Why Bigger Doesn't Always Mean Better (Ultra High End Scopes-JumBo Scopes)

[FukoChan]

I made a purchase on a Sig Sauer Tango6 5-30x56 Scope and want to share you some findings on the 34mm scope tube and 56mm objective lens scope class. It is pretty dang expensive at 2099$ when it is on sale or even 3000$ MSRP(I think Sig's high-end scope sales aren't doing very well atm). This thread is on the practicality and cons of owning one of these beast. Similar scopes are any with the specification of 34mm tube diameter and 56mm Objective Lens



So many would think that, "OHho Im gonna buy the very best/expensive scope for all my rifles so I can be super accurate and have the clearest sight picture!" . Hunters would think this too and spend 2000$-5000 on a high end 34mm Tube + 56mm Obj. This is dangerous thinking (especially for a hunter!). The reality is that:

• You are getting diminishing image clarity returns per $ beyond a certain price point. Lot of people don't notice the difference. 
• We are shooting 100-200 yards with airguns that don't necessarily need these super high-end scopes with 30x magnification zoom.
• Here is the biggest thing in my opinion: They are Heavy as lead!! These jumbo objectives that gobble light just aren't practical for a hunter. Look at a 30mm athlon scope for example 27.5 oz or so. My tango scope is 41 oz!!! Throw on top some adjustable Warne scope mounts that's ~16 oz and you have a 3.5lb scope setup!!! When you put this on your compact bullpup(hunters) you start to realize my mistake. This will lead to my next point
• Scope rings are (more) sparse in the 34mm area. There are no "FX no limit rings" for the 34mm tube class and they are much more expensive than the 30mm scope rings. So much more dang expensive that you seriously need to factor the price of these 34mm scope mounts to your budget. Let us not forget these bigger 34mm scope rings are heavier than the 30mm ones. My Warne 34mm adjustable scope mount cost me 240$(on a 100$ sale, usually its ~320$)! 
• Top Tier scopes are in the bleeding edge technology department which means you are paying top dollar for a class of products that is extremely new (think exponentially higher $$ compared to lower cost scopes).

So thats pretty much it. If you have the money and want the very best(such as benchrest shooters that aren't moving) no one is stopping you. However if you are using this rifle for hunting(+noncompetitive and fun use) try to be reasonable do yourself a favor and get a (mid->highend) 44 or 50 objective scope with 30mm tube diameter. Your wallet and muscles will thank you . 

 

[FredAZ]

Depends a LOT on your magnification as things get pretty dim at higher magnifications.

You might not see a difference plinking paper mid-day at 9X-12X, but you'll see a real difference hunting at dawn/dusk or when zoomed to 24X or more.



Get a dovetail -> Picatinny adapter and rings get a little more "reasonable" and choices are better.

Just like the photography world -- fast, quality glass makes all the difference and is a lifetime investment - get the best you can afford.

 

[JamesD.]

I appreciate your review. I'd like to point out to new folks in any shooting sports a few things about optics, and why I wish every rifle came with an open sight option.

Highest power I have is 24 & I never ever use it except when shooting at 100 yards, than I zoom int to see where I hit. This is actually what a spotter scope or binoculars are for. I prefer to shoot any long range shots majority of time on 6X to 12X. I '' explain why.

First off, these are airguns and we want pin point accuracy. There was a rule of thumb that if you could hot a 12" dinner plate at 100yrds with a common hunting rifle, you were good enough to hunt Deer

In shooting, there's MANY variations of the sport, recreational & competition. Fine motor skills, how they work when viewed through magnified glass. Here's the thing. The higher the magnification the worse your fine motor skills become as the eyes to brain to everything that controls that guns movement start to try to compensate for little movements, and we over compensate. 

If I shoot with open sights, or on my 1.25x4x32 scope, I have very little problem shooting off hand, finding the target in the scope. As long as I have a clear aim point or POA, (POV (point of view, aim & also POI of impact) that little 1.25x4x32 can get me great groups from my 7-8ftlb .177 10" carbine El Game 300 tuned, super accurate. Hole in hole with JSB 7.33's out to all my rifles zero, 32 yards. Admittedly, I can't usually see a .177 hole at 32 yards with 1.25 or bare eyes. I usually shoot this on 3 or 4x. 

High power scopes are for Bench resting only sports and double as quality telescopes at night. I'm serious, even my 18x Japanese Bushnell worked better than a telescope we had tried one Christmas. Here's the thing. I don't know of any man that can stand offhand and shoot a great group with a high power scope at 100 yards, (No sling, jacket, bands, just throw it up and shoot) as our brain is always trying to over compensate as we are telling ourselves to hold still, yet we just cant't. Personally, I wish I had six spring rated scopes. a breed between the Hawke Airmax AMX reticle & SWFA fixed 10X mil-quad or dot scope. Oh, and a super fine reticle so an old Weaver target is the Grandad.

 

[Macros]

Sportsmatch ATP34's are very nice 'no limit' type dovetail mounts. Not too heavy either 

Definitely don't regret my Delta - similar dimensions but I'll have to check the weight. Not heavy enough that it's bothered me on my full length or bullpups though but thats just me. I do use fixed power 10x glass on most of my guns, so I do have experience with the lighter end too btw.

I'm one of those that appreciates the glass and mechanics far more than I care about my rig weighing a bit less, but that pure personal preference, as are many, many things in this hobby. One for the best things about it actually - something for everyone's taste



P.S.

Just checked the Delta's weight - 36oz

 

[Guest]

Lighter?

Plastic lenses.

 

[FukoChan]

Lighter?

Plastic lenses.

 

[bubblerboy64]

Diminishing return. For a two times better scope you spend ten times the money. Anything over $500 in my opinion is unnecessary. Unless you are in the highest class in some type of competition or hunting in bad light for very elusive game . It's like horse power in cars. At some point it's just bragging rights. Not that I am against it just being truthful. 

 

[rwsmike]

I just picked up a hawke 6.5x20x42 & this is the third time I bought one....simple ,clear , good warranty. 

 

[Elbowgrease]

Yeah, there are some really nice scopes out there in the $150-$200 range. I will spend a bit on optics myself but there is a point where its simply to much and the difference is not worth it. IMO.

 

[FukoChan]

I thought this photo would be an nice comparison between 30mm and 34mm. You guys now should understand the possible weight differences hahah. Hey though my 34mm scope seems like i can zoom in and see the squirrels soul though or perhaps shoot at the bacteria on them.

 

[boscoebrea]

 Higher power and bigger does not make you a better shooter and a big yes on what a hunter needs vs. a target shooter.For the most parts you are talking PCP so a good rifle scope would work....what is good?Well I know this about all optics,it is better to pay more for a proven optic than not.

About all optics made by the manufactors have different price points...myself I can not afford the best,but less than the best works fine if it is close to the best,another thing I have found out is this,unless a person looks through some of the best optics they will never know what they are missing,but again who needs a scope over $800?I buy used and very rarely shoot over 100 yards so a good Leupold or Nikon or Burris ,etc is plenty good for me....weight I do not want a heavy scope I do not want a long scope I want to be able to hold my rifle and shot offhand as much as possiable.... ,bottom line is to get what you really need and learn to use it.