Swarovski rifle scopes

[Bullseye Shooter]

Anyone have any experience with the Swarovski 2.5-15x44 Z6i rifle scope? One of our older club members who has a deteriorating eye condition was wondering how the illuminated reticle works overall for hunting and target shooting. She really has to think about buying one since they are a little pricey.

 

[Dcav]

I have a Illuminated reticle scope, not a Swarovski though, it is pretty damn bright even on the low settings. Would definetly help with any kind of eye condition I would think.

 

[Bullseye Shooter]

Thanks for the input. I mentioned to her that Bushnel, Leupold, etc. also make an illuminated reticle scope, but she has researched the different ones and the Z6i seems to meet her criteria the best. So far, the least expensive one I've found runs right at $2800. Elk Castle in Fort Worth has them, but they want over $3,000 for it.

 

[Okierifleman]

Let me put it this way, with optics, you absolutely get what you pay for, up to a point. It depends on what you are used to. If you are used to looking through cheap optics(Bushnell, Tasco,BSA, etc...) you will look through the next level of optics(higher quality Nikon, Burris, Leupold) and really be able to tell the difference. If you are used to looking through the mid priced optics, and go up to the premium optics(Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, etc) you will really be able to tell the difference. But, I doubt that someone who is used to looking through cheap optics can tell the difference between say the Leupold or the Swarovski enough to justify the extra $1500.

 

[kingofwylietx]

I can only comment on the illuminated reticle. I just purchased a Trijicon AccuPoint 2.5-10x56. The AccuPoints are illuminated by fiber & tritium. I found it was very beneficial for low-light shooting and have some dead hogs to prove it. They are adjustable, so in bright light you can reduce the amount of illumination. The optics seem pretty decent to me, but I have very limited experience with traditional scopes. I did compare it to another shooters scope one night while hog hunting. He couldn't see anything past 20-30 yards and I could still shoot at 100yds.

Trijicon, Inc. : Brilliant Aiming Solutions

 

[Bullseye Shooter]

She will certainly appreciate the better optics of the Swarovski since she has macular degeneration which is slowing getting worse. Of course, even with her handicap, she won the Hunter class in our montly fun shoots at the range last year and I believe the year before.

Thanks for your inputs.

 

[dee]

Let me put it this way, with optics, you absolutely get what you pay for, up to a point. It depends on what you are used to. If you are used to looking through cheap optics(Bushnell, Tasco,BSA, etc...) you will look through the next level of optics(higher quality Nikon, Burris, Leupold) and really be able to tell the difference. If you are used to looking through the mid priced optics, and go up to the premium optics(Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, etc) you will really be able to tell the difference. But, I doubt that someone who is used to looking through cheap optics can tell the difference between say the Leupold or the Swarovski enough to justify the extra $1500.

I disagree with you to a extent I've found that the Elite series that Bushnell offers to me seems to be clearer and brighter than any Leupold I've looked through. As far as going up from there all I've looked through is a Ziess and it didn't seem to offer any advantage over the Bushnell exspecially with the price.

 

[Okierifleman]

Well, I will admit that the Bushnell Elite 4 series are awful good scopes for the money, I was more talking about their cheaper scopes that are, say, under $200. I would put them right up there with the mid priced Leupolds. I am going to assume that the Zeiss you say you looked through was a Conquest series. I have a couple of them that are really clear but I have looked through some that arent anything special. When I was referring to Zeiss with the Swarovski and Leica, I was really talking about their Diavari line, which is comparable in price to the other two. And you can damn sure tell the difference when you step up to that class if you know what you are looking at.

 

[Dawico]

Anyone have any experience with the Swarovski 2.5-15x44 Z6i rifle scope? One of our older club members who has a deteriorating eye condition was wondering how the illuminated reticle works overall for hunting and target shooting. She really has to think about buying one since they are a little pricey.

If it is mainly the illuminated reticle she is interested in, take her to a gun show and check out some of the cheap scopes there. They usually have someone selling NcStars or something. Have her try the IR and see if it helps. Obviously the optics and quality are not great, but for $40 she can try one and see if it helps. If not, she is not out $3000. She can also look at different reticles and see if wider posts or a dot/ circle type are easier for her to see. Let her actually look through other options and see what does the trick. Something with a bigger objective may even help more. Then spend some money on a quality optic that is the best to fit her needs.

Swarovskis are good scopes, but the quality can be matched for alot cheaper price tag.

 

[Texas1911]

I would like to vote against an illuminated reticle.

The IR scopes draw my eye to the glaring red center rather than the target itself, and for target shooting, they shroud a large amount of the target due to light bleeding. This might be even worse for someone with an eye condition. I find that my focal plane shifts alot, and my eyes get somewhat confused versus a traditional scope. This could be an issue with me, rather than the scope, but again, just my opinion.

They work well for battle optics, but I would not recommend it for target shooting. As a hunting scope, it'd be well suited, especially for low-light situations, although good glass like the Swarovski actually illuminates the tube more than the naked eye.


My recommendation would be a German #4 reticle in a big tube Leupold VX-L.

 

[Texas1911]

As far as the cheaper scopes option ... I will never have anything less than a Leupold VX-II on any of my centerfire guns. I have dealt with probably a thousand scopes now, and frankly the Burris, NcStar, and Bushnell scopes just don't cut it. I've have the pleasure of working with some high end glass like Schmidt and Bender and Nightforce, and those are quite frankly two of the best scopes on the planet. You pay for them, but damn do you get better-than-life clarity.

 

[Bullseye Shooter]

I guess I should have mentioned that she has looked at the various other brands out there. She was in Fort Worth the other day and stopped at Elk Castle, so she was able to check out the Leupold illuminated scope and the others. The "fun shoot" that the Graham club holds each month requires shooting at steel plates at various distances. I know the 200 yard plate is about eight inches by six inches. Not sure what size the 500 yard plate is. She was drawn to the Swarovrski because of the mill dot reticle they have with the graduated lines. Rather than change sights for each range, it would allow her to use the graduated lines to line up on the steel plates. For the "tight group" phase which is shot at 100 yards, she could turn off the illumination if it became a problem, but with her eyesight, I believe she would leave it on for even that stage.

I appreciate all the replies. Thanks guys.