Print Page | Close Window

Apples and oranges or a reasonable comparison??

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Scopes
Forum Name: Tactical Scopes
Forum Description: Police and military tools of the trade
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=39177
Printed Date: December/17/2017 at 21:27


Topic: Apples and oranges or a reasonable comparison??
Posted By: Eromtap
Subject: Apples and oranges or a reasonable comparison??
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 10:22
Ok so this may be a silly question, but I'm torn between buying another USO st-10 or swfa ss 10x42 HD. I have no experience with swfa, but can't find a single bad review and the price is very appealing. The main reason I went with USO for a rem 700 build was because I always want my equipment to be as indestructible as possible in case of SHTF time. Everything I've read says the swfa may be just as durable and if I ordered an st-10 with the exact same features as the HD it's $600 more (not to mention the 6-8 month wait which stinks). So in your guys opinion is the USO worth the extra dough? Keep in mind I absolutely love my USO, but I'm not super picky about glass, at a certain point I think a lot of guys start splitting imaginary hairs on that front. The scope would be used at mainly over 500 yds on a 308 and I'm only interested in fixed 10's as I find them the most useful to me. Thanks once again in advance for your help!



Replies:
Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 10:39
Having owned both a USO SN-3 and a SS 10x and a lover of fixed 10 powers, I'd say go with SS 10x.  
For the money you'd pay for another USO 10x, you could have a pretty darn nice variable. 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 10:44
That confirms my thoughts. Looks like I'm gonna be a new swfa owner!


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 10:49
Well, I'd wait to here from the OT Collective before deciding. Wink Just my thoughts, is all. 

-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 10:54
Haha fair enough. I do tend to jump the gun sometimes, the wife hates it! Ok, any other opinions? If these 2 scopes are in the same league what would justify the extra cost of the USO if anything?


Posted By: Kickboxer
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:05
Eromtap… I have the 10xHD, have seen, but not used the ST-10.  The 10xHD gives approximately 90% of what the USOptics will give you, at a much reduced cost.  Other than EREK, there is nothing the ST does better than the SS.  I have scopes ranging from NcStar to Hensoldt and use them all.   I can find no good reason to purchase the ST-10 over the SS 10xHD.  

-------------
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:06
Thanks kickboxer. Another point for the ss!


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:07
And actually that 600 extra is without erek knob anyway. That's another couple hundred!


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:15
I believe Mr. Boxer is referring to the SS HD, which is approximately $400 more than the standard 10X SS.

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-10x42-Tactical-Riflescope-P53712.aspx - http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-10x42-Tactical-Riflescope-P53712.aspx

http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-HD-10x42-Tactical-30mm-Riflescope-P50717.aspx - http://swfa.com/SWFA-SS-HD-10x42-Tactical-30mm-Riflescope-P50717.aspx

Maybe you were aware of that. I have the standard MOA 10X SS and love it. I've yet to see the 10X HD.  


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:28
Oh I thought we were all talking about the hd. That's 800 and the USO would be about 1400. I'm very impressed that in your opinion the non hd as would stand up next to the USO, I certainly didn't see that coming! Seems like deaf is putting out amazing scopes for the price if that's the case.   


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:29
In any case I do want mil/mil so the hd would be necessary


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:30
And swfa. Not deaf! Darn autocorrect.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:51
Originally posted by Eromtap Eromtap wrote:

I'm very impressed that in your opinion the non hd as would stand up next to the USO, I certainly didn't see that coming!

I'm saying that my non HD MOA Mil Dot 10X SS is as durable as my SN-3 was. 

As a matter of fact, I was so smitten by the SS that I sold my USO. Not a slight on USO. The SS just exceeded my expectations for a fraction of the price. Seems my SN-3 cost me around $1750 on a group buy at Sniper's Hide. Glass on the USO was better. The EREK knob rocked, but all in all, the SS did and does everything I need it to do.

Now....let's muddy the water a bit. How about a SS 3-9x? Flame 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 11:53
I just reread your original post and you indicated the SS HD. Sorry. Baby sitting 2 Doberman's and 2 African Grey's today. Little hectic.  

-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Urimaginaryfrnd
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 12:43
I have had the SS  10x HD and several of the standard fixed power SS scopes.  I upgraded from the SS 10 HD to the 5-20x50 Mil Quad illuminated.  I like the HD 10x very much far better than the standard 10x but the 5-20x50 is just as solid of a scope and I find 10x a bit much to engage moving targets at close range and not enough to identify small details at extreme long range.  ex.  a few years ago my son and I were hunting late antlerless season past 600 yds I had a fixed 10x Leupold Mk4 he had a 8.5-25x50 Leu Mk 4 he could tell which deer in a group of 6 was a young buck I could not see horns with the 10x. I truely value a fixed power scope and think them far stronger than most variables. My most recent purchase was a Super Sniper  6x42 mil quad but I run the 5-20x50 on my R5 Rem SHTF gun. I also am a big fan of US Optics scopes but no I would not pay the extra dollars over what the SS 10x HD cost to go to that scope Iwould pay the difference to go to the 1.8 to 10  US Optics scope because I cant seem to get onto moving targets under 100 yds at anything over 6x . If I bought a US Optics it would have to have the EREK knob I just wish every manufacturer would make a knob with that profile I just hate Leupolds tall knobs.

