Scope tube size

[Geetch]

Everything I've read says that a 1" tube will transmit as much light at a 30mm tube. The main difference is in strength of the scope and a larger range of reticle adjustment.

True?

[Swamp Rat]

I would venture that the quality of the glass and the coatings thereon would have more of an impact. But, that being said, I bought my first 30mm tube scope (Leupold Vari-X III Long Range 4.5-14x50mm) this year, and love it. Especially the Boone and Crocket reticle and side focusing knob. But, that's another story.

[Geetch]

With the money I got from my IOR, I was thinking about a Swarovski 1 inch 4-12x50mm.

[Swamp Rat]

That would be a good scope - but look at the Zeiss Conquest scopes as well.

[Redleg Camo]

What do yall think would be a scope to go on my beater rifle (mossberg 100ATR 30-06)? I dont need anything expensive. Something you wont mind getting dirty. I hunt mostly in heavy cover, so I need one that will get the most light.

[Geetch]

I've read that the Zeiss are slightly inferior glass.

[Gunning Bird]

Geetch - I have the exact same scope you are considering. I'm no optics expert, but I absolutely love it. I think it's a good value for the $.

[CWPINST]

DT,
I consider the best scope for the money to be the Weaver Grand Slam 3.5x10x50mm. It is better in light transmission than my 50mm Vari-X-III 4.5x14x50AO Leupolds. It cost about $300.

[Swamp Rat]

The Weaver is a fine scope, but the folks I know that buy, install, and use a lot of scopes on an annual basis seem to be of the opinion that the quality / quality control of the Weavers has slipped a little over the past year, and that the new Leupolds are a bit better - but, all in all, you can still get a lemon in any scope. They seem to see-saw a bit on quality. I spent last Saturday zeroing my brother's rifle (with a Grand Slam) and my own (with the Leupold Vari-X III) and thought the Leupold was brighter. Just my two bits.

There are several what I consider to be relatively "solid" brands - Leupold, Burris, Weaver, Zeiss are good examples... There are others as well.

For me, scopes to avoid include the lower end Bushnells, Simmons (especially), Tasco, and BSA. There are other bads ones as well.

[CWPINST]

Interesting. I had not heard that, but I have also not looked through one in a couple of years. Is your Leupold the Vari-X-III or the VX-III?

[Swamp Rat]

Oops - my bad. It's the VX-III 4.5-14x50mm Long Range with the Boone & Crockett reticle.

[jwilliams]

Hands down the swarovski 30mm is the best glass I have ever looked through....The Kahles is second...and very good.

I am not a big fan of the american made zeiss..The zeiss victory is top notch..I ahve a pair of those binocs and I like them better than I did the swarovski.

[mirroman]

I bought a new rifle this year and had a Zeiss Conquest mounted on it (40mm). Took it outside around dusk dark that afternoon and was very dissapointed. I loved the quality of the glass(very clear), but did not pick up enough light.
I returned it the next day and mounted a Bushnell 4200 Elite (4x16x50mm) and I love it.
I sat until 7:40 last night and could have easily seen and shot a deer with no problem.
I also have the 3200 Elite on my old rifle and am very happy with it.
My .02...

[Geetch]

is the glass in the american swarovski the same as the 30mm swarovski?

[TJManifold]

got the 4.5x10x50 bushnell elite with light up recticle (red dot) love it

[Gunning Bird]

G - My 1" tube Swarovski was made in Austria. Not sure where they are made now...