1" VS. 30mm

**arrrrgh15** · December 18th, 2011, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by spblademaker

What are there dimensions?

without getting out my calipers they are somewhere a shade under .75" thick

The question was whats the purpose behing the 1" vs 30mm. Right?

Your answer has something to do with surface contact. You said something about 1" rings then fired back a game show response when someone questioned you on it.

It doesn't matter how thick my rings are. If the idea behind the 30mm tube is surface contact with rings, then why would I ever need a 30mm tube when I could just get 1" thick rings, or 2" thick rings, or 6" thick rings?

This thread reminds me of my freshman calculus class. People burying their faces in a scientific calculator when the logical answer has everything to do with practicallity.

PS. My scope rings, both 30mm and 34mm are Badger rings. Maybe the "max 50" has a purpose besides scope base diameter. Also, some of the other manufacturers you sighted aren't the same quality, but give them some gimick for sales and they'll find a sucker to buy em.

Don't let the obvious escape you.

**spblademaker** · December 18th, 2011, 10:33 PM

Since the initial post asked three questions, I can clearly see your point that the only purpose for a larger scope-tube body is for greater range of adjustment. There would be no other reason to address any of their other questions regarding other benefits or drawbacks between the two. Even though a secondary benefit of the larger tube aids in distributing a specific force over a larger surface area.
Thus everything else being equal, it would take a greater force to move the 30mm tube body in it's rings. And as you already know, you wouldn't want your scope moving around in it's rings. As Badger Ord. put it "...more holding power...". That is unless they are pushing some gimmick. Now why would a high quality company like Badger Ord. do something like that?

Let's summarize: 1. 30mm = more adjustment than 1", but 34mm the best.
2. The laws of physics don't affect scopes.
3. Badger Ord. may be pushing a gimmick on suckers.
4. Silly gameshow comments have no business here.
5. Lastly, people take this internet stuff too seriously!

**PA1936MN** · December 22nd, 2011, 05:24 AM

Going with a Redfield 4-12x40 scope end of story.

**PaulB84** · December 22nd, 2011, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by PA1936MN

Going with a Redfield 4-12x40 scope end of story.

Probably the best "cheap" scope you'll find. I'm convinced the new Redfields are just rebadged VX-Is for $50 less. I have 2, I find them clear with good transmission, little to no distortion at full magnification, and they held zero through some serious bumps. Is it a nightforce? no, but its miles better than a trashco/bushnell/whatever

**PA1936MN** · December 23rd, 2011, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by PaulB84

Probably the best "cheap" scope you'll find. I'm convinced the new Redfields are just rebadged VX-Is for $50 less. I have 2, I find them clear with good transmission, little to no distortion at full magnification, and they held zero through some serious bumps. Is it a nightforce? no, but its miles better than a trashco/bushnell/whatever

While I don't consider this an expensive scope I don't consider it a "cheap" scope. At $219 regular that aint cheap. Unless your daddy warbucks. Yeah I know there are scopes out there $1k plus.

- Full Lifetime warranty
- Made in the USA to boot

**PA1936MN** · December 29th, 2011, 04:47 AM

Just received my Redfield Revolution 4-12x40 rifle scope.

I went through all the magnifications and it was clear on every single one of them!

The build quality feels great and the lines of it are smooth as butter.

I think for under $200 on sale that is this is a great quality scope for the money. Can't wait to test her out on my build!