1" Low Power Variable Scope

[OpticsPlanet]

Nikon is usually my go to for 1inch tube scopes, either the M-223 1-4x or the Monarch 3 1-4x

No budget stated, but the Sig Whisky 5 1-5x is a 1in tube as well and is illuminated

-Matt S.

[Blade Gunner]

Guys I'm looking for a 1" lower power variable scope (starting with 1x) and I want to see what you guys recommend. So far I have the Weaver Classic V 1-3x and Sig Whiskey 1-5 on my list. This will go on my Mini-14.

Why buy a 1" tube when most scope makers are moving to 30mm at almost the same price points. Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6x24 30mm tube. BDC reticle Illuminated POA and budget friendly. Only down side is elevation turret is capped. But at CBQ you won't be spinning turrets. Nikon M223 1.5-6x24 30mm tube both turrets are exposed MOA. BDC reticle illiuminsted POA. Almost twice the price but not twice as nice. I have both and they work equally well.

[crufflers]

Why buy a 1" tube when most scope makers are moving to 30mm at almost the same price points.

I had just assumed he had a mount and rings already and it was a Mini-14 thing. Maybe Mini's are not as hard to get a decent mount and rings for nowadays. On my standard I had an old Holosite on a scout mount forever till I got tired of the bulk and weight of the steel clamping mechanism + site and went back to irons and the stock handguard.

[ExtremeX]

Why buy a 1" tube when most scope makers are moving to 30mm at almost the same price points. Vortex Strike Eagle 1-6x24 30mm tube. BDC reticle Illuminated POA and budget friendly. Only down side is elevation turret is capped. But at CBQ you won't be spinning turrets. Nikon M223 1.5-6x24 30mm tube both turrets are exposed MOA. BDC reticle illiuminsted POA. Almost twice the price but not twice as nice. I have both and they work equally well.

Perhaps he already has rings, or perhaps he just wants to keep it light and tight.

A 30mm tube does nothing except for having more elevation... but if the OP can zero the rifle at whatever distance he needs then it really there isn't much benefit.

30mm tubes matter if you need a longer elevation range and for the distances he is shooting, again, non issue.

There is also a chance that from a cost/manufacturing standpoint... and at those budget price points, I wouldn't be surprised if the general overall build quality of that 1" Weaver is better than a similarly priced 30mm option.

[crufflers]

I've heard the bargain scopes like the Strike Eagle described repeatedly as "good enough" and my sample seems fine but not insanely clear and bright on 6x. 1x is definitely nice and clear. Eye box is good. The illumination is not bright. It is common sense that the glass can't come close to something like a Razor. I haven't tried a PA 1-4, 1-6, or the newer 1-8 under $300, but hear they are not as clear as the Strike Eagles but have the ACSS. The real high-end PA is the Platinum 1-8 which some are comparing to the Leupold M8's. That would be a tough sell against a Razor at $100 more, but if Optics Planet did a deal at $900ish it would be tempting. But if they chopped 30% off of a PA why not see what they'd do on a Razor genII.

[ElvenSoul]

Minox makes a 1-8

[Blade Gunner]

Perhaps he already has rings, or perhaps he just wants to keep it light and tight.

A 30mm tube does nothing except for having more elevation... but if the OP can zero the rifle at whatever distance he needs then it really there isn't much benefit.

30mm tubes matter if you need a longer elevation range and for the distances he is shooting, again, non issue.

There is also a chance that from a cost/manufacturing standpoint... and at those budget price points, I wouldn't be surprised if the general overall build quality of that 1" Weaver is better than a similarly priced 30mm option.

30mm tubes also transfer more light.

[ExtremeX]

30mm tubes also transfer more light.

Unfortunately they don't... larger objectives do.

Better glass and optical coatings assist in the process of more efficient light transfer as well.

[JackRydden224]

You got it. I want to keep the rifle light and tight with the factory rings. The Weaver at 8oz will allow me do accomplish my goal without breaking the bank. The usage for this rifle will be from 15-200 yards so I don't really need to turn the turrets.

You guys brought some good options in 30mm which will be going on one of my ARs. The Mini-14 will be a light and tight gun that's shot off hand 90% of the time.

Perhaps he already has rings, or perhaps he just wants to keep it light and tight.

A 30mm tube does nothing except for having more elevation... but if the OP can zero the rifle at whatever distance he needs then it really there isn't much benefit.

30mm tubes matter if you need a longer elevation range and for the distances he is shooting, again, non issue.

There is also a chance that from a cost/manufacturing standpoint... and at those budget price points, I wouldn't be surprised if the general overall build quality of that 1" Weaver is better than a similarly priced 30mm option.

[mtenenhaus]

I really like my Leatherwood CMR scope, 1-4x. i can't recall if its 1 inch or 30mm however

[JagerDog]

I have a 1-4X Leupold with pig plex on a 45 Colt carbine. Like it.

[JagerDog]

30mm tubes also transfer more light.

Unfortunately they don't... larger objectives do.

Better glass and optical coatings assist in the process of more efficient light transfer as well.

Agreed.

30mm can either give more robust internals or more adjustment.

[nickel plate]

Jack,
I too have a recently purchased 583 Mini 14 which came with the Ruger rail and rings.
If you decide to use their 1" rings be sure to lap them before installing the scope as they have very sharp protruding edges that will definitely eat through the scope's finish before you even begin to torque them.
I eventually wound up using the supplied Ruger rail with Warne QDs which didn't require lapping. My scope is a 2-7 x 32 Vortex Crossfire ll.

[crufflers]

Unfortunately they don't... larger objectives do.

Better glass and optical coatings assist in the process of more efficient light transfer as well.

Yeah in the bargain lines, I'd say you have to compare side by side because the glass seems to vary so much and is more important than the objective size IMHO.

I have a CrossfireII 3-9x50mm that comes in dead last by quite a bit of clarity and brightness compared side by side to a Strike Eagle 1-6x24, an SWFA SS 10x42 I compared all together. The SS 10x42 beats the Strike Eagle on 6x to my eyes, but not by a ton (they both beat the CrossfireII with the big objective by a ton - compared on 6x and 9x with the Strike Eagle and SS respectively).

[ExtremeX]

Yeah in the bargain lines, I'd say you have to compare side by side because the glass seems to vary so much and is more important than the objective size IMHO.

I have a CrossfireII 3-9x50mm that comes in dead last by quite a bit of clarity and brightness compared side by side to a Strike Eagle 1-6x24, an SWFA SS 10x42 I compared all together. The SS 10x42 beats the Strike Eagle on 6x to my eyes, but not by a ton (they both beat the CrossfireII with the big objective by a ton - compared on 6x and 9x with the Strike Eagle and SS respectively).

ok... but the answer is still NO... Larger tube sizes DON'T increase light transmission... doesn't matter what scope you are taking about.

The objective can only gather so much light, and its up to the rest of the optic to use that light efficiently... unfortunately your Crossfire does a terrible job of that... no surprise there... There is a reason large objective and high magnification bottom dollar scopes just get laughed at by people who really understand their optics.

Also no surprise that the SWFA fixed power with less optical elements and less moving parts (so less things to keep in perfect alignment) can also generate a better image than a Strike Eagle... In addition to that you have a 4.2mm exit pupil on the SWFA @ 10X vs the 4.0mm exit pupil of the StrikeEagle@ 6x. The SWFA already had a head start and was able to stay ahead being a fixed power scope. So... no real surprise there either.

Don't forget to calculate exit pupil size when doing your comparisons.