Swarovski Z6 2-12 x 50

Gents,

I was in a local gun shop today and came across a "used" Swarovski Z6 2-12x50 with the ballistic reticle. This is the 30mm tube version. A quick check now that I'm home shows these scopes go for about $2000-$2100. I could by this so called "used" one for just under $1600. I say it's "used" but there's not a single sign of wear on this scope.

I guess this is a stupid question, should I get it? This will be for my .375H&H.

I found Z6 scopes new for 1779 to 2359 on the web looking for the scope...

What are you planning on using the rifle for?

Originally Posted by BRICKBURN

What are you planning on using the rifle for?

PG and DG. I want a one scope for both solution.

I have bought nothing but leupold scopes for 15 years BUT about a year ago I found a Z6 2-12 that was new but at a old price, they had had it on the shelf a while, for $1650. I looked at it several times and finally bought it.

I have it on a 375 RUM that I am going to try to shoot a buff with, and it is awesome! For my eyes a leupold is slightly clearer, but beyond that the Z6 is great, better light gathering, low yet high magnification, and the field of view is unbelievable. You can see a big part of the barrel. I can read a paper at the end of the barrel this may be very helpful if a buff has something written on his head while charging me. And at 12 power I can easily hit a pigeon at 150-200 yards. good for a steinbuck at long rang. I liked it so much that I bought a second for my 416 Rigby which I have throwing a 400 grainer at 2750 fps thus plenty of recoil. I have about 200 rounds through the 375 and 50-60 through the 416 with no problems yet.

For a gun that will only be used in the western States I'll stick with a leupold; cheaper, lighter, smaller, and I have loved the 4.5-14 for years. But if you may shoot a leopard at dusk at 50 yards, the next day shoot a ele at 20 yards, a caracal in the dark, or a jackal at 200 yards I think the Z6 is a very good idea.

By the way samplelist.com shows the 2-12 without the ballistics in the scope for $1450 I didn't look if they have the other one. I found this after I bought the first one. The second I bought from a store that had one returned with a scratch on it so I got a good deal.

Good Luck.

Originally Posted by JamieD

By the way samplelist.com shows the 2-12 without the ballistics in the scope for $1450 I didn't look if they have the other one. I found this after I bought the first one. The second I bought from a store that had one returned with a scratch on it so I got a good deal.

Good Luck.

Thanks for the link JamieD. I've never seen that outfit before. Lots of good deals there on demos. I think I'll pass on this Swarovski for now.

I haven't bought from them but did quit a bit of research on them when I was looking for my second Z6. People seemed very happy with them.

The best time to get stuff from them is right after the shot show. I'm told that is where they get a lot of product.

I think Swarovski are great scopes. It seems like a lot of money but they are super nice. I like Leupold too. But my Swarovski binoculars are to die for! And the 2-12 power would be a great choice for a 375 H&H. Plains game and buffalo hunting are what a 375 H&H is good for...short and long shots.

I think they're great too, but usually about the time the drool hits the scope I see the price tag and dry right up. That link that Jamie put up has some really good deals too however. There's a Zeiss Victory Diavari 2.5-10 with an illuminated reticle that got my attention too.

I'm also a big fan of Swarovski. I just like their simple design with their excellent glass. I am strongly contemplating putting the Z5 5-25 x 52 with the Ballistic Turret on my .243 Win . Still deciding if it will be the Z5 or the Z6 with the illuminating recticle. Not sure if the IR makes all that much difference. Would appreciate your views if you have had any experience with the IR's.

Best Regards
Marius Goosen

Marius, I've got the 1.7-10 x42 z6i on my 30-06. It is without a question the finest scope I have ever seen. The illuminated reticle makes a huge difference on a dark animal at low light. I don't know if that matters to someone in the trade who has plenty of opportunities to wait for a shot in good light, but then again, in good light, the need for a optically great scope is not much. If you actually need the excellent optics of the Swarovski, it means you are shooting in low light, in which case the illuminated reticle does make a big difference. Last year in Namibia, I was able to make a clean shot on a waterbuck at last light. I could see it easily due to the excellent optics of my scope, but could not have placed the shot well without the illuminated reticle. The day/night settings for the illumination plus regular cross hairs that work without batteries give you a lot of options but no complexity. I am no fan of complexity in my tools.

