New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 30mm vs. 1"
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

30mm vs. 1"

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/27/2006 at 11:44
jbroadnax View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: January/04/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10

How much difference if any in Light filtering can once expect between and 30mm and 1" Rifle scope.  I know there is more adjustment in windage with a 30mm but how much better is it in low light condtions? 

 

I have a Swarovski AV 4x12x50.  I am contemplating a 4x16x50 PV.  Will the PV be worth the extra money interms of low light, and or long range shooting?  IS IT A 500.00 BETTER SCOPE?

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/27/2006 at 12:36
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Assuming the same optical quaity there is no difference whatsoever in light transmission between 30mm and 1" scopes.

Here is the link with some information:

http://opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=2169&PN=1

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/27/2006 at 20:34
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

Swarovski uses the same glass and coatings in their one inch and 30mm scopes.  They have the same resolution and light transmission.  The extra money for the Pro-Hunter is because of the exchange rate (Euro vs. Dollar), 20% import duty on scopes from Austria, higher wages, recoiling eye cup, gold coil spring holding the reticle.

 

The 1" Swarovski are assembled in the USA from imported components (no 20% duty), we work cheaper than the Austrians too.

 

Zeiss 30mm scopes are much brighter and have much greater resolution when compared to their 1" line however because they are two totally different scopes (glass, coatings, everything).

 

The Swarovski American Lightweight scopes are the best value in ultra high end optics....by far.

 

Check the SampleList.com for some really good deals.  My favorite is the 4-12x50 TDS.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/27/2006 at 21:48
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
Too bad they don't make a 1.5-5 or 2-7 American as this information is really new to me regarding glass and coatings. Chris does the same apply for the Kahles? Your discussion on the 1.1-4 Helia for your big game gun was really good news, too. $699 on the Sample List, hmmmm, maybe the Kahles American doesn't matter anyway.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/28/2006 at 18:57
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
correct me if I am wrong.  But, I thought I heard Chris say the Swarovski scopes had painted reticles.  Regardless, the law of La Place state that the wider the diameter of an object the greater the tension and therefore the weaker the tube, unless it is thicker.  Therefore, I have always been suspect of 30mm scopes as being stronger and more rugged.  Do these euro-makers state how thick the scope walls are, compared to other scope makers.  The analogy for persons not familiar with this law of physics, is that a small bird egg is more rugged, as compared to a larger egg.  Just curious, because I do not own and cannot afford these euro scopes.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/28/2006 at 19:30
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
If memory serves me right, Laplace's law refers to the tension in the walls of the tube as a result of internal pressure.  Since I do not think the scope has a very high chance of being warped from internal pressure, I am not sure how applicable Laplace's law is. 

Generally, it is not entirely clear what is meant by "scope tube strength".  There are all sort of mechanical stresses that are all a bit different and depend on a number of parameters.  I suspect that, largely, people are referring to tube stiffness.  If that is the case, a larger diameter tube of the same wall thickness will be stiffer (until there is a catastrophic material collapse of one of the walls).  In other words, it will be a little easier to break, but harder to bend.

Whether European manufacturers truly use walls or not is hard to say offhand.  I just looked at comparative weights of 30mm and 1" scopes from Burris and Leupold and my guess would be that the wall thickness is about the same between of 1" and 30mm models (comparing Leupy to Leupy and Burris to Burris).  Whether Europeans use thicker is not easy to determine since most of the wieght in a scope comes from glass, so the weight contribution of a slightly thicker tube is difficult to reverse engineer.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2006 at 06:45
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
While, it is true that the law of LaPlace is usually applied to objects with changing internal pressures, the same concept applies, to any object with a fixed internal pressure.  The greater the radius of that object, the greater the tension and the less force required for external pressure to damage said object.  The only reason I bring the subject up, is that many people use the reason for buying a 30mm tube is because they are more rugged.  I only own one and do not even have it mounted on a rifle, so I don't have any personal experirence.  Just a question, from a different standpoint and wondering whether they are more rugged, from people who have more experience than myself.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2006 at 12:12
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

Originally posted by tahqua tahqua wrote:

Too bad they don't make a 1.5-5 or 2-7 American as this information is really new to me regarding glass and coatings. Chris does the same apply for the Kahles? Your discussion on the 1.1-4 Helia for your big game gun was really good news, too. $699 on the Sample List, hmmmm, maybe the Kahles American doesn't matter anyway.

