SWFA SS 3-9 scope or mark 4?

[OTO27]

Anyone try this scope? I am undecided between this or a Mark 4 2.5-8x
with M2 turrets. It will be going on my MWS .308 I have a low budget so the high end ones are out of the question. Its basically comes down to these two from reading some reviews. Its tough deciding between the prooven leupold or the SS.

Also a newb question, do the M2 turrests on the mark 4 mean its calibrated for the 308?

[Meplat]

Anyone try this scope? I am undecided between this or a Mark 4 2.5-8x
with M2 turrets. It will be going on my MWS .308 I have a low budget so the high end ones are out of the question. Its basically comes down to these two from reading some reviews. Its tough deciding between the prooven leupold or the SS.

Also a newb question, do the M2 turrests on the mark 4 mean its calibrated for the 308?

I was deciding between the exact two scopes myself just a few months ago, and I ended up going with the SWFA. Not only for the price, but also because it had a few things going for it that the Leupold didn't, as well as having some raving reviews behind it. As someone who did not know much about scopes, it was a confusing process, but I ended up deciding on the SS scope after learning a bit.

First, the SS 3-9 is a FFP (first focal plane) scope. This is a plus, but it does have a drawback. Being a first focal plane scope, it means that the reticle stays a constant size, and only the magnification changes. This is, however, confusing, as when you look down a FFP the reticle will appear small at the lowest magnification, and grow and become large at the highest. The perk to a FFP scope is that, since the reticle does not change, your POA/POI will not change when changing the magnification. The con to this is that some people find the reticle too small to use on the lowest power setting.

On a SFP (second focal plane) scope like the Leupold, the reticle changes with the magnification. It grows or shrinks depending on the level of magnification, thereby making it look like it stays a constant size (confusing, yes?). If you zero in at 100yds. on, say, 4x power and then switch to 8x, your zero will no longer be exact. Exactly how off your shot will be, however, I do not know.

Although I'm not particularly experienced with "tactical" shooting, I would venture so far as to say that a FFP scope is a better choice for a mil-dot reticle if you plan on using it for it's intended purposes of size and range estimation, as well as bullet drop and wind compensation. I should note, however, that higher-end SFP scopes do not have this issue as some sort of voo-doo gnome magic ritual is performed on them. :D Higher manufacturing standards and quality, I suppose, but in your case and budget, I believe it's applicable.

Another thing in the SS scope's favor, for use with a mil-dot, is that it uses mil/mRad adjustments instead of MOA like the Leupold.
This means that your mil-dot scope's values, will not have to be converted to MOA for adjustment, which can be confusing for some and easy for others. The downside to this is that, if you're unfamiliar with the metric system, you may have a hard time.

Of course, the SS scope does not have an option for illumination, which may or may not be necessary for you. The SS scopes are tanks, though, and I would venture so far as to say they're far tougher than the Leupold scopes, with one reviewer going so far as to run over one with a truck with no loss of zero or damage.
For the price and features, I think the SS scope is a winner over the Leupold for a DMR/SPR type rifle.