Has any body used or have any experiance with the TDS-4 reticle on swarovski scopes?

I have two of the PH 4-16x50mm PH models with that reticle, TDS-4...The only difference between the standard TDS and the TDS-4 is two dots which are for the "lead" on a running Boar at 100yds....if I remember correctly.

I use mine on my long range hunting rifles and they work better than I had expected....what do you want to know???

Just that jjs, what are they like on long range stuff, are the crosshairs as fine as thier standard fine hairs?
Im looking to get another scope mainly to begin with for long range vermin. I toyed with the leupold 4 1/2-14 x 50 with a boone and crockett crosshairs but the importers tell me its not a stock item.

Alex,

Hopefully, you will have the chance to view one before purchase. The cross hairs adjust with magnification and work fine for my application.

I have mine set-up for long range deer hunting and have done an extensive amount of shooting at 400, 500, 600 yards and the TDS has proven very accurate...better than MOA. I have done some testing, although not as extensive, at 700 and 800 yds with same results.

Took a Mule Deer last year at a laser ranged 475 yds with the TDS...1st bar on my 30-378 weatherby. On a true varmit rig an option to consider, given you have time to adjust the turrets, are scopes set up with turrets. I use turrets for long range F-class target competitions and the TDS for hunting...

Hard for me to compare Leupold with a Swarovski...different league in my view. I prefer Swarovski for hunting rifles with the only exception being big boomers where extended eye relief is a plus.

Hope this help you...

Thanks jjs,
your right about different league's. swarovski has got to be the way to go.
Its always good to get other peoples views.

Swarovski and sound moderators do not mix; apparently the reticle is not etched and may come adrift. No personal experience but there are rumours of problems.

Schmidt lead the way in my opinion for robustness.

trans-pond,
just curious as to how the moderator affects a scope, especially when it significantly reduces recoil
regards
griff

Griff - my understanding of this problem (quite substancial number of variable swaros being returned) concerns the mounting of the reticule and the 'shape' of the recoil.

If you anticipate a recoil push backwards towards the shoulder (c/f rifle) - it makes sense to mount the reticule with a retaining collar to the front of the scope.

With a moderator, I believe that a proportion of the expelled gas will encounter the internal baffles of the moderator and provide an additional forward recoil element.

Certainly, it is this bi-directional recoil force that can tear scopes to pieces when mounted on powerful springer type air rifles.

It's my guess that this is the effect that is trashing the sights mentioned.

rgds Ian

Ianf,
that's just fantastic news!!!!

regards
griff

Has any body out there got or had a swarovski that has suffered from a reticle that has come a-drift?

I have a 4-16x50 TDS-4 with a moderator. Had it for 4 years now, with no problems(touch wood).

TDA-4 is a realy good retical for long range vermin, wouldent think twise about another one!

James

Alex,

Have had a 6-24x50 on my .243 for deer and vermin for about 8 years and about 5000 shots, last 4 years with a moderator, no reticle problem, just a great scope, great reticle, great field of view(look through a nightforce and see the differance). Only problem was a slipping zoom ring rubber, super glue fixed this!

Don't think you will have much bother with a Swaro on your 20 Tac, just remember the other half would like a little 20 bore, so don't blow all yer money!!