-------------

"Always do the right thing, just because it is the right thing to do".
Bobby Paul Doherty
Texas Ranger


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 12:59
I used to be uncertain, but now I'm just not sure.

according to the Ig Nobel awards.
Materials and Methods Both samples were prepared by gently desiccating them in a convection oven at low temperature over the course of several days. The dried samples were then mixed with potassium bromide and ground in a small ball-bearing mill for two minutes. One hundred milligrams of each of the resulting powders were then pressed into a circular pellet having a diameter of 1 cm and a thickness of approximately 1 mm. Spectra were taken at a resolution of 1 cm-1 using a Nicolet 740 FTIR spectrometer. Figure 2 shows a comparison of the 4000-400 cm-1 (2.5-25 mm) infrared transmission spectra of a Granny Smith apple and a Sunkist Navel orange. Figure. 2 Conclusions Not only was this comparison easy to make, but it is apparent from the figure that apples and oranges are very similar. Thus, it would appear that the comparing apples and oranges defense should no longer be considered valid. This is a somewhat startling revelation. It can be anticipated to have a dramatic effect on the strategies used in arguments and discussions in the future. NOTE: This article is included in the book The Best of Annals of Improbable Research - See more at: http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html#sthash.tSG7Fq2R.dpuf

100 gr. of either contain 10 grs. of fructose and sucrose
and 100 gr of either contain the same calories.

oh the scopes, let me know when you get something definitive .

-------------
I love little league baseball-- it keeps the kids out of the house
Yogi Bera



Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 13:08
Hello, Dale! 

Are you nipping the left over egg nog today? Big Grin 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 13:40
The extra 600$ will go a long way toward brass, powder, primers and bullets and a better weather station and a better chronograph and ect.ect.ect.

Jmho

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 14:16
Wow thanks for all the info guys! And dale thanks for showing me the error in my argument technique haha. This would be on a 308 so mostly within 800 yds and with 20/10 vision I don't have a problem identifying target that far (for now) I am thinking of moving up to a 338 lapua in the not too distant future so a 5-20 would be ideal. Also the moving target within 100 yds is a serious consideration and may sway me the 3-9 route. This is also going on a 5r so I'm glad somebody has experience with this exact combo. Regardless of the model it looks like an ss is the clear winner here!


Posted By: Sparky
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 15:01
I would lean towards the SS10xHD. And since you have an USO you could compare them and SWFA is great about returning scopes if they have not been mounted. But I would be surprised if you did want to return the SS.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 15:08
The SS 3-9x is outstanding and gives you a 3x on the low end and is FFP allowing you to range at all power ranges.  

I failed to welcome you to Optics Talk earlier. Welcome! 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Dale Clifford
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 16:18
no, screwdrivers, and its a new batch,

-------------
I love little league baseball-- it keeps the kids out of the house
Yogi Bera



Posted By: jonoMT
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 16:23
The glass in the SS 3-9 is really good. You get variable mag, a tough scope and just a notch less magnification of a fixed 10X. It also weighs 19 oz., which is a consideration.

-------------
Reaction time is a factor...


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 16:27
Thanks for the welcome cheaptrick. This is a great forum and I hope to be able to help out by sharing some of the knowledge I've accidentally aquired over the years by making almost every mistake possible lol


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 16:32
Also the fact that swfa variables are ffp is a huge selling point to me. That's why I was so set on fixed for so long. I hate having to set to a certain magnification to use my mil system, just makes for one more opportunity to screw up a first shot and makes holdovers impossible on anything but that magnification. Sfp makes absolutely no sense to me so I'll never buy one.


Posted By: cheaptrick
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 16:39
I think you'll like the 3-9x, if you choose to go that route. That very scope, (Mil Dot), is on my GO TO rifle. 
Mine is one of the first SWFA released. I wouldn't take anything for it, or my OLD SS 10x. 


-------------
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.


Posted By: Sparky
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 16:56
Originally posted by Eromtap Eromtap wrote:

Also the fact that swfa variables are ffp is a huge selling point to me. That's why I was so set on fixed for so long. I hate having to set to a certain magnification to use my mil system, just makes for one more opportunity to screw up a first shot and makes holdovers impossible on anything but that magnification. Sfp makes absolutely no sense to me so I'll never buy one.


