PA 4x14x44 vs swfa ss 10x42

Daleo8803

Move along, move along
Joined
Dec 18, 2016
Messages
1,770
Location
Rock Hill SC
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
I'm needing a scope for my "long range" rifle, ruger predator 6.5 creedmoor. I have read alot of good thing about both of these scopes for the $$. Shooting ( one day) to 1000yds.

Which would you get?
 
Are you talking about the FFP or SFP primary arms scope? And which recticle?

If you want to hunt with it, I'd get a variable power optic. A larger FOV is good and you don't need max magnification all the time. If you are wanting to shoot on the range, the SWFA ss 10 is hard to beat for the money. Also, I like the recticle on the SS. I have a 3-15x SS and like it a lot.
 
I’ve had the primary arms scope you mentioned and a 16x Super Sniper. I preferred the Super Sniper
 
The PA will be the FFP with mil/mil mildot reticle.

I'm leaning to the SS just because it has more adjustment, and the glass is supposed to be better.

Rifle is strictly a range gun. Wont be hunting with it.
 
Last edited:
Is the SWFA SS 10x HD worth the big price premium? Is the glass that much better?

Are you guys all talking about / own the $300 model?
 
Is the SWFA SS 10x HD worth the big price premium? Is the glass that much better?

Are you guys all talking about / own the $300 model?

The HD glass is phenomenal. The SWFA 3-9 hd is one of the best Scopes under $1,000. Shoot, their 3-15 non-hd it's also one of the best Scopes under $1,000.

If you can afford the 10x with the HD you'll never want for better glass clarity without paying another grand. But the non-hd is a really really good scope as well.
 
The HD glass is phenomenal. The SWFA 3-9 hd is one of the best Scopes under $1,000. Shoot, their 3-15 non-hd it's also one of the best Scopes under $1,000.

If you can afford the 10x with the HD you'll never want for better glass clarity without paying another grand. But the non-hd is a really really good scope as well.

I've never had a rear focus scope; it seems like the only thing people ever complain about? Is it really that big of a deal or spend another 100 on side focus?

One thing it seems like rear focus would be less moving parts but idk.
 
I've never had a rear focus scope; it seems like the only thing people ever complain about? Is it really that big of a deal or spend another 100 on side focus?

One thing it seems like rear focus would be less moving parts but idk.

I never thought it was really that big of a deal, but I prefer side focus over rear focus.
 
I’ve got the Primary Arms 4-14. with Arc 2 moa reticle. Not the best glass I’ve owned, but far from the worst. Really good budget glass for us poor people.
 
The SWFA fixed scopes have a LOT of vertical adjustment, which can be very useful at extreme ranges (or with a 22 at extreme-for-22 ranges like 250+ yards). That is a big plus for me.
 
Back
Top Bottom