Any disadvantage to using a fixed 10x like the SWFA SS?
22PRL League Dec 9th
- Thread starter Frontline Defense
- Start date
- Replies 49
- Views 2,038
Any disadvantage to using a fixed 10x like the SWFA SS?
I would also suggest adding a 25 or 30 MOA rail. Unless you are lucky on your zero, the extra elevation in the dial is necessary. I have a 25 MOA on my CZ and my Helos will only dial up 40 MOA from my 50 yard zero. And my 300 yard dope is right in that 38-40 MOA range. So, anything past 300, I am doing holdovers in the reticle. Luckily, that reticle has an 80 MOA total range, so even when it is dialed up to 40 MOA, I still have another 40 MOA I can hold over.
Not much really. If you are comfortable shooting at 10X out to 300 (and maybe 400 occasionally), then it is fine. Plus, your holdovers would be consistent just like a FFP scope. My scope is 6-24X50, but I rarely shoot it at 24 power, unless I am shooting test groups at 100 or less - and even then I find that my groups are often better when I dial back a little. In fact, I usually only have it set at about 14-16X and that is where it stays.
Currently out of stock, but good rimfire rail (and other) products generally:
http://www.diproductsinc.com/Products.aspx?CAT=9431
http://www.diproductsinc.com/Products.aspx?CAT=9431
I'm one of the ROs for 22PRL at Frontline (Rob Hardee) and I'm going on three years of shooting long range 22LR matches. I'm on my third optic setup. Here's some things I've learned.
Optics don't win these matches. Fundamentals of positional marksmanship, having solid DOPE from 25 - 400 yards factoring spin drift, above average quality ammo, and an understanding of the peculiarities of 22LR at long distances is what wins this stuff more often than not. There are plenty of non-optic related variables to address/overcome in 22LR long range so, it is prudent to rule out as many optic-related issues as you can with the highest quality optic setup that fits your budget.
A fixed 10x SWFA HD well mounted in at least a 30+ MOA with a properly setup bubble level will be as good or better off than optics costing three times as much poorly mounted on 20 MOA mounts without a bubble level. Specific challenges of that fixed 10x SWFA would be the standard non-Christmas tree reticle and having too much magnification for easily/quickly finding targets in the optic's FOV under 100 yards, especially so under 50 yards, and while I cannot confirm with direct personal experience, it may not have enough low-end parallax to focus properly under 50 yards. I can confirm that for me, the optically similar quality 5-20x50 SWFA HD did not as I had trouble focusing it at right about 50 yards and under.
I started out with the 3-9x42 SWFA on my 20 MOA rail with an Accuracy 1st bubble level. I thought incorrectly that is did not have enough magnification to spot my own hits/misses at distance. It wasn't the magnification range so much as it was the glass quality.
So, I switched it out for 5-20x50 SWFA HD keeping the Accuracy 1st bubble. That was quite an improvement for spotting my own hits/misses. It also had more adjustment range ...in a 20 MOA mount, depending on weather, I could dial to 325 yards with SK Standard Plus ammo. Meanwhile, I was running a Vortex 4.5-27x56 Gen2 Razor HD EBR-2C and switching that over their Razor HD AMG 6-24x50 EBR-7B on my centerfire match rifles. Over time, with the experience of using those higher-end optics, I began to realize the simple reticle in the SWFA, its elevation adjustment range & parallax adjust limitations, turrets setup, and the 20 MOA rail on my rifle were holding me back in 22LR. While the optical quality was there to spot hits, that simple Mil-Quad reticle was not as good at making quick corrections flow-up shots like the better tree-style reticles such as the EBR-2C and EBR-7B. The way SWFA (and similar mid-level competitors) turrets are setup, your zero POA/POI may be caught between clicks so, you could be a 1/3" off at 100 yards with 0.1 MRAD adjustments. Often, the clicks on the turrets on SWFA would not line up with hash marks on the turret caps - my elevation cap was good but this was not the case on my windage turret. This was a pain in rimfire as you often dial out the spin drift and have to remember is the zero half way between zero and 0.1 Right or between zero and 0.1 Left?!
I replaced that setup with a Vortex 3-18x50 Gen2 Razor HD EBR-2C mounted in a Spuhr mount with 31 MOA on top of my existing 20 MOA rail giving me a total 51 MOA of scope cant. Even though the Spuhr has an integrated bubble, I continue to use the Accuracy 1st bubble level - having seen many others, I'm convinced it the easiest to read while on glass and it settles the fastest since its "bubble" it actually a weighted bead. This setup that gives me 25 mils of usable dial above my 50 yard zero which takes me to 450 yards using Norma Match22 from my 16” barrel without holdovers on the reticle.
Someone mentioned above that the reason some of us run high-end stuff like Razors in the rimfire match is to mimic our centerfire match rifle that are equipped with he same/similar optics. While there is no doubt some benefit to that (same reticle/same turrets), that's not the real reason. It's worth it to me to run a Razor in rimfire matches for several reasons. Razor turrets are designed so that you can put the zero any where on the turrets rotation, you're not limited to putting it where the clicks are so, you won't get caught between clicks on your zero. Your zero will be absolute, exactly where the bullet goes. As previously stated, the tree-style reticles are just better for corrections. You will miss more often in 22LR due to things you can't control, making quick corrections is a much bigger deal here vs centerfire. Razors have tons of vertical adjustments ranges and the 3-18x50 specifically has a vast parallax range down to 25 yards. While I typically run centerfire PRS/NRL matches at 10-12x, I have found that for rimfire I'm staying somewhere 6-10x for most stages with this Vortex. The Razor's zero stop and elevation revolution indicator are both very useful in long range rimfire where you're often dialing well past your first revolution and sometimes past your second. Knowing what rev you are on at a glance and not losing your rev count is a distinct advantage. This rarely comes up in centerfire long range unless you're shooting .308WIN.
Here's a real example that puts the mid-level vs higher-end optic selection to the test.... I'm one of 4 shooters who cleaned that LYL plate rack and 1 of only 2 I know of that did it clean in 8 shots. In case you weren't there, it was a 8 plate rack at 50 yards. I think the largest plate was 2" and the smallest was 0.22" ...same size as the bullet. Standing start moving a few feet to prone shooting position. 90 second par time. Many folks in my squad struggled to even see the smallest plate in their optics having trouble finding the tiny lead colored circle against the loose clay berm background. I cleaned it in 8 for two reasons... 1. because it was at my zero distance (50 yards) which ruled out any DOPE issues, and 2. because I was shooting a Razor and was able to clearly see a 0.22" target 50 yards away and hit it because my zero wasn't 0.16" off for being caught between clicks on a mid-tier turret system. I would not have been able to do that with either of my old SWFAs.
As I said at the beginning, higher-end optics won't plug holes in your DOPE, or overcome bad wind calls on no berm targets, or remind you to check the bubble level on every shot, or fix your positional game. Overall, I had a pretty good match. I cleaned 3 of 8 stages got an 8 on another but, I also had a 1, a 4, and a couple of 5s. The factors or mistakes made on those bad stages would have happened no matter what optic I was running. Those errors made the difference between a top 5 finish and 10th place. That wasn't my optic's fault.
Good optics will work, great optics certainly help but, in the long range 22 LR rimfire realm you've got much bigger problems to solve than optics selection. That said, no reason to invite an optics handicap if you can afford not to. Get the best you can get so you can move on and focus on the real demons in rimfire that actually matter.
Before anyone asks... I'm not sponsored by Vortex. In fact, my sponsorship arrangement allows for me to shoot one of their competitors that has much better quality glass in terms of clarity and field of view. I choose to pay full street price out of my own pocket for Vortex Razor Gen2 and Razor AMGs because in my opinion, they have better reticles and turrets which make them more useful and advantageous for PRS/NRL and 22LR rimfire matches.
