Thread: Advice needed

yes then your requirements are very different - large front lens for more light gathering - power to at least 12 - must have parallax adjustment -but really can be a 1 in tube - good luck - I have an earlier bushnell that fits all that criteria and very happy with it ( not for sale ) but my kahles ya cant beat the optical quality

What ever scope youv got at home or you like.Spend $300 -$400 and buy some nice contessa scope rings to fit.Problem solved.

I use 1" and 30mm
Light gathering is not a function of tube Dia, but the transmittance is , I'm in chch till tomorrow. Can catch up shor
W u the difference, noticeable in low light conditions, lot of my shooting is dawn/ dusk , 30mm comes to its own. Varminting with light very noticeable

I'm a big fan of nightforce ultralight rings

Originally Posted by Sharki

I use 1" and 30mm
Light gathering is not a function of tube Dia, but the transmittance is , I'm in chch till tomorrow. Can catch up shor
W u the difference, noticeable in low light conditions, lot of my shooting is dawn/ dusk , 30mm comes to its own. Varminting with light very noticeable

Awesome man, thanks for explaining that. Wallabies come out in low light so it may infact be important!
Cheers

Ultimately rings can be easily changed out unless you are running an obscure rifle with special dovetails or special direct mounted rings. The rifle you are considering is not in this category.
Rings dia isn’t really a consideration on which to base your rifle purchase on anyway, besides diameter they may be too high, too low, too cheap, too tight (over torqued), too loose (really over torqued), too close together, too far apart, to flimsy, too heavy.

Once you choose the scope you want, the rings you have will either be perfect, almost perfect, not great, not able to fit.

If they are either of the second two, just buy new rings that are in either of the first two categories.
You can sell the original ones or put them in a box for a day when you might buy a rifle/scope combo that suits.



To answer your original question directly, main difference between 30/25 scopes is dialing range. I do have two 30mm scopes that are nice to look through, but I don’t have directly equivalent 25s to make a direct comparison.
If you are buying a new scope, there seems to be more 30mm scopes around these days.

Originally Posted by longshot

Ultimately rings can be easily changed out unless you are running an obscure rifle with special dovetails or special direct mounted rings. The rifle you are considering is not in this category.
Rings dia isn’t really a consideration on which to base your rifle purchase on anyway, besides diameter they may be too high, too low, too cheap, too tight (over torqued), too loose (really over torqued), too close together, too far apart, to flimsy, too heavy.

Once you choose the scope you want, the rings you have will either be perfect, almost perfect, not great, not able to fit.

If they are either of the second two, just buy new rings that are in either of the first two categories.
You can sell the original ones or put them in a box for a day when you might buy a rifle/scope combo that suits.



To answer your original question directly, main difference between 30/25 scopes is dialing range. I do have two 30mm scopes that are nice to look through, but I don’t have directly equivalent 25s to make a direct comparison.
If you are buying a new scope, there seems to be more 30mm scopes around these days.

Thanks longshot.
I guess I'm just trying to decide the overall cost of the setup I want... Scope, rings, bipod, sling etc etc.
I'm on ACC and money is tight and I don't want to buy a sub-par scope just because it already has the rings and I will save a few dollars on rings just to lose out on scope effectiveness.

My wallaby rifle wears a 3x9x50 Leupold as it came with high rings...the 40mmversion works just as well. Never felt underscoped using 3x9.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

My wallaby rifle wears a 3x9x50 Leupold as it came with high rings...the 40mmversion works just as well. Never felt underscoped using 3x9.

Thanks Micky, you eating them Wallys or feeding your dog?

leave em for pigs usually...have eaten a few..makes great jerky...steaks are ok,found roasts bland like lamb...very dark lean meat like hare (which I love) the tails make awesome very very rich casserole...find oxtail recipe and go from there.

30mm is typically more rigid and the turrets and adjustments can be made tougher all things being equal - traditionally the diameters were 1" (25.4mm) and 26mm for the Euro types. No real difference on a zero'd rifle where you are "point blank" shooting (i.e. one you are just lining up the crosshairs on anything from 0m out to 300m).

30mm will likely be heavier but where the bigger diameter is better is for dialling scopes, wider at the adjustment turrets allows a longer thread on the adjusters which = greater adjustment for range. The trade off is bulkier heavier mountings, but all things being equal on a poo70 you won't notice much between the two sizes all other characteristics being equal.

