30mm versus 1" tubes on scopes

[Lone_Gunman]

I can't find much info on which is supposed to be better. Does it really matter?

 

[Medusa]

Not much, the 30 mm tube does offer a slight advantage in chromatic and spherical abberations, but mostly these are one standard vs another. If the piece is top quality, then get what you like most.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Specifically, I am looking for scopes for a 223 bolt action rifle that will mainly be shot off a bench at 100-200 yds at paper targets. Will 1 inch versus 30mm make a difference?

 

[Thin Black Line]

No. If you were shooting 300 yards on up, yes.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

TBL:

Why? What does a 30mm tube do that a 1 inch tube can't do? Is it an issue of light transmission? Why is a 30 mm tube better at long ranges?

 

[ctdonath]

Bigger tube = greater elevation adjustment.

 

[goblin357]

My wife has a Leupold Mk4 PR 3-9x40 with a 1" tube on her .223 Steyr Tactical Elite scout.
She's grouping 1" at 200 yards with it, and will take her all the way out to 1000yards with the 56moa elevation.

I can't recommend it enough.

Here it is at Leupold's website.

http://www.leupold.com/products/tactical_products/Mark_4_3-9x40mm_PR.htm

 

[ctdonath]

I musta missed something. My Leupold Vari-X 3 with 1" tube on a Steyr Scout (19" launching .308) only got me out to 600m with the full range of elevation (56MOA IIRC). Had to order rings with a built-in 20MOA slope to squeeze it out to 1000m.

 

[ocabj]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the 56MOA adjustment listed for the Mark 4 3-9 PR only for the entire range of adjustment from end to end and not from center? Meaning that you only actually have 28MOA adjustment from optical center to bottom (or top)?

 

[rockstar.esq]

So I'll chime in given that when I was making up my mind about just this issue I decided to go with the 30mm tube for two reasons. The first reason is that the larger tube gathers more light (noticably) than the 1". Given that ALL optics loose some of the light through transmission, I figured that more in will only help. The second reason was that the reticle had more room to allow no dial up holdover for almost 800 yds with a .308! Most if not all 1" tubes need slanted bases to allow the needed holdover for 1000yd shooting. Something against them is that there are considerably fewer options for 30mm tubes than the 1". Also the 30mm tubes weigh more which in all fairness might have more to do with the typical construction than anything proportional to diameter. One thing I really like about my scope (IOR 2.5-10X 50) is that the objective bell isn't so sharply flared as the 1" tubes with similar objective diameters. The net result is that the scope seems better proportioned when mounted to the rifle. You'll likely get all kinds of advice but my 2 cents is that going above 10X or so will magnify mirage more than you'd think. A cursory look around will show that most 30mm scopes hover around this magnification level which makes the best use of it.

 

[USSR]

The first reason is that the larger tube gathers more light (noticably) than the 1".

Negatory. The size of the tube has zero to do with light transmission. Light transmission is a function of objective diameter and lense quality and coatings. The only thing a larger diameter tube does is allows for greater W&E adjustment.

Don

 

[sscoyote]

Some of the VX-III, and other Leupold models have 100 MOA of total adjustment, both vertical and horizontal. This allows for a lot more flexibility for the long-range shooter who likes to run turret clicks-- especially when combined with a slanted base of 20+ MOA, or maybe some Burris Posi-Align Signature rings.