Barrelnut
Well-Known Member
Well, in the end, the line of sight would have to go right down the center of the tubes. And there is 4mm difference in diameter of the tubes. So, I don't see how they can get around that...
2019 Leupold
- Thread starter Brado16
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
FIGJAM
Well-Known Member
I don't think its the objective people are complaining about - its the tube...and for me, its not just the weight, its the added cost of 34mm rings, resale on a SFP 34mm tube scope, and just the fact that you don't need a 34mm for hunting. Honestly I probably don't need a 30mm tube either.
tmmcampbell
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2008
- Messages
- 411
What I like and what I need are rarely the same. 
FIGJAM
Well-Known Member
Ok...Given the same size objective with the same barrel clearance, the line of sight would be the same in a 34mm and 30mm - ring height would be different. The objective lense would ultimately determine the height of the LOS as long as it is larger than the tube in diameter.
Barrelnut
Well-Known Member
That would only be if the ring manufacturer was wise enough to make the 34mm ring about 1/8 inch lower to the action AND that 1/8 inch would not cause the bell to touch the barrel. I think. LOL
I think you're comical.
Overall height will be the same between the 30 vs 34mm tube, assuming that the objective diameter is the limiting factor. The bottom of the tube is 2mm lower, top of the tube 2mm higher. Imagine wrapping a 2mm thick tape one wrap around your 30mm tube. If there is room to do that, there's room to mount a 34mm tube.
That said, I think for most people the limiting factor is probably not overall travel in their dial, so the larger tube/erector is not needed.
In my mind, it's not a deal maker or breaker one way or the other.
That said, I think for most people the limiting factor is probably not overall travel in their dial, so the larger tube/erector is not needed.
In my mind, it's not a deal maker or breaker one way or the other.
Only problem is, most if not all 34mm rings are higher than available 30mm rings, probably due to most 34mm tubed optics having very large objectives.
Ben Keller
Well-Known Member
It's adding a really nice option to their lineup whether you like 34mm or not. I'm also watching the weight of everything on my rifle, but 3 ounces ain't breaking anyone's back. If you don't like the 34mm tube then go buy the 3-18 VX-6 and be quiet. This is the first time Leupold is willing to add the TMOA reticle to the VX-5 lineup so its a major upgrade IMO.
5RWill
Well-Known Member
Along with Mil/Mil. There is a severe lack of Mil/Mil hunting optics be it sfp or ffp. Currently they offer the custom shop vx6hd 3-18 in Mil/Mil for $1800 but that's it.
D
Deleted member 103481
Guest
I sent them an email asking for a dumbed down(less waterproof) version of mk5 illumination for hunters so it wouldn't be as large of an upcharge, or a FFP version of the VX series since it would serve the same purpose to me.
They responded that hunters don't need combat proven optics and I should just go buy a Vx6hd.
This makes me doubt they are interested in mil/mil for vx. But one can hope.
5RWill
Well-Known Member
Well that response is rather ridiculous. One would think with the amount of PRS/NRL competition shooters growing by the minute, the majority using Mil/Mil FFP optics one would be so inclined to design a hunting optic in the same realm. I can't be the only one who hates having one rifle that's MOA when the majority are Mil. They gave me a quote for the 3-18x50 with the TMR in Mil/Mil, probably try to sell our V6 to grab one. Don't get me wrong there are Mil SFP options and all but they're pretty heavy. Keeping it below 28oz isn't that easy trying to find a SFP Mil/Mil optic in this case. Can't stand not knowing generalized holds or elevation for his gun because it's MOA. Guess i could get used to it, but it's just not ingrained like Mil is.
Last edited:
Ben Keller
Well-Known Member
Anybody know what the T-zl3 setup is in the 4-20? I'm assuming it's going to be a three turn dial instead of the 2 turn but the T instead of CDS is what I am more curious about.
My sentiments exactly.