 

Yes the same is true with Kahles.  In fact I am in the process of switching my American Lightweight Swarovskis with Kahles CL 1" scopes.  Kahles is the world's oldest scope manufacturer; they were purchased by Swarovski when the last Kahles passed away with no heir.  Swarovski immediately started branding the Kahles scopes with their name and kind of treated Kahles like a step child for many years.  The resentment grew and grew because all of Kahles' hard work and ideas were being used under the Swarovski name and the Kahles brand was positioned by Swarovski to be a lower line.  Kahles finally just stopped sharing, basically and two years ago were able to break free and operate on their own with no technologies being shared either direction.  Kahles formed their own rep groups and price list, making them completely independent.  This is why you don't see the TDS reticle on Kahles scopes any longer as it was a Swarovski acquisition from U.S. designer T.D. Smith.

 

Well, come to find out Kahles had not really stopped their design and engineering they just kept everything top secret and hidden.  So once the board of directors agreed to the split and all the details were done, Kahles phased out their existing lines and started production of the CL, CSX, CB, etc.  The CSX illuminated technology is easily the best and most advanced in the world.  The ground breaking Multizero turret with the micro-clutch assembly is amazing.  The CL 1" scopes have a huge ocular that provides a wide field of view, long eye relief and a easy to find sight picture.  New coatings and glass are also being used.

 

When you get to this level of optics, there are many things that make one scope better than another (not just optics), Kahles is the "real deal" and in my opinion they currently make the finest scope money can buy.  Keep in mind that scopes are pretty much all that Kahles does (99%) and they have been doing it longer than anyone.  They devote all of their resources to scope development not rangefinders, spotting scopes, mounts, cameras, projectors, microscopes, telescopes, crystal, etc.  World wide Kahles is a much larger brand, the U.S. market has yet to realize how good they really are, but their time is coming......its just taken over 100 years.

 

>>>Read more about the history of Kahles<<<

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2006 at 12:24
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

In regards to the tube strength debate.  Here's my humble two cents worth.  It does not really matter.  Catastrophic tube failure is not even a measurable portion of scope failures.  If your scope's tube gets bent or damaged to the extent that it effects the function of the scope I think you would have bigger problems to worry about, like does the firearm it is attached to still function or do you still function.  It would take quite a fall to damage the main tube of a quality hunting scope.  Keep in mind the law of leverage (if there is one).  You scope is mounted in a set of rings spaced apart and clamped down securely segregating the scope into four parts and shielding a large portion of the main tube itself.  The rings themselves make it very difficult to bend or damage the main tube.

 

I can only recall one instance of main tube failure, make it two.  One was when the UPS truck ran over one of our boxes and the other was from someone using an extremely long 6-24 to turn in a stubborn set of Redfield rings.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2006 at 13:43
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10961
Originally posted by Chris Chris wrote:

In regards to the tube strength debate.  Here's my humble two cents worth.  It does not really matter.  Catastrophic tube failure is not even a measurable portion of scope failures.  If your scope's tube gets bent or damaged to the extent that it effects the function of the scope I think you would have bigger problems to worry about, like does the firearm it is attached to still function or do you still function.  It would take quite a fall to damage the main tube of a quality hunting scope.  Keep in mind the law of leverage (if there is one).  You scope is mounted in a set of rings spaced apart and clamped down securely segregating the scope into four parts and shielding a large portion of the main tube itself.  The rings themselves make it very difficult to bend or damage the main tube.

 

I can only recall one instance of main tube failure, make it two.  One was when the UPS truck ran over one of our boxes and the other was from someone using an extremely long 6-24 to turn in a stubborn set of Redfield rings.