More relevant issues for me would be the position of the scope for correct eye relief (clearance forward and rearward), height over the action (clearing everything it needs to while being in line with your natural eye position and then clearing everything on the front of the rifle like rear sight bases and suppressor etc etc.

Originally Posted by BushChook

Thanks longshot.
I guess I'm just trying to decide the overall cost of the setup I want... Scope, rings, bipod, sling etc etc.
I'm on ACC and money is tight and I don't want to buy a sub-par scope just because it already has the rings and I will save a few dollars on rings just to lose out on scope effectiveness.

Yep I think you have put it more succinctly than I did, in that saving money on rings is false economy if you end up with an unsuitable scope.

I think to help answer your original question some more, I could have gone my whole life without a 30mm scope without realising it was a problem, what I mean by that is there are plenty of great 25mm scopes out there, the ones I do run won’t ever be upgraded because they are fine as they are.
If you end up getting a 25mm scope, there is nothing to say you won’t end up having the same approach.
I think for most people if they didn’t know better it wouldn’t be a problem.
It’s only in the last few years that we are starting to see 34mm scopes, I do wonder if in 10-15 years time someone will be asking a similar question with a debate between 30/34 instead of 30/25.

The other thing to be reminded of is that even if you start with a cheaper set up, it might not be great for reaching out to 500+, but without spending too much on a second hand scope, you could be out there shooting without any real impediment and you’re at least doing some hunting and while you’re already hunting you can always save up for a better scope for later on or decide you don’t actually need it.

Sorry if this has been a less than binary answer than you might’ve been originally looking for, but I am speaking from experience of not only using 25 and 30mm scopes, but also of having bought scopes on a very limited budget, the opinion I give above is based on that experience and more recent experience where I have been able to buy scopes that far outperform what would have cost thousands of dollars back when I first looked at a rabbit through a Tasco pronghorn fixed 4x.

There are already some good responses. I will only add a bit.

Tube diameter is a design choice influenced by several things. The most of influential factors are amount of available dial and overall strength of the scope.

More dial room means larger mechanism under the turrets and larger the housing. for example, you will find most scopes with more than 12x on 1 inch tube will be limited to 40 MOA, some as low as 30 MOA of adjustment.

in terms of strength, obviously the more magnification the bigger the glass the bigger the scope. You will find most 3-9 or less are 1 inch tubes and most 5-20 and above are 30mm these days. Most scopes intended for the "Tactical" marget go with 34mm or 35mm tube for additional strength.

So, you should really consider whats cope you want first and let that inform your choice of rings.

Originally Posted by longshot

Yep I think you have put it more succinctly than I did, in that saving money on rings is false economy if you end up with an unsuitable scope.

I think to help answer your original question some more, I could have gone my whole life without a 30mm scope without realising it was a problem, what I mean by that is there are plenty of great 25mm scopes out there, the ones I do run won’t ever be upgraded because they are fine as they are.
If you end up getting a 25mm scope, there is nothing to say you won’t end up having the same approach.
I think for most people if they didn’t know better it wouldn’t be a problem.
It’s only in the last few years that we are starting to see 34mm scopes, I do wonder if in 10-15 years time someone will be asking a similar question with a debate between 30/34 instead of 30/25.

The other thing to be reminded of is that even if you start with a cheaper set up, it might not be great for reaching out to 500+, but without spending too much on a second hand scope, you could be out there shooting without any real impediment and you’re at least doing some hunting and while you’re already hunting you can always save up for a better scope for later on or decide you don’t actually need it.

Sorry if this has been a less than binary answer than you might’ve been originally looking for, but I am speaking from experience of not only using 25 and 30mm scopes, but also of having bought scopes on a very limited budget, the opinion I give above is based on that experience and more recent experience where I have been able to buy scopes that far outperform what would have cost thousands of dollars back when I first looked at a rabbit through a Tasco pronghorn fixed 4x.

Thanks.
Funny you should say that, because I ended up passing on this 270 and got another one, proudly adorned with a tasco pronghorn. I also grabbed a BRNO semi auto from the same guy, and that has a tasco pronghorn also haha.

Go the mighty pronghorn!

I am still using mine regularly. It's nothing special but it works well enough to shoot pesties, and I am so used to it, that like comfy old slippers, any upgrade would be a down grade.