1 inch tube vs 30mm scopes

[MtnOak]

I own both but can anyone tell me any difference in quality/reliability or the one that’s really better than the other??
Ive never had issues with the 1 inch in any situation…

[Stumpkiller]

The 30mm will offer more adjustment range in both elevation and windage vs. a 1" tube. That's about the only advantage over a 1" tube.

You will find some 1" tubes superior in every other way over 30 or 33mm tube scopes depending on brand and glass quality. 30mm is not a magic quality in a scope.

[Robinhood]

Sometimes a bigger tube supports a larger objective from a light gathering perspective.

[Dave Hoback]

Both points are correct. If there you have two scopes with the same quality glass, size objective etc., but one has a larger maintube, the larger tube scope will be brighter through day & later into the evening.

[geezerhood]

The tube diameter has virtually no impact on brightness / light gathering between a 1 inch, 30mm or a 34mm tube, all other things being equal. Larger tubes as already stated allow for greater elevation travel and likely better support for larger diameter and longer objective bells. They can also give a more rigid / stronger tube depending on wall thickness. Light gathering comes from the objective diameter. A 10% larger objective on paper, gives about 20% greater light gathering.

I can't remember when I bought my last 1" tube scope - maybe 15 years ago - but I have a few old Leupold compacts in 1" that I quite like. It seems like the majority of new designs and options are in the 30mm or larger tubes. I am so used to seeing 30mm+ that 1" tube scopes look kind of strange to me now on anything but a compact, classic rifle design.

[Dave Hoback]

Yup! It’s true. Ok to be wrong sometimes. :redface-new: Only contributing factors to Brightness are Objective diameter & magnification, equating to Exit Pupil. Even then, an Exit Pupil of around 7mm provides the MAX amount of light the human eye is capable of taking in anyway. Just divide a scopes objective in mm, by the magnification number, and that is the EP size in mm. But besides a greater elevation factor, a larger maintube also can enhance resolution/sharpness over the smaller counterpart. I have used 30mm for a long time. But I know use 34mm and will continue likely in the future.

[yobuck]

On a good day they will all look good.
On a poor day the better ones will look a little bit better.
On a bad day none will be any good.
Thats true for all optics regardless of size and cost.

[wbm]

+1.

And there ya have it. Those things which can be said in few words are done in vain with more!

[ragsflh]

use both.like 30mm for long range,

[pdshooter2]

like all things it is quality that counts.
for long range precision work they are a must.
you have to see and you have to be able to crank out to the distance..repeatable cranking
scopes are built for a purpose, not just to be bigger
ringing large steel is not the same as shooting group and score at long range

[efm77]

Seems like I've read that the interior lenses play a role in how much light gets to the ocular end as well. So a larger tube may be beneficial if larger internal lenses are put in it. But as has been stated, it's not just the tube size itself.

[Dave Hoback]

Not the amount of light, but better resolution/clarity with a larger tube, thus larger lenses, yes.

[MtnOak]

Mounted the leupold with 1 inch tube this past week, the eye relief is closer than the vortex I had on there, not sure I’ll like it but I’m gonna give it some time and see if I’ll eventually like or get used to it..

[efm77]

Found this article that has some pretty good information about the topics being discussed here. Pretty much goes along with what's been said.

https://www.outdoorlife.com/story/hunting/understanding-riflescope-brightness-misconceptions/

[nksmfamjp]

The one key point that cannot be lost is larger tube diameters for a given thickness are stronger. There is some information that says loss of zero after a hard knock is often related to the objective being bent. So, in general, larger is better. IMO, OBJ over 40mm should step up to 30mm from 1”….over 50mm should be >30mm.

With that larger tube, makers have to decide how to fill it. Larger lenses, better mechanicals, electronics….

[yobuck]

Sometimes a bigger tube supports a larger objective from a light gathering perspective.
Wouldnt the quality and thickness of the tube material play a roll in that?
I met a guy while hunting in the late 70s by name of Larry Smith.
He made me aware of a guy by name of Dick thomas, and i later met him at Larrys camp.
Dick was the second generation owner of Premier Reticles, who were the only authorized service facility for Leupold scopes other than Leupold.
Their speciality was custom reticles in Leupold scopes, and since there were no dials on hunting scopes at that time, they did a good business with hunters who were interested in shooting longer distances.
Dick Thomas was very much an inovator, and when the original 6.5x 20 was introduced he cut the objective end off of one and soldered a 50 mm one on in its place and gave it to Larry to use. It no doubt improved the scope when compared to a standard one.
I tend to agree with Stumpy in that the larger tube will allow for more adjustment range and not much else.
Brightness comes about from light entering the optic, and that comes thru objective.
A larger objective also increases power to some degree.
A 15 power eyepiece for example installed in a 50 mm objective spotting scope, will become about 22 power if reinstalled in a 60 mm scope.
And of coarse the opposite is true as well.

[Dave Hoback]

On an aside note: Not for nothing, but we’ve already established the Tube size has no bearing on the amount of light seen through the scope; the “brightness” as our minds understand it. It’s not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing.


The one key point that cannot be lost is larger tube diameters for a given thickness are stronger. There is some information that says loss of zero after a hard knock is often related to the objective being bent. So, in general, larger is better. IMO, OBJ over 40mm should step up to 30mm from 1”….over 50mm should be >30mm.

With that larger tube, makers have to decide how to fill it. Larger lenses, better mechanicals, electronics….

You hit the nail on the head with this statement my friend. There is added strength and more ease of fitting components by the manufacturer. Good things to the point one can accept the added weight. Some scopes now coming in at 40oz+!

[Robinhood]

I'm looking for a scope. It needs to be one inch tube with a 56 mm objective. I like the smaller tube scopes but as an older guy I need brightness too. Can someone help me find a scope like this?

[Stumpkiller]

Optics Planet let’s you search on features. I find a 1” tube Barska AR6 2.5x15X 56mm. Unfamiliar with the brand but I have had good luck with Optics Planet.

[Robinhood]

Optics Planet let’s you search on features. I find a 1” tube Barska AR6 2.5x15X 56mm. Unfamiliar with the brand but I have had good luck with Optics Planet.

LOL Barska huh? I as hoping for a Swaro, Leupold or maybe Meopta.