Why no 1-10x32(ish) Scope

**AndyLate** · 09-23-22, 06:33

There must be something I am missing. The optics engineers have definitely cracked the nut on 1-10 LPVOs, but why are they all straight tube?

I get that glass is heavy, but I cannot think of any advantage to a straight tube on an AR other than weight. Lets be honest, most (all?) of the 1-10 scopes are heavy enough to convince me that weight savings are not a high priority.

Why do I ask? Exit pupil. To me, a FFP 1-10x32 or 36 scope would be a no brainer, especially with a nice bright dot instead of a lit reticle. Nice for hunting, nice for Recce, nice for lots of shooting.

Maybe the low light performance is exceptional in the high end LPVOs but I honestly don't understand how.

Andy

P.S. I realize that many of the LPVOs don't have a perfectly straight tube, but they certainly don't have a bell.

**One More Time** · 09-23-22, 07:54

May as well go to a 2.5x10 at that point.
SWFA has one that's 9.5 oz, not illuminated though.
My NF weighs twice as much but has a 42mm objective and 30mm tube.

**T2C** · 09-23-22, 08:37

Aren't the low to high power scope magnifications usually in a 1/4 ratio? I would think that a higher ratio, if possible, would be much more expensive to make.

**MegademiC** · 09-23-22, 09:08

Originally Posted by T2C

Aren't the low to high power scope magnifications usually in a 1/4 ratio? I would think that a higher ratio, if possible, would be much more expensive to make.

There are tons of 1/6x scopes (leupold, trijicon, vortex, brownells) and a few 1/8x (NF, swampfox & trijicon) and 1/10x. (USO & trijicon).

**mig1nc** · 09-23-22, 09:45

Originally Posted by One More Time

May as well go to a 2.5x10 at that point.
SWFA has one that's 9.5 oz, not illuminated though.
My NF weighs twice as much but has a 42mm objective and 30mm tube.

I've often contemplated getting the swfa and throwing on a piggyback red dot.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

**One More Time** · 09-23-22, 10:00

Atibal makes a 1-10x30 for $800
Chinesium though.
Sig also has a 1-10x28 for about $500.

**gunnerblue** · 09-23-22, 12:32

Originally Posted by AndyLate

There must be something I am missing. The optics engineers have definitely cracked the nut on 1-10 LPVOs, but why are they all straight tube?

I get that glass is heavy, but I cannot think of any advantage to a straight tube on an AR other than weight. Lets be honest, most (all?) of the 1-10 scopes are heavy enough to convince me that weight savings are not a high priority.

Why do I ask? Exit pupil. To me, a FFP 1-10x32 or 36 scope would be a no brainer, especially with a nice bright dot instead of a lit reticle. Nice for hunting, nice for Recce, nice for lots of shooting.

Maybe the low light performance is exceptional in the high end LPVOs but I honestly don't understand how.

Andy

P.S. I realize that many of the LPVOs don't have a perfectly straight tube, but they certainly don't have a bell.

https://youtu.be/9E7W3NbhvIU

OP, here's a great explanation from Ilya Koshkin (aka The Dark Lord of Optics). Basically, a larger objective would result in a larger, heavier scope.

March does makes a 1.5-15x42 which is 21 oz. and 10.5" long (basically the same dimensions of the ATACR 1-8 and Razor Gen III) but it's second focal plane, not first.

**AndyLate** · 09-23-22, 16:56

An interesting (1.5 y/o) blog by Ilya: https://palmettostatearmory.com/blog...15-optics.html

Andy

**vicious_cb** · 09-23-22, 21:03

Not a good idea. You are going to make a 1-10x LPVO weigh as much a MPVO when they are already pushing 21oz + mount, no way Im putting that on top of duty/defense AR. And what do you gain? Alittle more light transmission and maybe more field of view on the top end? Not worth it.