, CS and CB line scopes. The Kahles is a very, very good targeting device and the view through the glass is very nice as well. I have not needed Kahles customer service, and I have them mounted on 338WM and 300 Roy A-Bolts. It seems the Kahles can hold up to magnum recoil at those levels, anyway.
Hope that helps.
Texas
|
|
"There are some things which cannot be learned quickly and time, which is all we have, must be paid heavily for their acquiring. They are the very simplest things..." Ernest Hemingway
|
|
Tip69
Optics Master Extraordinaire Tip Stick Joined: September/27/2005 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 4155 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Either way, you'll have a nice scope.
|
|
take em!
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Brodeur brings up a good point to consider. Do you prefer a first focal plane reticle (magnifies with the target image -- PH) or second focal plane reticle (non-magnifying -- CL)? Neither is necessarily "better," and both have pluses and minuses, but answering that question may go a long way toward making your decision for you.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Browning
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/19/2010 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Every scope that I have ever owned has always been SFP, so really that is all I know and what I'm used to. Just by reading articles here and there, I have always gathered that the majority seem to prefer a scope with SFP instead FFP when using a scope for big game hunting. I didn't mention before, but the Kahles I'm looking at has the 4a reticle. I've looked through one and liked it, but I have never used a scope with 4a out in the field. From what I read...the majority seem to think that this is a good reticle for hunting. I don't know..... ???
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
4A is an awesome reticle. Like a heavy plex without the thick bar in the 12:00 position. Depending on the magnification range, I sometimes like FFP reticles for big game hunting, because I can dial up reticle thickness in low light. The reverse to that is the reticle can get pretty thin on low power, which may or may not be an issue to you.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Browning
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/19/2010 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Help me out here....the 4a on the Kahles, is it like the reticle #4 on the Zeiss where it narrows to the 12:00 position when magnified? I looked through a Zeiss Conquest 3x12x56mm that did that.
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Not sure I'm following you on "narrows to the 12:00 position when magnified," but all #4 and 4A reticles are very similar.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Browning
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/19/2010 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
To me on the Zeiss #4, the thick bars opened up when I lowered the magnification and closed up when I cranked the magnification up. Does that make sense?
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |