New Scope for my CZ 452 Scout.

Clayne B

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
512
Location
Saratoga Springs, Ut
SWFA SS 16x42 Mil-Quad Reticle

Got my new scope in today. it looks SWEET. feels very sturdy. the clicks feel very nice. numbers are on from topped out to bottomed out. I have not got a chance to shoot with it yet. but the glass is very clear.

I will be posting more in this thread about thoughts after shooting with it.

Until then. here are a few pic, the picture threw the scope does not do it justice. all pictures taken with my phone

0621121448.jpg


0621121448a.jpg


0621121449.jpg


0621121449a.jpg


0621121356.jpg
 
I just got back from shooting with it. its SWEET! zeroed at 25 yards. did some test. shoot, dial a mil shoot dial a mil ect. up to 10 mil and each hole lined up perfectly with the mil dots (diamonds) then took it out to 215 yards. 7.8 mil and a 1.5 for wind. its really nice being able to see your miss, measure with crosshairs then dial and hit! over all im very happy with it

I want to get some shorter rings but not sure how low i should go with how close the bolt already is...

0621122245.jpg


0621122244b.jpg


0621122244a.jpg


0621122244.jpg
 
The SWFA scopes are getting pretty good reviews by a lot of users so I suspect you'll be pretty hapy with it. In general the opinion seems to be they are one of, if not the best scopes in their price brackets.

I don't think you'll be able to go any lower on rings though without having some interference with the bolt handle.

Enjoy.
 
Got to do some more serious shooting, gathering dope for this coming weekends shoot. I tell you what i REALLLLLLY like this scope. its so sweet to shoot a group at a distance you haven't shot at before, measure the difference in elevation with the reticle and add it the turret then right it down.

And as far as it being 16x i could see my holes in paper at 200 yards. and shooting off hand at 25 yards wasn't to bad.

oh and the glass.... imo i think its great for the money. more then what you pay for!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top