When did scopes get so large?

As someone who fell for the BIGGER IS BETTER bug, and is in the midst of planning a couple of rifle builds - one lightweight for hunting and a heavy for the range, I've spent quite a bit of time looking at weights and specs. Not sure why, guess I'm just slow, but a couple weeks ago I realized that there is a big weight jump some 30mm to 34mm tubes, and it's for a simple reason - geometry. The tube is filled with glass discs, and that glass is heavy. Those discs grow in volume and weight exponentially - 25.4mm (1") to 30mm is a 40% increase, 1" to 34mm is an 80% increase, 1" to 36mm is 101%.

I now that some of you will say "well no sh!t Sherlock"... I'm dumb, I know.

What I am currently thinking is that I'll be not caring about weight on my range gun, so I'll be choosing on glass quality, power, and features. On my hunting gun I'll be putting on something with a 30mm tube, in the 1-15 range, that comes in around 18-20oz. Right now the Vortex LRT's and one of the NF's are on my radar. I know its not a 9oz Leupold, but they have the features I want.

SRS
 
Maybe the increase of women getting into hunting and shooting is starting to have an effect on the market...... "look at the size of that!"


Guys like big stuff as well though, it might be a phallic fallacy.... but I've heard enough ladies talk about it to think there could be some truth to it..... :)
 
Sloped Roof Specialist said:
As someone who fell for the BIGGER IS BETTER bug, and is in the midst of planning a couple of rifle builds - one lightweight for hunting and a heavy for the range, I've spent quite a bit of time looking at weights and specs. Not sure why, guess I'm just slow, but a couple weeks ago I realized that there is a big weight jump some 30mm to 34mm tubes, and it's for a simple reason - geometry. The tube is filled with glass discs, and that glass is heavy. Those discs grow in volume and weight exponentially - 25.4mm (1") to 30mm is a 40% increase, 1" to 34mm is an 80% increase, 1" to 36mm is 101%.

I now that some of you will say "well no sh!t Sherlock"... I'm dumb, I know.

What I am currently thinking is that I'll be not caring about weight on my range gun, so I'll be choosing on glass quality, power, and features. On my hunting gun I'll be putting on something with a 30mm tube, in the 1-15 range, that comes in around 18-20oz. Right now the Vortex LRT's and one of the NF's are on my radar. I know its not a 9oz Leupold, but they have the features I want.

SRS
Click to expand...
The extra 9 oz, will just make you stronger! Take a big dump after breakfast and you will be fine.... :)
 
Can-down said:
Next time you see someone rocking a "Hubble space telescope", specially if it's on a nice target .22lr maybe ask them if you can take a look through it..... which will likely lead to an offer to take a couple shots.

We live in a golden age of options that's for sure, even the inexpensive optics are way better then they were 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
I just might do that, thanks for the suggestion. But if it results in me buying another scope, I'm gonna blame you. :cool:

I also agree about how good scopes are these days. The Simmons seemed decent to me until I used a Bushnell. Which seemed decent to me until I started using Leupolds. Please don't tell me that the next level up will be just as much an improvement - my bank account won't handle it.
 
I got spoiled after trying a few high-end target scopes. I like that the glass quality, tracking, reticles etc. I do most of my shooting on the range and enjoy them much more than the Leupolds VX3's I started with. Weight hasn't been an issue for me yet but I don't do any steep mountain hunting.
 
Can-down and Sloped Roof Specialist mentioned a good point. I actually run "hubble space telescopes" on my benchrest 22LR builds - but that's because the main objective of those builds is to shoot 5-shot cloverleaf groups or through the same hole, every group, all day. Every detail of those builds were meant to do just that - even down to the scope. So it doesn't matter if the scope is big and heavy. And yes, I love letting other gun range buddies try my rifles! 😁 For my group-chasing builds, I don't use anything smaller than 6-24x50 or 5-25x56 - I know, it seems crazy! 😂

I've always thought of it as purpose and budget. You probably wouldn't want a heavy telescope on a lightweight hunting rifle. On the other hand, there are scopes that are the same size with much better glass (much more expensive). I also believe that super high-end scopes, even in smaller sizes, offer better light transmission and clarity, which aid in precision aiming. Even for precision or long range builds, there's a difference between "hitting" and "chasing groups". A lot of scopes can hit plates at 300 yards; but you'll probably want more zoom power for chasing groups.