As far as the original question, I personally wouldn't go with the 2-12 on a 375 for mixed PG/DG use. I'd rather have the 1-6 for DG, and 6x is enough for me under most circumstances on plains game. I don't think I've shot any animal with my scope on even 6x. I keep it on the lowest setting and turn it up if I need to. That said, I do have a general preference for less magnification that a lot of people seem to have on plains game. If you are going to use one scope for both, I think the dangerous game side of the equation is more critical than the plains game side, even though it will almost assuredly be used more on plains game. The dangerous game is, after all, dangerous, so if a compromise is to be made, I think it should be made on the plains game side of the equation.

A ballistic reticle is interesting, but I would find it a distraction for DG and don't see need for it on plains game. If the animal is far enough away that I need drop compensation beyond holding for the top of his back, then I'd rather stalk closer.

A ballistic reticle is interesting, but I would find it a distraction for DG and don't see need for it on plains game. If the animal is far enough away that I need drop compensation beyond holding for the top of his back, then I'd rather stalk closer.

I'm not a huge fan a all of ballistic reticles and definitely wouldn't want it on a big game hunt for cape buffalo. I agree with the comment above 100 percent.

I have a Swarovski Z6 2-12 by 50 on my .375 H&H and I love it. I've used it on Cape Buffalo, Grizzly, Black Bear and Nilgai. My oldest son used it on several plains game animals. Very versitile scope, and I consider Swarovski top of the line. The range of magnification is great. At the range you can dial it up to 12 and see exactly where the bullets hit. In close quarters, 2 allows for a very wide FOV and quick target acquisition. If your target ends up being further away than you expected, being able to increase the maginification is great.

I have to agree with the comments regarding the ballistic reticle. I would avoid this for dangerous game. A simple Plex reticle is much better in my opinion.

I'm curious: whey would a 375 need a 3-12 x 50: I don't know many hunters who would shoot that caliber-particularly loaded for dangerous game( eg 300gr) at distances which would require that type of reticle and at such "long" ranges- for which the scope is intended I've used the 375twice in Africa; for plains game I never shot greater than just inside 200yds using my S&B 1.5-6 and that was BEFORE my eye surgery!!!!!! There was an interesting article in American Hunter- which I simply cannot find comparing ballistic reticles and Zeiss- whose bars are numbered, was given a much better rating by the author- The only ballistic reticle I have is for my mountain/sheep gun which is specifically for long range up to( hopefully not ) 800 yds- the farthest I shot with it was 653yds on a Borden 300Wthby using 180gr TTS- that was on a range in fairly controlled environment

Personal preference, simple as that. Agreed that 12 power is not needed for any reasonable distance that someone would shoot a .375 H&H. I just prefer high magnification for the range, primarily. Aside from an Aimpoint H30L, which has zero magnification, I don’t own a scope that does not go to at least 12 power on the upper end. When Swarovski introduced the Z6 line (6 times magnification), I was sold (low power setting of 2 for close range combined with the ability to dial up to my personal preference of 12 at the range). I did shoot a bear at over 200 yards with this set-up, and for that particular shot, I appreciated the ability to dial up the power to around 10. Once again, personal preference.

Swarovsky manufactures excellent optics, no doubt about that.

As for magnification, on a large bore rifle, I feel no need for anything larger than 6X, in fact I have shot all my animals in Africa with 4X, except for Spingbok.

My thoughts on higher magnification. Can I make a shot at 6X at 200 yards? Yes, no doubt. If the animal is relaxed and I have time to crank it higher and pick out the hair I want to hit, well then why not? I subsribe strongly to the theory of aim small, miss small. I don't mean that to sound boastful. At larger power the movements caused by your heartbeat, a breeze, nervous twitching become that much more apparent to you. By going to the higher power it has caused me to rethink just how steady I think I am.

Do you need 12x in what is basically a 200 yard gun? Nope, I just like it.

I can't blame you I love my 10X on most of my scopes....aim small...miss small. Nothing wrong with that logic. It's great to carry a gun around on low power. But if the shot is a long one, you will have time to adjust everything...more than is you walk around a corner and giant kudu is standing there eating in the brush and you can't find the kudu because you have the scope cranked.

Higher power helps me aim the shot too!

I have one, it is great, also bougth it second hand, they have lifetime warranty. you are getting a great price.