Why are scope tubes getting larger and larger?

[Bushwhacker]

More ring mounting surface for heavy recoil guns

This! I don't have near the experience you do but wouldn't more mounting surface be ideal regardless of recoil? That's my understanding anyway.

 

[poopdaddy]

adjustment and light. you can pass a lot more light thru a 34mm than a 1"

 

[greg vess]

You would think. I mean they are already making 300 dollar scope mounts so now that's another 50 bucks for the extra 5mm. At what point do call enough's enough. Holy molly. Yeah you get more mounting surface but the scope is heavier. So how does that work out to more anything except for a little elevation. I mean scopes are heavy enough already. I guess if you are just long range shooting It would have it's place but just us plinkers and 200 to 400 yards shooters I can't see the cost to benefit. Just my take on it.

 

[poopdaddy]

You would think. I mean they are already making 300 dollar scope mounts so now that's another 50 bucks for the extra 5mm. At what point do call enough's enough. Holy molly. Yeah you get more mounting surface but the scope is heavier. So how does that work out to more anything except for a little elevation. I mean scopes are heavy enough already. I guess if you are just long range shooting It would have it's place but just us plinkers and 200 to 400 yards shooters I can't see the cost to benefit. Just my take on it.

nope, the more room inside = more air (or nitrogen to be specific) air is lighter than aluminum. so the bigger scope is lighter..

 

[ReservoirDawg10]

You would think. I mean they are already making 300 dollar scope mounts so now that's another 50 bucks for the extra 5mm. At what point do call enough's enough. Holy molly. Yeah you get more mounting surface but the scope is heavier. So how does that work out to more anything except for a little elevation. I mean scopes are heavy enough already. I guess if you are just long range shooting It would have it's place but just us plinkers and 200 to 400 yards shooters I can't see the cost to benefit. Just my take on it.

Coming from a guy who likes to put expensive titanium non-critical parts on an AR.

 

[greg vess]

Coming from a guy who likes to put expensive titanium non-critical parts on an AR.

Excuse the rant. Really good optics are expensive enough is what I was getting at. I mean to get a half way decent long range scope you start at 1,500 and that's just the minimum. Then you got to have a 300 mount. That's a good chunk of change. I mean you can buy a damn good AR15 for less than you can a really good optic and mount. I know it has to be done to be competitive in the long range circuit.

 

[SOLGardener]

Greg, don't you know that you have to spend twice as much on the scope as you do the rifle!

That's the Fudd standard. they have to make $7,000 scopes so that the guys with $3500 rifles have something to put on them.

I reflect back to when Leupold M3 3.5-10 MkIV's were $750, and with Nightforce and S&B running in the $1,200-$2,000 range, Leupold just repriced their scopes by about $500 without any changes to them. They were and are good scopes, but they didn't get $500 more valuable just because of competition pricing.

 

[greg vess]

Greg, don't you know that you have to spend twice as much on the scope as you do the rifle!

That's the Fudd standard. they have to make $7,000 scopes so that the guys with $3500 rifles have something to put on them.

I reflect back to when Leupold M3 3.5-10 MkIV's were $750, and with Nightforce and S&B running in the $1,200-$2,000 range, Leupold just repriced their scopes by about $500 without any changes to them. They were and are good scopes, but they didn't get $500 more valuable just because of competition pricing.

WORD!

 

[REDX]

This! I don't have near the experience you do but wouldn't more mounting surface be ideal regardless of recoil? That's my understanding anyway.

Yes, but everybody else is avoiding the OP's question. Why would a hunter need a 34mm tube and that's the answer more clamping force for the magnums. You can get more light with a bigger objective. With a 1" Zeiss HD5 50mm Objective if you can't see it you are poaching. but the 34mm tube does give more elevation for the extreme long range shots but most of all gives more clamping force for magnums.

I have personally seen scopes move in their rings when shooting a 300 WM while at my previous employer. we chased that gun build around for weeks, barrels, scopes etc. finally while at the range I just happened to be looking while my coworker was shooting and I said "I think That scope is moving" sure enough it was the scope in the customer's mount.

 

[Gunanddoglover]

I thought it was so you could see bigger animals like Buffalo, Giraffes, and Sasquatches, and Rosie O'Donnell......