For the most part you are correct. Any quality manufacturer takes this into account and we do not need to worry about tueb strength.  I have however seen bent tubes due to improper mounting with windage adjustable rings and due to impact.

ILya
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2006 at 16:02
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 3483

Chris,

 

I was looking at the samplelist and I just don't know much about Kahles....... can you kind of explain what the difference is between the different names..... i.e.   Helia CL vs European  vs European Helia C   vs CL (the new redesigned and improved Kahles)   I suspect there are some that are quite a bit better than others. 

 

Thanks,

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2006 at 17:49
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

I cleaned it up a little.  The reason it was not consistant was our fault.  I entered some by looking at the box description and Brady entered some looking at the packing list or price list.  Kahles is not real consistent with their model descriptions and we weren't either.

 

Every scope Kahles makes is called a Helia.  There are two basic lines:

 

CL - 1"

C - 30mm

 

 

Under the 30mm there are CSX which are illuminated and CS which have the Multizero feature.

 

The ones that read American Hunter are the old discontinued models.  All of the 30mm Kahles we have are the latest models.

 

You can find more specific details here http://www.kahlesoptik.com/index.php

 

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/30/2006 at 09:23
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
Regarding Koshkin's and Dolphin's discussion, I agree that Laplace's Law does not apply because the internal pressure of a scope is low. I have always thought that when discussions about scope tube strength arise it was about resistance to crushing and bending. In this case hoop stress needs to be considered and an increase in diameter does increase the stress, all other things being equal. I have never tried to to prove this. I have fallen hard enough with a Burris 4X to break a turret cover without doing damage to the tube. I sure don't want to try this on my 30mm Kahles, though. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/30/2006 at 10:45
Dolphin View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: October/05/2006
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 1795
Tension of a cylindrical or spherical object is relative to it's diameter, regardless of whether the internal pressure is changing or fixed.  Hence the reason a robin's egg is more resistant to breakage as compared to a chicken's egg.  I really did not mean to bring this up as a matter of debate regarding the law of LaPlace, as I know it well, but to understand better whether 30mm tubes are stronger, since I have little experience with them.  According to Chris, it seems that tube failure/crushing, in good quality scopes is rare and therefore my questions have been answered.  I am sorry to create a thread of discussion, to try to get to the answer of my question.  Sorry guys.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/30/2006 at 11:41
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 8044
No need to be sorry, this is fun stuff and good discussion. Like you guys already said, not many bent or crushed tubes out there. l sure like to hear stories about horses and trucks doing their best on them.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/30/2006 at 11:59
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 7765

Originally posted by tahqua tahqua wrote:

No need to be sorry, this is fun stuff and good discussion.

 

I agree, plus how are us 'educationally challenged" members supposed to learn about things like LaPlace's Law.

 

Funny story about that scope the UPS truck ran over is that they refused to pay the insurance on it, claiming "insufficient packaging".  We responded with the box that had a tire tread pattern embedded in it and the question, "what kind of packaging would have been sufficient?"  They graciously paid up.

 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "30mm vs. 1""
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
30mm vs. 1" tubes mailman7707 Rifle Scopes 1 9/17/2006 10:13:22 PM
30mm Vs. 1" tube canine Rifle Scopes 1 2/20/2007 11:12:51 AM
bushnell 30mm or 1" tubes norcalkid Rifle Scopes 3 10/16/2007 9:27:21 PM
30mm vs 1" brush_buster Target 8 1/23/2006 12:26:33 PM
30mm Tube or 1" Tube Diggerdan4 Rifle Scopes 8 6/4/2006 2:04:56 AM
30mm vx 1" tube muleymaddness Rifle Scopes 6
30mm or 1" flcooler Rifle Scopes 3
30mm vs 1" tube mnhunter2 Rifle Scopes 18
30mm verse 25mm (1") Tube CK Rifle Scopes 11
SWFA SS-Tac 30mm / 1" Rings randycbarker Rings and bases 1


This page was generated in 0.641 seconds.