Print Page | Close Window

Swarovski Z3 4-12X50 BRH reticle

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Optic Reviews and Tests
Forum Name: Member's Tests and Reviews
Forum Description: Real world reviews and comparisons
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=27412
Printed Date: March/28/2024 at 11:14
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Swarovski Z3 4-12X50 BRH reticle
Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Subject: Swarovski Z3 4-12X50 BRH reticle
Date Posted: January/30/2011 at 18:14
I got to the range today and thought I would share some first impressions of my new Z3.

First, here are some pics of her mounted on the Elkinator:






Range time:

My first set of TPS rings were a dream!.  They required very little lapping.  I used the old eyeball-through-the-bore bore sighting method, and had the scope zeroed in 4 shots (more on this later).  A sub 1/2 MOA group later and I start ringing steel at 300 yards.  It became quickly apparent that this scope and rifle needed some more range.  I can't wait to stretch it out!

Optical performance:

The Z3 series is marked that it is assembled in the USA.  I don't know if the optical components are sourced from Austria or wherever, but I will say this:  This scope is optically superb.  The field of view is quite wide.  There is little to no tunnel effect and the eyebox is quite forgiving.  Eye relief is listed at 3.54 inches.  It is all of that and CONSTANT throughout the magnification range.  The image is clean, bright, and flat.  In fact, the image is similar to a high end 50mm spotter.  CA control is really good.  The weather a the range was cold (28 degrees F) and snowing.  There were a lot of high-conrast subjects at the range.  There was very, very little color fringing.  Images stay sharp until very near the edge.  As far as resolution goes, I was able to resolve a tiny print ad on the bottom of my paper target at 100 yards.  This is the first rifle scope I've used that performed at that level. 

This scope out-resolves and has noticeably better CA control to my Zeiss Conquest.

Overall my initial optical impressions of this scope are overwhelmingly positive.

Build/Ergonomics:

This scope feels extremely light for it's objective size and power range.  The scope also looks extremely sleek for a 1 inch tube 50mm objective scope.  It looks right on my Sendero.  The power ring turns with moderate force, and very smoothly.  There is no parallax adjustment.  The parallax of my BRH-equipped model is set at the factory at 200 meters.  Non-BRX/H models are factory set at 100 meters.  The sleekness will definitely aid in using scabbards, which is one of the main reasons I chose this scope.

Adjustments:

Well, not everything went perfect with this scope.  After the first shot, I was four inches low and five inches left.  I dialed the adjustment and shot again.  Three inches high and two inches left.  Hmmm.  Adjust again.  Fire.  Elevation perfect.  Windage still one inch left.  Adjust four clicks right.  Fire.  Dead nuts. Two more shots, and I have a tiny three shot group right where it should be. 

My best guess is the adjustments were likely accurate, but the new mounts had to "settle" through the first few shots from the 300 RUM.  Time will tell on how it holds up.  I did not get this scope for dialing dope.  This is a set-it-and-forget-it setup.

Reticle:

The BRH is the "heavy" version of the BRX ballistic reticle from Swarovski.  I liked the idea of the BRX, but when I first saw one, I knew immediately it was way to thin to be a practical hunting reticle for me.  The BRH is heavier, but still thinner than I would like.  It is quite a bit thinner than my Rapid Z 600 reticle.  I will have to do some low light testing with this reticle.  However, it was easy to pick up in the falling snow and less-than-ideal conditions at the range.

Here is a pic of the reticle, just to show setup and thickness:




Conclusion:

My first range experience was quite positive.  I am hopeful for this scope, and I will keep the OT updated!






-------------
-Matt



Replies:
Posted By: SVT_Tactical
Date Posted: January/31/2011 at 03:33
Glad you like it.  Good write up


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: January/31/2011 at 07:13
Thanks for the review, Matt!


-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: lucytuma
Date Posted: January/31/2011 at 09:47
Matt, thanks for the review.  The Sendero and z3 make one hell of a combo.

-------------
"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


Posted By: stickbow46
Date Posted: February/01/2011 at 19:11
Thanks for a good review Matt.I also agree with you on the BRX ret.I made the mistake of buying a Z5 with the BRX,way to thin.It will be making a trip to SWARO for a change to plex & a ballistic turret shortly.

-------------
Pearls of Wisdom are Heard not Spoken


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: February/01/2011 at 19:20
Good deal! Thanks for the write up! 

 


Posted By: bp
Date Posted: February/02/2011 at 18:23
Thanks Matt.
This is what I was looking for in choosing a scope for the 280 AI I am am having built.  No Swaro dealer close so I would have picked the wrong ret. (BRX). 

I am starting to wonder if I would gain much over a 4a or 4plex ret. at the ranges I would feel good about  shooting at (400 yd or less).  

Bruce


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: February/02/2011 at 18:37
Originally posted by bp bp wrote:

Thanks Matt.This is what I was looking for in choosing a scope for the 280 AI I am am having built.  No Swaro dealer close so I would have picked the wrong ret. (BRX).  I am starting to wonder if I would gain much over a 4a or 4plex ret. at the ranges I would feel good about  shooting at (400 yd or less).   Bruce


bp,

If you are going to shoot 400 yards, I think the BRH would be a better choice, because you are past the maximum point blank range for the rifle. I have found practicing with a ballistic reticle to be confidence inspiring. YMMV

-------------
-Matt


Posted By: bp
Date Posted: February/02/2011 at 22:01
You are probably right on the ballistic ret.  I've not had a problem with plex and holdover on current 270 but I've not needed to shoot at animals much past 300 yds, wind and longer ranges makes me nervous, and I am used to the rifle.

The BRH would be helpful with with long shots at long range paper, rocks and just in case.

However, I don't want to give up versatility for help on a rare  shot hunting.  A rapid Z 600 is ok but the ones I've looked through seem slower to get lined up.  The Swaro looks a bit less cluttered.  I'm over 50 and maybe all the extra lines in the scope just confuse me.Big Grin




Posted By: budperm
Date Posted: February/03/2011 at 06:45
Hey Matt!!!!
 
Have you gotten and played with your new bino's yet?


-------------
"Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".
--Thomas Jefferson





Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: February/04/2011 at 18:33
Originally posted by budperm budperm wrote:

Hey Matt!!!!
 
Have you gotten and played with your new bino's yet?


Hello Bud!!!

They are still in the brown truck, en route.

Hammer


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: Codhagee
Date Posted: February/21/2011 at 18:00
I also have a sendaro 300WM and I'm looking at ether a Z3 or Z5. I would like to know if u have shot anything past 300 yds and what power magnification of the two would you recommend? I do know that I too want the BRH. Just want something that will not leave me wanting more on a elk hunt. Thanks for your review.


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: February/21/2011 at 18:05
300 yards is as far as I've gotten so far.  As soon as the Montana weather takes a turn for the better, I'll be stretching it out on some steel.

As far as magnification goes, I would say either the 3.5-10 or the 4-12 would be ideal for a magnum elk rifle.  The remarkable resolution of these scopes makes extra magnification unnecessary. 


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: mike650
Date Posted: February/21/2011 at 23:32
Thunbs Up


-------------
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear


Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: February/22/2011 at 00:30
Nice write-up, Sir!

ILya


-------------
http://www.darklordofoptics.com - www.darklordofoptics.com
https://rumble.com/c/DLO - Rumble Video Channel


Posted By: brilite
Date Posted: June/04/2011 at 19:26
I'm a little late to the party, but what a professionaly written review. 
Thanks for all the information.
Brian


Posted By: bird_hunter66
Date Posted: July/14/2011 at 07:05
Bitterroots, what caliber was your Remington Sendero?  

-------------
D. Holmes


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: July/14/2011 at 10:33
She is a 300 RUM.

-------------
-Matt


Posted By: Alan Robertson
Date Posted: July/14/2011 at 13:22
Matt,
Fine job, sir- many thanks!

Don't you just love a good RUM?
None of that wimpy Roy or STW stuff- overbore!


-------------
"Garg'n uair dhuisgear"


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: July/14/2011 at 15:34
I too love TPS rings. Are those mediums?


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: July/14/2011 at 20:10
Yep, mediums.  Could have gone lower, but the ocular is just right for my cheek weld.


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: bigbadwolv
Date Posted: December/04/2012 at 18:33
I am a little late to the party, great write up. Just one question though, without some form of parallax adjustment, will that make it difficult when going further out? If this is the case would the Conquest with AO be a better option? Sorry I'm new to this and was just curious.

-------------
Better to be trialled by 12, than carried by 6


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: December/04/2012 at 19:12
Originally posted by bigbadwolv bigbadwolv wrote:

I am a little late to the party, great write up. Just one question though, without some form of parallax adjustment, will that make it difficult when going further out? If this is the case would the Conquest with AO be a better option? Sorry I'm new to this and was just curious.
 
Parallax error is minimized at enxtended ranges with the 200m factory parallax setting.  I have calculated maximum parallax error with this scope, and all the way out to 800 yards, it is acceptable.  I have made good hits on 12'X12' rocks at that range.
 
In a hunting scope, not worrying about parallax in the field is a benefit, in my opinion.  AO would be nice during load development.  I have to maintain good head position when doing load development, but it has not been a real problem.
 
As you probably know, if you keep your head centered behind the reticle, there is no parallax error anyway.
 
This is a great practical hunting scope. Target shooters will want AO.
 
If you want AO, check out the 3.5-18 z5 w/ BRH reticle.
 
I have made some biggame kills nearing 400 yards with the scope, and like it a lot.


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: bigbadwolv
Date Posted: December/04/2012 at 19:27
Thanks for the clarification

-------------
Better to be trialled by 12, than carried by 6



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net