2019 Leupold

[brentc]

Don't really understand why you need a massive tube cds scopes that are limited to 2 revs anyway.

4-20 is a nice add though. Would be great if we got a FFP vx 5/6 series

I don't consider the 34mm tube a disadvantage after using both in the VX-6HD lineup. I wouldn't hesitate to purchase a 34mm 4-20x52 VX-5HD if it was the magnification range I wanted.

 

[hunterdan]

Couldn't agree more. I was looking forward to the 4-20, even holding out for one. I have no need for a 34mm tube on a hunting rifle.

I was holding out for a couple of them. I was excited when I heard they were going to come out with a 4-20. What a huge let down when I seen it was a 34mm Tube. I agree no need on my hunting rifles.

I don't consider the 34mm tube a disadvantage after using both in the VX-6HD lineup. I wouldn't hesitate to purchase a 34mm 4-20x52 VX-5HD if it was the magnification range I wanted.

You make a great point but I have no desire for a 34mm tube on my hunting rifles.

 

[middleofnowhere]

What is the disadvantage to a 34mm tube? I only own one scope in 30mm tube VX-5HD 3-15x on a backpack rifle and love it. Is it just the size and weight?

 

[the hunter]

I mite be selling my SHV for the 4-20.

 

[Pdvdh]

What is the disadvantage to a 34mm tube? I only own one scope in 30mm tube VX-5HD 3-15x on a backpack rifle and love it. Is it just the size and weight?

Yup. Too heavy for my backpack hunting. Excess weight, without significant advantage in the field.

If I shot >99% of the time and walked <1% of the time, I might have a different set of priorities.

 

[Deleted member 103481]

On Vx6hd 34mm model adds 3 ounces. 20.5 to 23.5oz. Still an extremely lightweight scope for what it offers. Long range w/ zero stop scopes under 25oz are rare

 

[Pdvdh]

My 3.5-18x Swaro weighs 15.9oz.

1/2 lb less. 1" scope tube. Dials to 1000yd. Enough for my backpack hunting uses.

 

[hunterdan]

Yup. Too heavy for my backpack hunting. Excess weight, without significant advantage in the field.

If I shot >99% of the time and walked <1% of the time, I might have a different set of priorities.

Plus scope usually sits higher need taller rings/ cheek weld change.

 

[WiscGunner]

Plus scope usually sits higher need taller rings/ cheek weld change.

I don't see how the tube size has anything to do with scope ring height except if you are using a a straight tube/objective like a 1-6x30 vs 1-6x34 then I could see the smaller tube allowing lower profile. Otherwise isn't your rig height determined by the Objective bell diameter and not the tube diameter?

 

[FIGJAM]

I think it would still be slightly higher to center your eye in a 34mm tube vs a 30mm tube given the same objective. You might be able to get away with a medium vs a high ring tho with a 34mm tube.

 

[FIGJAM]

Scratch that...I don't think that first part would be right.

 

[Brado16]

I think is commical people complain about extra weight a 34mm objective adds- if that's going to make or break you, better hit the gym, loose some weight, or find another way to carry your rifle while humpin mountains.

 

[Barrelnut]

Scratch that...I don't think that first part would be right.

I think you are right. The center of the rear (ocular) 34mm lens would be 2mm higher than a 30mm lens.

 

[FIGJAM]

I think you are right. The center of the rear (ocular) 34mm lens would be 2mm higher than a 30mm lens.

Right? That's what I was thinking, but then I figured the center of both a 30mm and 34mm would be the same height and backpeddled...