Optics don't win these matches. Fundamentals of positional marksmanship, having solid DOPE from 25 - 400 yards factoring spin drift, above average quality ammo, and an understanding of the peculiarities of 22LR at long distances is what wins this stuff more often than not. There are plenty of non-optic related variables to address/overcome in 22LR long range so, it is prudent to rule out as many optic-related issues as you can with the highest quality optic setup that fits your budget.
A fixed 10x SWFA HD well mounted in at least a 30+ MOA with a properly setup bubble level will be as good or better off than optics costing three times as much poorly mounted on 20 MOA mounts without a bubble level. Specific challenges of that fixed 10x SWFA would be the standard non-Christmas tree reticle and having too much magnification for easily/quickly finding targets in the optic's FOV under 100 yards, especially so under 50 yards, and while I cannot confirm with direct personal experience, it may not have enough low-end parallax to focus properly under 50 yards. I can confirm that for me, the optically similar quality 5-20x50 SWFA HD did not as I had trouble focusing it at right about 50 yards and under.
I started out with the 3-9x42 SWFA on my 20 MOA rail with an Accuracy 1st bubble level. I thought incorrectly that is did not have enough magnification to spot my own hits/misses at distance. It wasn't the magnification range so much as it was the glass quality.
So, I switched it out for 5-20x50 SWFA HD keeping the Accuracy 1st bubble. That was quite an improvement for spotting my own hits/misses. It also had more adjustment range ...in a 20 MOA mount, depending on weather, I could dial to 325 yards with SK Standard Plus ammo. Meanwhile, I was running a Vortex 4.5-27x56 Gen2 Razor HD EBR-2C and switching that over their Razor HD AMG 6-24x50 EBR-7B on my centerfire match rifles. Over time, with the experience of using those higher-end optics, I began to realize the simple reticle in the SWFA, its elevation adjustment range & parallax adjust limitations, turrets setup, and the 20 MOA rail on my rifle were holding me back in 22LR. While the optical quality was there to spot hits, that simple Mil-Quad reticle was not as good at making quick corrections flow-up shots like the better tree-style reticles such as the EBR-2C and EBR-7B. The way SWFA (and similar mid-level competitors) turrets are setup, your zero POA/POI may be caught between clicks so, you could be a 1/3" off at 100 yards with 0.1 MRAD adjustments. Often, the clicks on the turrets on SWFA would not line up with hash marks on the turret caps - my elevation cap was good but this was not the case on my windage turret. This was a pain in rimfire as you often dial out the spin drift and have to remember is the zero half way between zero and 0.1 Right or between zero and 0.1 Left?!
I replaced that setup with a Vortex 3-18x50 Gen2 Razor HD EBR-2C mounted in a Spuhr mount with 31 MOA on top of my existing 20 MOA rail giving me a total 51 MOA of scope cant. Even though the Spuhr has an integrated bubble, I continue to use the Accuracy 1st bubble level - having seen many others, I'm convinced it the easiest to read while on glass and it settles the fastest since its "bubble" it actually a weighted bead. This setup that gives me 25 mils of usable dial above my 50 yard zero which takes me to 450 yards using Norma Match22 from my 16” barrel without holdovers on the reticle.
Someone mentioned above that the reason some of us run high-end stuff like Razors in the rimfire match is to mimic our centerfire match rifle that are equipped with he same/similar optics. While there is no doubt some benefit to that (same reticle/same turrets), that's not the real reason. It's worth it to me to run a Razor in rimfire matches for several reasons. Razor turrets are designed so that you can put the zero any where on the turrets rotation, you're not limited to putting it where the clicks are so, you won't get caught between clicks on your zero. Your zero will be absolute, exactly where the bullet goes. As previously stated, the tree-style reticles are just better for corrections. You will miss more often in 22LR due to things you can't control, making quick corrections is a much bigger deal here vs centerfire. Razors have tons of vertical adjustments ranges and the 3-18x50 specifically has a vast parallax range down to 25 yards. While I typically run centerfire PRS/NRL matches at 10-12x, I have found that for rimfire I'm staying somewhere 6-10x for most stages with this Vortex. The Razor's zero stop and elevation revolution indicator are both very useful in long range rimfire where you're often dialing well past your first revolution and sometimes past your second. Knowing what rev you are on at a glance and not losing your rev count is a distinct advantage. This rarely comes up in centerfire long range unless you're shooting .308WIN.
Here's a real example that puts the mid-level vs higher-end optic selection to the test.... I'm one of 4 shooters who cleaned that LYL plate rack and 1 of only 2 I know of that did it clean in 8 shots. In case you weren't there, it was a 8 plate rack at 50 yards. I think the largest plate was 2" and the smallest was 0.22" ...same size as the bullet. Standing start moving a few feet to prone shooting position. 90 second par time. Many folks in my squad struggled to even see the smallest plate in their optics having trouble finding the tiny lead colored circle against the loose clay berm background. I cleaned it in 8 for two reasons... 1. because it was at my zero distance (50 yards) which ruled out any DOPE issues, and 2. because I was shooting a Razor and was able to clearly see a 0.22" target 50 yards away and hit it because my zero wasn't 0.16" off for being caught between clicks on a mid-tier turret system. I would not have been able to do that with either of my old SWFAs.
As I said at the beginning, higher-end optics won't plug holes in your DOPE, or overcome bad wind calls on no berm targets, or remind you to check the bubble level on every shot, or fix your positional game. Overall, I had a pretty good match. I cleaned 3 of 8 stages got an 8 on another but, I also had a 1, a 4, and a couple of 5s. The factors or mistakes made on those bad stages would have happened no matter what optic I was running. Those errors made the difference between a top 5 finish and 10th place. That wasn't my optic's fault.
Good optics will work, great optics certainly help but, in the long range 22 LR rimfire realm you've got much bigger problems to solve than optics selection. That said, no reason to invite an optics handicap if you can afford not to. Get the best you can get so you can move on and focus on the real demons in rimfire that actually matter.
Before anyone asks... I'm not sponsored by Vortex. In fact, my sponsorship arrangement allows for me to shoot one of their competitors that has much better quality glass in terms of clarity and field of view. I choose to pay full street price out of my own pocket for Vortex Razor Gen2 and Razor AMGs because in my opinion, they have better reticles and turrets which make them more useful and advantageous for PRS/NRL and 22LR rimfire matches.
Last edited:
Good write up junger.
Would you say great optics don't win these, I agree. But the other side is that bad optics DEFINITELY do lose this type of match.
I'm still by far at the low end of the scope spectrum with the 4-14 athlon, but it actually tracks and has a good turret. I kind of wish I'd gone a little more for more zoom, but it did everything I needed and the scope did not cost me any misses.
The first match with a bad scope, the scope definitely cost me a LOT of misses. This match my misses were all my own fault. Stupid extended magazine release...
For this style match, the MINIMUM I'd say is dialable turrets with mil/mil or moa/moa for the turret/reticle. Ideally ffp, but SFP could work as long as your zoom is low enough you'd never have to back off maximum zoom. If you don't have that minimum, it's still really fun, but the scope WILL hold you back.
Would you say great optics don't win these, I agree. But the other side is that bad optics DEFINITELY do lose this type of match.
I'm still by far at the low end of the scope spectrum with the 4-14 athlon, but it actually tracks and has a good turret. I kind of wish I'd gone a little more for more zoom, but it did everything I needed and the scope did not cost me any misses.
The first match with a bad scope, the scope definitely cost me a LOT of misses. This match my misses were all my own fault. Stupid extended magazine release...
For this style match, the MINIMUM I'd say is dialable turrets with mil/mil or moa/moa for the turret/reticle. Ideally ffp, but SFP could work as long as your zoom is low enough you'd never have to back off maximum zoom. If you don't have that minimum, it's still really fun, but the scope WILL hold you back.
What kind of idiot installs an extended magazine release just before a match? I mean, who DOES that?
Good points on going too low end. Only issue I got with the above is the bit about running SFP at max power all the time so, the reticle mils are true. Yes, with a SFP you can only use the reticle to hold over at max power. However, the guy with a SFP will give up fewer points by deciding to run that optic in the 6-10x magnification range (or at least not max power) so he can find the targets faster and accept that he must dial for every target.
The most recurring optic-related operator errors that I see in matches as an RO:
1. Running too much magnification. You need to QUICKLY find the targets - this requires giving yourself the widest field of view you can get and still be able to see target and hit it. This is going to most likely be somewhere in the bottom half or one third of your magnification range. Most folks new to precision rifle are also surprised to learn they shoot tighter groups on lower magnification as well. Try it... go to 100yd with a 22LR, shoot a group at max power... then, shoot another at the lowest power you can still see it. I'm willing to bet that second group is tighter for most shooters... when you can't see the holes and have less perceived wobble, I think it's subconsciously easier to stay more consistent.
2. Losing track of what elevation revolution you're on. You will dial A LOT in rimfire stages, often several revs ...especially on 5 mil turrets. Getting lost on your revs or starting the stage on the wrong one is the most certain way to botch, if not zero a stage, and can be very hard to recover from without a mechanical zero stop. Never put your rifle down after a stage and walk away without reseting your turrets to zero. NEVER.
3. Blaming wind when it wasn't the wind. In other words... Not running a bubble level and checking it before each shot and not factoring for spin drift. Scope cant has been pretty well covered. Spin drift is more pronounced in 22LR. If you're not level, you cannot know if your windage miss was actually wind or spin drift or operator induced scope cant. You cannot learn a thing about shooting in the wind until you stop shooting with scope cant and start factoring spin drift every shot.
4. Not correcting for bad scope click values. When you check the tracking on your scope, it's not just about plum vertical travel. Just as important is that your 0.1 mil click actually moves the reticle 0.1 mil and not 0.08 or 0.125 or whatever. There are many ways to run a tall target test to figure yours out. If you think you're doing everything right, your zero is straight, your muzzle velocity is spot on and adjusted for temperature, you're running a legit proven ballistics solver/app with good inputs... but, still struggle the further you go out, if you have not ruled this out or factored for it then, it may be your scope's tracking is not perfect. Good ballistic solvers can factor this into their solutions but, you got to first know that gremlin is in there before you can kill it.
Last edited:
This is absolutely spot on. I was running a SFP Viper PST in the night match/stage before the Guardian a couple of years ago. Because I was overly concerned with time (and by a coincidental fluke of luck my scope actually maxed out exactly on my 1000 yard dope), I had decided to dial to 500 and shoot holdunders and holdovers out to 800, then just dial up to max and holdunder for 800 and 900 and dead on at 1000 and instead of trying to dial each and every shot. This strategy is way too convoluted for experienced shooters, but as a new shooter, it seemed much faster and easier to me at the time than trying to come off the scope and dial each shot in the dark. My dope was solid and it worked great, right up until I got to 800 yards and didn't have enough field of vision at 24X to find the target. I got lost in that black void between the 600, 700 and 800 yard targets. And not being experienced, I didn't think to just dial the magnification back and find the target, then crank it back up. So I sat there lost for probably a full 30 -45 seconds trying to find that 800 yard plate in the dark. If I had had a FFP, I could have set it at 10X - 12X or so and had plenty of field of view to avoid that disaster. I saw a number of other newer shooters make the same mistake and get lost in that same spot.
Fast forward to this last .22 match, where I had rechecked my zero beforehand and had jacked my scope up to 24X to shoot the 300 a few times to check that dope also. I usually prefer my scope to be set at about 14X; however, I forgot/neglected to turn it back down from 24X before the first stage. So when I got to the second or third target, I got confused if it was the right target for that stage, but did not have the others in the field of view to easily confirm it was the correct plate. So again, I wasted about 10 or 15 seconds trying to scan the lane to make sure I was in the right place, and it cost me my last 2 shots on that stage because time ran out on me. So that was a possible 2 hits that were left on the table by a lack of preparation and over magnification.