When looking at modern budget LPVOs, the ones that stand out to me are the versions with fiber illuminate reticles.  These have been around for a while in different guises, but they started (at least the ones I can think of) with Japanese manufacturers.  Trijicon has been dabbling with different version for a long time, but Vorte Razor Gen2 1-6x24 is the scope that really put it on the map.  These have been made in significant quantities and acquitted themselves very nicely.  A while back, I spent some time in the place that maintains a lot of the small weapon systems for the various specialized troops we have.  I was not there for dayoptics, but boy did I see a lot of Razor Gen2 scopes there.  They were well liked and they held up well.  Simple reticle was easy to use and the ultra bright fiber dot made the scope seriously fast.  Wide and very well corrected FOV did not hurt either.  The scope is not cheap, so Vortex offered a similar reticle illumination scheme in a much cheaper Phillipino made PST Gen2 1-6x24 https://alnk.to/aANR0Sl

A lot more recently, Chinese OEMs figured out how to do fiber reticles and Primary Arms' 1-6x24 with Nova fiber iluminated reticle became an unmitigated success. https://alnk.to/6bUUuw4  

Fiber illuminated reticles are electroformed (wire), rather than etched out of glass.  That prevents reticle designers from adding many features of questionable utility into the sight picture.  Apparently, the concept worked since Primary Arms has since added a fiber illuminated version of their PLxC 1-8x24 which is really impressive https://alnk.to/4XvBCQE (review coming soon).   That's the scope that goes head to head with the Razor Gen2.

What, then, goes head to head with the inexpensive PA SLx?

That would be the 2nd generation of SwampFox Tomahawk scopes.  I saw the 1-6x24 version at SHOT and it is avialable with a wire fiber illuinated reticle (BFO in SwampFox parlance) and more conventional, but less bright glass etched reticle.  All of these reticles are avialable in 1-4x24 and 1-6x24 models.

Unlike most other scopes out there, SwampFox offers their fiber illumination in four colors: red, blue, green and amber.

After staring at the specs a little bit, I got my hands onto the 1-4x24 model with amber iluminated dot.

I suspect more people would prefer red or green dot https://alnk.to/58qmBLq , but I had a very specific thing I wanted to test.

I have mild astigmatism and an ultra bright red dot does trigger it slightly.  It does not impact my shooting, but amber is supposed to play better with astigmatism.  For people with more sever eye astigmatism than mine, this could be important.

Well, to cut the long story short, the amber dot is indeed sharper to my eye.  Here is the view through the Tomahawk II on 1x:

and on 4x:

I looked at the Tomahawk next to he similarly priced Primary Arms SLx 1-6x24:

In comparison, the new Swampfox is about an inch shorter and a couple of ounces heavier.  The illumination on the PA is a bit brighter, but both were easily day bright in midday Albuquerque sun.

PA's SLx has simple covered turrets.  SwampFox uses locking exposed turrets.  That probaby accounts for the weight difference.  On a scope of this type, covered turrets work just fine, but as long as the turrets lock, I do not hugely care.

What I do care about is the FOV and that is the reason I went with the 1-4x SwampFox instead of the 1-6x.  On 1x, it has 134ft @ 100yards FOV.  That's a lot.  All of the scope I talk about in the background section above are in the 115 to 120 ft range.  Here is the view through the SLx on 1x.  Note that FOV difference:

The 1-6x version of the Tomahawk II has FOV nearly identical to the PA, but the 1-4x is wider.  To me, that is probably more important on a budget LPVO than the erector ratio (within reason).  I'd love to see a truly modern 1-4x LPVO that is very short and has wide FOV.

In the meantime, I am pretty hapy with the new SwampFox.  Optically, it is a step up over the previous generation and a flatter image than the SLx.  Now, it is not a true apple to apples comparision due to different erector ratios.  However, it is a very nicely sorted out scope in terms of image quality.  Resolution and contrast are pretty good even at the edges.  I spent time with it in a variety of lighting conditions without any issues.  Even flare is fairly well controlled.

Mechanically, I have not had any issues yet, but it is a sample of one.  I did not test whether the windage turret tracks.  It tracked correctly while sighting in, but that's oe adjustment.  I did check the elevation turret to the tune of about 30MOA and it was accurate.  Since I do not intend to dial with it, I did not spend much time on that.  The clicks are 0.5 MOA each and one full turn of the turret is 50MOA.

That gets to what I consider to be the main weakness of the design: like several SwampFox products it is MOA only.  That basically makes it a non-starter for my own personal use, but if you are an MOA shooter, you might like it.

If you can live with the MOA reticle, the new Tomahawk II appears to be a very nicely sorted out budget LPVO option.  Like all SwampFox products to date, it is made in China, which is why it costs what it costs.  If you want a different country of origin, you'll need to open up your wallet a bit wider.

However, you would have to open it MUCH wider to get a alrger apparent FOV.  The 1-4x24 Tomahawk II clocks in with an apparent field of view of just over 25 degrees.  That's quite a lot and is one of the reasons it works well with clip-ons.  Between that and the different reticle illumination options, it offers a compelling alternative.

This competition is a blast.  Next year, I am going to shoot it.  It is an interesting combination of normal precision shooting with both bolt gun and semi-auto, shooting from unsupported positions with both, and some handgun shooting.   The focus is still on stuff that requires good precision, but it does require a lot of versatility, thinking outside the box and team communication.

Simply watching people shoot was very illuminating.  Field stages are long rifle only.  Assault stages is where things get creative. 

Each team has two shooters.  One carries a bolt gun and a handgun.  The other carries a semi-auto carbine and a handgun.

For example, there was one stage where the first shooter has to shoot several plates with a handgun.  The plates are far enough where you need to know what you are doing.  I tried it with my carry gun (G43x) and struggled a little.  Watching other people shoot at these with full size handguns made me feel a little less bad about myself.  When a pistol shooter missed a target, his teammate had to shoot a hanging plate 250 yards away with whichever long gun he happens to have.  250 yards is not very far, except you are not allowed to use tripods and can not sit or go prone.  You can get on one knee, but nothing else is supposed to touch the ground.

The people who had triple pull Ckye bipod did not have any issues there.  Here is a picture with Dorgan settng up to make it look easy:

If you do not have a tall-ass bipod... you improvise.  Here is one of the more creative methods I saw.  It looks odd, but beats the hell out of doing this unsupported. 

After they were all done, we shot a little at that 250 yard plate.  My kids shot it prone and made quick work of it.  I shot it unsupported and only connected on the third shot.  I suspect that doing this on the clock would make things worse.

On long rifle stages, pretty much everyone was shooting off of tripods, some kneeling, some standing.  I think many people unutilized the gear they had and completely forgot that it is a team event where they can use their teammates gear as well (they shoot one at a time).  The whole team aspect makes it even more interesting.

I spent even more time with the Signature LRF bino.  I like it.  It is going onto my list of recommendations.  https://shrsl.com/4kzs1   10x42 is not my favourite configuration, but it works well enough.  User interface is quite familiar.  All I need from it is to give me the LOS distance and horizontal distance, which it easily does.  Ranging worked pretty well to a bit beyond 2000 yards.  It is probably more along th elines 1000-1200 yards on a deer though.  That's plenty for my purposes.  The binocular is easy to hold.  Rubber coating is just right in terms of giving me a secure hold without getting too sticky.  Collimation quality is good, since I did not have any real eye fatigue to worry about.  Focus wheel is not showing any apparent hysteresis.

I also shot a bit with a handgun that had Burris' new Fastfire C red dot. https://alnk.to/cSHEuuf It is a RMSc pattern sight with a 6MOA dot.  You can either run it in a manual mode or in an autoadjust moode (my preference).  One the Burris guys had a G43x similar to mine excpet with the Fastfire C.  My G43x wears Crimson Trace's Rad Micro (I am wrapping up with a lng term test).  Rad Micro has worked well for me, but in terms of sight picture and dot quality, I have to admit the Fastfire C is a better sight.  Between these two, the only reason to go with CT would be if you have a preference for green dots https://alnk.to/6TzT8NE

There was a lot more to observe and tomorrow I'll head out to other stages and do some more shooting when the competitors are done.

It took some planning, pulling a string or two and the entirety of my powers of persuasion (on my wife), but the kids and I made it to Burris Optics Team Challenge competition in Wyoming.  The competition officially starts tomorrow morning.  Today started with a tour of Burris' offices and manufacturing facility in Greely, CO followed by a longer than anticipated drive out to Douglas, WY.

I have visited Burris in the past, so I can attest that they are beefing up their capabilities in the US.  Every time I come here, the facility is a bit better than before.  Still, the main purpose of this visit was to show my kids how stuff gets made.  Modern day children are convinced that products come out of an Amazon box.  It was nice to see them develop an understanading of what goes into making these htings, from CNC machines to assembly labs to R&D facilities, etc.

It was also nice for the kids to realize that there are places in this world with more riflescopes than my workshop.

Then, we headed out to Wyoming.  A three hour drive became a 4+ hour drive because we got hit with a massive hale storm a couple of times (my rental car is now all dented up which will make returning it in a few days unnecessarily involved).

It was a perfectly normal summer drive through Wyoming.  Then it got dark.  Rain dropped visibility down to a few feet.  Quail egg sized hail hammered the car (it felt like sitting inside a drum while God wa playing a percussive solo).  A freeway that was dry 15 minutes ago turned into a river of ice.

Eventually, we made it through after having to stop and wait it out a couple of times.  The third time hail hit that day was when we were are the range.

Today was sorta prep day: Burris brought a bunch of stuff for people to shoot.  Competitors were checking their zeros.  Because of the bloody hail, we got there a little late, but we did to a little shooting here and there.  I got to spend some more time with Beretta 92xi that surprised the hell out of me at SHOT.  I really liked it back in January and liked it even more this time around.  I'll have to pick one up.  I did not get a chance to shoot any long guns, but I'll rectify that over the next couple of days.  We are here until Sunday.

It is a nice facility, so I look forward to some shooting once the comptitors are done each day.

My plan is to roam around, watch competitors shoot the stages and take a few pictures.  There are three field stages and four assault stages.  Each team has two shooters, one with a boltgun and another with a semi-auto.  If you are not familiar with this competition, here are the basics:  http://competition-dynamics.com/burris-optics-team-challenge-2024/

I'll do a livestream after it is all done to talk about what I saw.  It sounds like a blast, but it is a difficult competition.

Since we flew here, I tried to go light.  Burris loaned me three binoculars to play with: Signature HD 12x50, Signature HD 10x42 and Signature LRF 10x42.  I have not seen any of these before (outdoors), so I plan to spend some time with them while I am here. https://alnk.to/74uDLld

Since we got soaked earlier today, they ended up going through an impromtu waterproofnes test without any issues.

Today, I was mostly using the 10x42 LRF bino and I have to admit it looks earily similar to Leupold BX-4 Range LRF bino and Meopta Optika LR for a lot less money.

Opticsplanet has the Signature LRF 10x42 for $819 https://shrsl.com/4kzs1 at the moment.

The way the LRF bino is constructed, I bet it is from the same OEM.  I do not have a ton of experience with the BX-4 Range, but quite a lot with the Optica LR.  The Signature LRF looks eerily similar except for a lot less money.  Optically, it is very respectable, especially given that had a built in LRF. 

I have only looked at the 12x50 and 10x42 conventional binos briefly, so I do not have any strong opinons yet.  They looked pretty decent for the $500-ish price.  FOV is not super wide, but the image seemed well corrected.