I think nowadays there are more disciplines / competitions, more styles of shooting, different types of rifle builds, therefore manufacturers are offering more options; practically having a product offering for everyone, every segment, to fill in every product gap. Technology has also come a long way - many offer convenience features (parallax, zero stops, larger tubes for more elevation adjustment, specialized reticles, etc.). It doesn't mean old or small scopes are bad - but I think scopes are more accessible now, and there's something for everyone.
 
balonbay said:
Can-down and Sloped Roof Specialist mentioned a good point. I actually run "hubble space telescopes" on my benchrest 22LR builds - but that's because the main objective of those builds is to shoot 5-shot cloverleaf groups or through the same hole, every group, all day. Every detail of those builds were meant to do just that - even down to the scope. So it doesn't matter if the scope is big and heavy. And yes, I love letting other gun range buddies try my rifles! 😁 For my group-chasing builds, I don't use anything smaller than 6-24x50 or 5-25x56 - I know, it seems crazy! 😂
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say crazy. I'd say "fit for purpose".
 
..... I'm sensing judgement for the 7-35x56 on my 22lr. ;)

It all comes down to the intended use. With the 4x, 5x, 6x, 8x multipliers we're seeing now the lenses need to be certain distances, so the larger optic is necessary, optimal light transmission, etc.

And as was touched on, a big one is maximum elevation in relation to tube size. You just can't fit the same amount of elevation into a 1" tube as a 30mm tube. and the same can be said for a 34mm tube.
And I guess one can ask why would you need that much elevation? But gravity is a #####... and it takes 42.2 mils (145 moa) to hit 600m.
 
I prefer 1-4x or 2-7x , the freedom 2-7 hunt plex is my favorite glass, but have noticed a trend in guys buying light rifles and mounting huge heavy scopes with lots of knobs and turrets, thinking that instantly makes them some sort of special forces super sniper operator, I got news for you putting a 5-25x on your Tikka T3 doesn’t qualify you as a Navy Seal.
 
bunny said:
I prefer 1-4x or 2-7x , the freedom 2-7 hunt plex is my favorite glass, but have noticed a trend in guys buying light rifles and mounting huge heavy scopes with lots of knobs and turrets, thinking that instantly makes them some sort of special forces super sniper operator, I got news for you putting a 5-25x on your Tikka T3 doesn’t qualify you as a Navy Seal.
Click to expand...

That's funny :cool: . I'm sure there's some of that play acting going on, as Bittereinder mentioned, (just like you see the like the pyjama/noSkill crowds in Asian martial arts), but I also think there are folks who just want to wring maximum accuracy from each shot taken.

Cheers,
Marlin989
 
Last edited:
ATRS Shaun said:
..... I'm sensing judgement for the 7-35x56 on my 22lr. ;)

It all comes down to the intended use. With the 4x, 5x, 6x, 8x multipliers we're seeing now the lenses need to be certain distances, so the larger optic is necessary, optimal light transmission, etc.

And as was touched on, a big one is maximum elevation in relation to tube size. You just can't fit the same amount of elevation into a 1" tube as a 30mm tube. and the same can be said for a 34mm tube.
And I guess one can ask why would you need that much elevation? But gravity is a #####... and it takes 42.2 mils (145 moa) to hit 600m.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you big scope precision guys ought to shoot at your own ranges. You make average shooters look bad. :ninja: Freakin' ninjas. ;)

And what you said is the crux of it, isn't it? "...It all comes down to intended use...".
 
It's all about capability and usually to get more capability within a certain budget, scopes are heavier and bulkier.

Want better light transmission especially in dim conditions? It's necessary to increase the size of the tube and/or increase the Obj diameter. Want convenient and fast MOA/MIL adjustments then external target turrets are nice if somewhat bulky. Want more magnification for those distant shots then size of scope and weight will generally increase.

The question you need to answer is What type of shooting am I trying to set myself up for?
 
ATRS Shaun said:
I just wish the industry could all agree that adjustable parallax is not a want, it's a need.
Click to expand...
100%. Ever since I tried my first scope with parallax, I never looked back. I've been in the process of selling all of my old scopes without parallax and replacing them with ones that do. It's the one feature that I think all scopes should have.
 
bunny said:
I prefer 1-4x or 2-7x , the freedom 2-7 hunt plex is my favorite glass, but have noticed a trend in guys buying light rifles and mounting huge heavy scopes with lots of knobs and turrets, thinking that instantly makes them some sort of special forces super sniper operator, I got news for you putting a 5-25x on your Tikka T3 doesn’t qualify you as a Navy Seal.
Click to expand...
I was gonna leave this alone, but the accusation of 'special forces super sniper operator navy seal' is just... ridiculous.


You got a laugh out of me, is it fair game for me to then say that your 2-7 hunt plex means you wear a 'coon skin hat, tanned leather vest, a buck knife lovin' Davey Crockett wannabe? ;)
Is this you:
1741814464044.png
.... okay actually that was kind of fun to do.


Marlin989 said:
Yeah, you big scope precision guys ought to shoot at your own ranges. You make average shooters look bad. :ninja: Freakin' ninjas. ;)

And what you said is the crux of it, isn't it? "...It all comes down to intended use...".
Click to expand...

lol, only ninja I ever been compared to is the Beverly Hills Ninja. BUT, Rocky Rod and Gun Club is pushing out to 1600m this summer! Woohoo!

1741814532141.png
 
This is a scope from the 50's, a Lyman 15X Super Targetspot.
Fantastic scope design , basically a telescope mounted in adjustable pillow blocks .
https://imgur.com/2ED3GiW
They were used for both target shooting and hunting back in the day.
This beat up old 2.5X Kahles is the next generation style with internal adjustments that physically moved the reticle within the tube so if you were a bit off center on the bases, the reticle was over to one side when zeroed .
https://imgur.com/sOzUBZC
This older model Leupold 2-7X is about as modern and big as I get on my main hunting rifle, although I normally use a 1.25-5X these days for everything out to about 350 yards.
https://imgur.com/ehCvRuF
This 16X Leupold Mk4 is pretty much your modern scope with a larger obejective lens, exposed turrets, ad adjustable parallax adjustment on the left side.
https://imgur.com/aCBXHfR
Thenn we have the big 20-50X X56mm variable target scopes with 1/8 MOA click reticles designed for long range competition .
https://imgur.com/cpukEkL
Where it is going to end is anybody's guess, now that they have laser assisted scopes out there !
Cat
 
Last edited:
ATRS Shaun said:
I was gonna leave this alone, but the accusation of 'special forces super sniper operator navy seal' is just... ridiculous.


You got a laugh out of me, is it fair game for me to then say that your 2-7 hunt plex means you wear a 'coon skin hat, tanned leather vest, a buck knife lovin' Davey Crockett wannabe? ;)
Is this you:
View attachment 919055
.... okay actually that was kind of fun to do.




lol, only ninja I ever been compared to is the Beverly Hills Ninja. BUT, Rocky Rod and Gun Club is pushing out to 1600m this summer! Woohoo!

View attachment 919057
Click to expand...
Uh, nope! I use irons for that game and something a bit bigger than a coon skin for a hat! LOL
https://imgur.com/9gzadRA
Cat
 
ATRS Shaun said:
And as was touched on, a big one is maximum elevation in relation to tube size. You just can't fit the same amount of elevation into a 1" tube as a 30mm tube. and the same can be said for a 34mm tube.
And I guess one can ask why would you need that much elevation? But gravity is a #####... and it takes 42.2 mils (145 moa) to hit 600m.
Click to expand...

Great point! Folks are often surprised to see the big scopes on a .22, but we need those scopes with 50moa rails to lob our slow little buddies waaaaay up in the air and then see the tiny quiver of the gong!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom