I would ask this over on snipers hide but those guys have such a pack mentality over there they rip someone to shreds if they challenge the status quo. anyways I suppose I am jealous seeing all the new tactical offerings and features being offered and while it seems like none of the companies want to offer optics that are tailored to long range hunters. case in point the recent offerings of leupold and bushnell, my question is why does anyone and what point is served by having a scope with a 34 or 35mm tube?? other than looking beefy and heavy I don't get it. my mark 4 30 mm scope has 100 moa of internal adjustment, combine my 20 moa canted base and that autta darn near be able to site an artillery piece. other 30 mm offerings have similar amounts of adjustment. so again why the bigger tube?? its frustrating seeing optics companies offer products like this instead of giving us target turrets with a freakin zero stop on them, offering the dumb horus reticle instead of an easy quick to use MOA reticle with 1 moa wind hold offs. I actually think tactical shooting and hunting are more similar than most people think. but the tactical crowd seems to have a pack mentality.
if you have seen john burns reticle setup and how they shoot, dial for elevation hold for wind, with a turret that is marked. I can't see how that would not be ideal for the tactical shooter.
I dunno, I saw a guy at the range about a week ago that had a Savage .338Lapua with a 34mm Vortex on top. He was poking 100yd targets. I didn't understand it but he was look'n cool doing it.
I think the simple answer would be marketing.
Terry P.S. If it wasn't Christmas we would gang up on you here too
The difference between 25.2mm (inch) and 30mm is that you get more adjustment travel with the extra 4.8mm ID of the tube, using the same size internal lenses in both. You get better clarity with bigger lenses so some manufacturers who offer 34 and 35mm tubes have bigger internal lenses with the same adjustment travel as a 30mm tube. If the travel increases to 125MOA, it means they use the same lenses as the 1 inch tube.
I've shot a .308 at 1000 yards a few times. Ok, I've shot it a great deal at that range. I am here to tell you that it's pretty iffy at that range even with the 32 inch barrel in my FTR rifle. And additional 760 yards is just a stunt as it will have gone subsonic several hundred yards before. We are talking artilery, not riflery at that range.
The difference between 25.2mm (inch) and 30mm is that you get more adjustment travel with the extra 4.8mm ID of the tube, using the same size internal lenses in both. You get better clarity with bigger lenses so some manufacturers who offer 34 and 35mm tubes have bigger internal lenses with the same adjustment travel as a 30mm tube. If the travel increases to 125MOA, it means they use the same lenses as the 1 inch tube.
All true. The only reason for a 30mm or more tube on a cheap scope is that it just ain't tactical if the tube only measures one inch.
just did some checking and with my 243 ai shooting a 105 @3100, A 20MOA base and my mark 4's 100 moa of internal adjustment, I should be able to run up to 1700 yards. you need a rangefinder costing over 2k to be able to even range a target at that distance, much less hit it. at that distance I going to call it like it is and say its a pot shot. and you better have a vectronix RF, 6 mo minimum wait. of further note is that the extra 25 moa of internal adjustment of the 34 or 35 mm tube only offers an extra 200 yards at that distance. from 1700 to 1900 yards.
Just a SWAG but 1000 plus yards is becoming more and more common. Guys are shooting to a mile and more guys are doing it.
Not that 1000 yards is "close" but extended very long range is becoming more and more of a "thing" I guess.
Magpul's most recent video has them shooting 308's to a mile.
I would love to see this if you have a link, I have found that if you shoot a bullet supersonic then it goes transonic to subsonic for seven hundred yards you cant hit CHIT......would love to see the film doctoring
The video is 10 hours long and just came out. Don't know if anyone has it on the 'tube yet but I'll check.
As to doctoring - the people in the film, instructors, have a rather high level of respect/reputation from what I've seen. I SERIOUSLY doubt they'd put that on the line with camera trickery. I've not seen anyone or heard anyone have issue with Caylen Wojcik.
Magpul does have this disclaimer for their class - Magpul Dynamics does not recommend students to utilize the Sierra 168 Grain HPBT Matchking projectile for the Precision Rifle 1 or 2 courses. This projectile experiences dynamic instability at extended ranges and does not produce consistent results at transonic flight speed and below.
Actually - I believe Shane (MontanaMarine) has gone to a mile with his .308
yeah but was anything hit?? like I said the factors start to really stack at that range. I don't care how great the equipment is and if the scope has a 50mm tube. a 308 or for that matter pretty much any rifle that maintains functional portability, at that range its still a pot shot, and if it did manage to hit something its luck, not because the equipment is so great or because the shooter had excessive skill.
Actually - I believe Shane (MontanaMarine) has gone to a mile with his .308
yeah but was anything hit?? like I said the factors start to really stack at that range. I don't care how great the equipment is and if the scope has a 50mm tube. a 308 or for that matter pretty much any rifle that maintains functional portability, at that range its still a pot shot, and if it did manage to hit something its luck, not because the equipment is so great or because the shooter had excessive skill.
Good equipment and a high degree of skill is your idea of luck? WOW, just WOW
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
just did some checking and with my 243 ai shooting a 105 @3100, A 20MOA base and my mark 4's 100 moa of internal adjustment, I should be able to run up to 1700 yards. you need a rangefinder costing over 2k to be able to even range a target at that distance, much less hit it. at that distance I going to call it like it is and say its a pot shot. and you better have a vectronix RF, 6 mo minimum wait. of further note is that the extra 25 moa of internal adjustment of the 34 or 35 mm tube only offers an extra 200 yards at that distance. from 1700 to 1900 yards.
I've ranged an elk over 1800 yards ith my Swarovski and tress to 1900 plus. When I bought mine they were 750 dollars. They are about 1,000 dollars today
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Actually - I believe Shane (MontanaMarine) has gone to a mile with his .308
yeah but was anything hit?? like I said the factors start to really stack at that range. I don't care how great the equipment is and if the scope has a 50mm tube. a 308 or for that matter pretty much any rifle that maintains functional portability, at that range its still a pot shot, and if it did manage to hit something its luck, not because the equipment is so great or because the shooter had excessive skill.
I completely agree. At that distance an error of a few yards on the range and it's a miss. We won't even talk about atmospheric condititons. Can it be done? Sure, with a huge amount of luck, but the question is can it be done any time, on demand?
At any rate, the military battle rifles of yesteryear carried open sights that could be run up to 2000 yards/meters (take your pick). A single rifle doing that was useless, but when you had large amounts of soldiers aiming in the same direction with their sights set to 2000 yards, it became more of an area weapon, cheap artilery. Machine gunners used to be trained to do essentially the same thing, deliver a whole lot of bullets over the heads of advancing friendly troops onto the target a couple thousand yards away.
