concerning riflescopes, does the 30mm tube offer a great advantage over the 1 inch tube?

Also, regarding the manufacturers Zeiss, Swarovski and Kahles, which one due you prefer and why?

It potentially offers more strength. It offers mainly a larger range of windage and elevation adjustments. Unless going to large magnification you probably don't need the extra adjustment for the most part.

quote:

Originally posted by Esldude:
It potentially offers more strength. It offers mainly a larger range of windage and elevation adjustments. Unless going to large magnification you probably don't need the extra adjustment for the most part.

What does the magnification have to do with the need for more or less elevation/windage adjustment?

IMHO

The main advantage is that the magnification multiplier is larger (in almost all cases) with the 30mm, i.e. 3x9's have 1" tubes, 3x12 have a 30m tube. Also, they are supposed to have a larger range of elevation and windage adjustments, as esldude says.

I own 2 Zeiss's, 1 Kahles, and 1 Burris Black Diamond. 2 have 1" tubes and 2 have 30mm tubes. I don't base my decision on which size tube, but more on other factors that I am looking for.

Zeiss, Kahles, or Swarovski - can't go wrong.

In Swarovski's the advantages of the 30mm Tube are that they use a stouter more recoil proof spring system in the 30mm tubes and you can see a little better through them.
I own several 1" and 30mm Swaro's with 50mm objectives and I can just see better through the 30mm's even at the same magnifications. They may have the same glass and my observations may not be all the scientific buy my eyes can definately tell the difference.
I don't have enough examples of the other brands to make as valid a comparison...........DJ

This discussion is the perfect [!!!] example of why manufacturing hype works so well.

"What does the magnification have to do with the need for more or less elevation/windage adjustment?"

Extra magnification has nothing to do with needing more adjustment. However, higher magnification scopes have less adjustment range. A low mag scope vs. a 20x or 24x will usually have only half the adjustment range. The 30 mm tube gives some of it back to you. I have seen it occur several times, that a 6-24x or 6.5-20x scope will run out of elevation when a lower mag scope would have had some to spare. That Rick is what it has to do with it.

In regards to Swarovski scopes in particular, they use a 3-1 adjustment range in their one inch variables. In the 30 mm tubes they use 4-1 adjustment ranges. Other things being equal, 4-1 scopes have less adjustment range than the 3-1 variables. In the case of the Swarovki's, the 30mm tube just about exactly gives you back the adjustment range lost by going to 4-1 ranges vs. 3-1 variables.

I have a 30mm Leica 3.5-10x on my 300 Win. Mag., and it's a great scope in every way, but I can't see that it offers any performance advantage over the 1" 3.5-10x Leupold VX-III I have on my other 300 Win. Mag.

In fact, I really like the 1" Leupold better, simply because it's more compact, and lighter in weight.........

AD

The actual benefit of a 30 mm tube lies in the fact that you have more adjustment range up and down and left and right. The light that reaches the eye has more to do with the exit pupil number and also the quality of coatings applied to the lenses.

a 3.5 - 10 x 40 mm will yield a exit pupil of 4 (40 divided by 10) The eye cannot handle more than 7 when young and this number goes down with age to about 4.5. The problem is when this number drops to below 3.5 then visibility is greatly impaired - for example a scope configuration of 4.5 - 14 x 40 mm yields an exit pupil of only 2.86 at max magnification. That is why at such magnification one needs a 56 mm objective lens (56/14 = 4)

Chris

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
This discussion is the perfect [!!!] example of why manufacturing hype works so well.

C'mon, Rick. Don't you know that you can't possibly squeeze enough light through a lil ole 1" tube to see a ten-point buck at 3 AM from 800 yards away? And if you can't see 'em, you can't shoot 'em!

Besides, if the manufacturers didn't have the advertising hype to sell over-priced, gimmicky scopes to neophytes, you and I would have to pay a lot more for the truly useful scopes we buy. So see, we should quit complaining about idiotic hype and join in the chorus.

How about some 1.5" maintubes, fellas, them would really brighten up the view? I guess the manufacturers won't let us have any of them because they're reserved for the CIA!

WOW WOW WOW what a way to start something on this forum "asking for your opinions"

stonedgeek is at it again,GHEEESH

Small fish come with proportional brains.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Small fish come with proportional brains.

Is that the BEST you can do little man?

I have the Swaro 1.5-6 x 42 4A 1K w/30mm tube and everything about it is awesome. I have yet to have anyone else look through that scope and not say "wow" and so it isn't just me. JMO.