Convince me I need a 30mm rifle scope

Dentite said:

Well I guess I should have done a bit more research before posting.

In the example I shared, I did gain more FOV than just the change in magnification, but now that I look at all the details, I went from a 40mm objective to a 42mm objective and that may have helped.

I just compared two VX-3 scopes, both with a 40mm objective, one with a 1" tube, and one with a 30mm tube. And guess what...you are right! There is difference in the advertised FOV.

I should have considered that some of my increase in FOV came from a larger objective lense vs the larger main tube.

Thanks for the kind correction.

Click to expand...

txaggie1 said:

It's not hard to find a good or even new vx5 for under a grand these days - IMO the optics quality and price should match the rifle. You put a 2500 scope on a 900 rifle seems as foolish as putting a 900 scope on a 3500 rifle. Plenty of good options in every package and budget. just my 2cents;

Click to expand...

Rosebud said:

I have a $1200 scope on a six hundred dollar CZ 22LR. Call me foolish.

Click to expand...

Hugnot said:

Go for the 30mm tube.

Assuming glass & lens coatings are equal for a 1" & 30mm tube.

Internal lenses will have larger diameters in the 30mm and the F ratio being the focal length of a lens divided by the lens diameter will be less meaning more light will be focused on the image, like brighter view.

Assuming tube material, most likely 6061 type aluminum, and tube wall thickness are equal, , the rigidity or resistance to longitudinal bending.will be more for the larger radius 30mm tube scope. Some real pricy scopes use 7075 aluminum. Olde Weaver 1' tube scopes had steel tubes.

Expect to see - "Convince me I need a 34mm rifle scope" soon. Real fat scope.

Click to expand...

txaggie1 said:

It's not hard to find a good or even new vx5 for under a grand these days - IMO the optics quality and price should match the rifle. You put a 2500 scope on a 900 rifle seems as foolish as putting a 900 scope on a 3500 rifle. Plenty of good options in every package and budget. just my 2cents;

Click to expand...

Jon Bischof said:

I have both and never even notice the difference. You won't either. Also, not all 30mm scopes are heavy.

Click to expand...

wilehunting said:

Right now, I have a Leupold VX-3HD 4.5-14x cds on a Tikka T3 rebarreled to 280ai. There seems to be some concern regarding the dependability of the Leupold according to several different threads on this site. There are numerous recommendations for Nightforce and others that are 30mm. From my understanding, the only real advantage over a one inch scope is more potential adjustment as the erector assembly is the same and therefore no real exit pupil advantage. So, to me, a 30mm scope is bigger and heavier with the potential to have more robust components because of its larger size but not necessarily better outside of possibly a better brand, per se.

Click to expand...

memtb said:

This……it's when you add that giant lense, rivaling that of the Hubble Telescope, that it "packs on the pounds"! memtb

Click to expand...

MagnumManiac said:

The only time I choose a 30mm tube and 50/56mm objective is for target work 99% of the time with a little LR hunting thrown in.
Latest for me is 34mm tube, haven't mounted it yet, waiting on rings.
This scope is super heavy to me and have never experienced such a heavy scope.
I have a 30mm tube 3-18x50 on my 300RUM, looks ridiculous on a skinny barrel SPS, it's heavy too, reticle is for targets/mildot and SPF, so not really practical. Wanting to change to similar magnification in 1" tube and perhaps smaller objective of 44mm…

Cheers.

Click to expand...

BrentM said:

I have a 35mm 5-25x56 mil ffp on my prc right now. It's my hunting rifle. That thing is like 40 ounces. It's ridiculous. It's an Arken ep5 and honeslty it kind of sucks. The plan is to use it for training. Right now I'm just playing with it to see how it does.

Click to expand...