I have several SFP scopes that they provide the data so I can use them at different magnifications. Not just one magnification. So it is possible, but it does require more thought to use.




Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 17:43
Yeah too many extra steps with the sfp if you ask me. I like to be able to use just one equation for the sake of simplicity, I'm just an ex grunt after all haha but I can remember size in yards times 1000 divided by mil reading.


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 19:56
Size in yards times 1000 decided by the mil reading. .

Is that for mil dot or mil rads ??

So size in yards are just inches converted th yards?



-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 19:57
Devided

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: jonoMT
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 22:25
Originally posted by Cold Trigger Finger Cold Trigger Finger wrote:

So size in yards are just inches converted th yards?


Yes. For example, target size is 18". That = .5 yards. Multiply x 1000 = 500. Divide by number of mils subtending (spanning) the target. Say 1.2 mils. that would mean 500 / 1.2 = 417 yards.

FYI, almost all scopes now use true milliradians. So a mil dot reticle of modern vintage will mean milliradians are the subtensions. The best thing besides the availability of more affordable (and still reliable) FFP scopes is the realization from manufacturers that turret clicks should match the subtensions used.

-------------
Reaction time is a factor...


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 22:47
Agreed. Why they still make mil/Moa scopes at all is beyond me. Leupold still hasn't figured that out and is one of the reasons in my opinion they're losing lots of fans (myself included)


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/03/2014 at 22:52
For the record I mean MOST of they're scopes. I know they have the m5 turrets on leupys but that's not they're standard offering rather an option on certain scopes if memory serves


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: January/04/2014 at 03:26
What about the SS line of moa scopes.
They say that the turrets are moa but the reticle is mil dot in mili rads
Am I missing something?

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/04/2014 at 07:53
I'm pretty sure that's only the old ones. If you look at the current line they all say .1 mrad meaning 1/10 mil per click which is 1cm at 100 yds. If you go to rifle scopes in the product part of this sight and click on Sara you can see all the current offerings


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/04/2014 at 07:55
*swfa, not Sara haha my phone hates me typing swfa apparently


Posted By: Eromtap
Date Posted: January/04/2014 at 08:35
Oops. Reread your post, didn't realize you specifically mentioned the Moa scopes. I think those are for people who are used to mil/Moa because for so long that's all there was and they don't wanna change. I guess if it works for you then it doesn't really matter which system you use. It just makes for more calculations using mil/moa


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: January/04/2014 at 12:08
OK.

Thinking

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: May/15/2014 at 21:55
Well the 10×42 SS that came in the mail has. 25 moa clicks. I had it to the range today andfor a 300$ scope I am very pleased. I'm not all that sure that it is repeatable as once it was sighted in I zeroed the knobs snugged the allen screws
pretty snug. Didn't want to break anything. Then I ran the knobs to their top and bottom and left and right stops. Came back to my zero and my shot was over 3" high. I will do more testing but I was pretty blown away as I took its repeatability for granted.

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: May/17/2014 at 17:26
OK. So.I went back to the range yesterday after opening up the fore end of the stock. New Hornady 6.5 Creedmoor brass, full length sized and chamfered. Load was 140 gr SST and 41 gr of H4350, CCI200 primers.
I also installed an adjustable cheek piece.
I'm super happy with both the rifle and scope. I'll try to get into my photobucket accnt and post a pic of my final target.
My last group was roughly 3/8×1/4 " .

The only thing I noticed, which I believe caused the lack of repeatability was the set screws for the knobs had loosened up. Why, I don't know. But I rezeroed then redid the knobs and tightened them. Tight! Then I started running the knobs all the way down and up and left and right and back to zero. Then did a final 2 click right adjustment and fired the last group. Shoot, run the knobs. Shoot run the knobs ect. Final adjust and shoot a group. I'm very happy that I got this scope now.      

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: May/17/2014 at 17:49
http://s1087.photobucket.com/user/gumboot4581/media/photobucket-7876-1400291583394.jpg.html">

This is the final group.
For a factory Ruger Hawkeye I am very pleased! I believe a better shooter could have shrunk the group size by 50% as my contacts were getting cloudy.
The only metal work that has been done to this rifle is to lighten the trigger to around 2.5-3 lbs.

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined


Posted By: Cold Trigger Finger
Date Posted: May/19/2014 at 17:05
So, after rereading this thread again it looked like there
are 2 different equations that will figure the distance.
Inches × 27.78 = × mils = yards distance to target
And yards ÷ mils = yards. Distance to target.

-------------
You are being watched.
If it can't be grown, It's gotta be mined



Print Page | Close Window