If my SN-3 does it it's not a big deal because honestly i haven't noticed it, in five years. I'll have to look at the video and go through the magnification range tonight.
Rifle Scopes Tunneling - Here's what it looks like.
- Thread starter orkan
- Start date
I've never even noticed this on my S&B PM11, I am madly in love with my S&B. I would not trade it for any scope on earth period the end.
I've never even noticed this on my S&B PM11, I am madly in love with my S&B. I would not trade it for any scope on earth period the end.
Those are some pretty broad claims... I don't really see how S&B have pioneered anything really, other then those crappy locking turrets. Sure they make clear glass glass but I can think of other manufactures that have better features that certainly didn't copy S&B. It looks like S&B is falling behind now in their 'advancements in technology', unless you're willing to shell out 7k for something that comes with a 2 year warranty, lol.
With the way the Rifle Scopes subform is presently behaving, roughly 25% of the participants will agree that ice cream is good, 15% will disagree only so that they can be part of a rebellious minority, 10% will complain about the cost of some recently-introduced scope, and the remainder will ask the same fucking questions about a Bushnell 3.5-21 or SWFA 3-15 that have been asked approximately twice a day since the beginning of time.
Thank you for your opinion. Have you used or handled some of the competing options, such as a Premier 5-25, Hensoldt 3.5-26, Kahles 6-24, or the Tangent Theta 5-25?
I don't get it. I don't own a scope that does this, so maybe I'm not seeing the whole picture. What is the point of having a scope with lower magnification if the field of view does not increase (between 5 and 7 in that video)? Why would you ever put it on 5?
Like what??
How many scopes prior to the PMII 5-25 had the following?
5-25 FFP
MRAD adjustments
Zero stop
34mm tube
adjustable Illumination
DT turrets,
26Mrad internal adjustment
10 mtr parallax,
DT indicator
56mm objective
fast adjustable diopter
How many????
Last edited:
Yeah I've had the Premier and the Kahles?? has the rebadged Premier (Tangent Theta) been released yet?
The Henny 3.5-26 would be in direct competition with the 3-27 PMII
Again the scopes you mention are all competing against a 10year old design
Same here. I have an NF ATACR and it tunnels but I never turn it down low enough to see it.
Who cares that was 10 years ago. Those specs are not impressive now compared to other offerings. You claimed that they lead the way in advancement in technology. Yeah maybe 10 years ago but now they're falling behind. They certainly aren't pioneers anymore and I'm sure they've even lost some of their loyal supportes with their new warranty program and price increase.
Frankly even if they were the 'best', I wouldn't spend 1k let alone 3 or even 7k on something that comes with a 2 year warranty. That says something about a company. It means either thy don't have faith in their products or it means they don't want to support their customers.
Last edited:
Never knew for sure what tunneling really meant for sure, that video made it crystal clear. Had to check out my NXS cause was thing bout getting another one, no tunneling. Happy Happy Happy.
Mate you have no idea what your talking about at all
You asked what did the S&B Pioneer?? I gave you a list of possibilities!!
You said "I can think of other manufactures that have better features that certainly didn't copy S&B" I asked like what?
You said "who cares"!!! lol I do tell me!!
You said " Those specs are not impressive now compared to other offerings"
What do you mean? they all have copied those specs!!
I never said S&B "lead the way in advancement in technology"
I said "and with a platform to copy not pioneer and advancements in technology they still haven't!! Which means let me explain it for you. PMII 5-25 is a guide line for other scope manufactures to copy, not come up with from scratch. And in the 10 years since advancements in technology ie machining, general R&D etc have increased and yet its still Top.
Your welcome
So, I guess every single thread in the optics section is going to be about S&B, regardless of the topic being discussed.
I should have probably used the USO or IOR I had laying around instead. I'm sure that would have been spun to be about S&B though too.
Come on... police yourselves a bit and take the S&B shit to one of the 50 other threads discussing that topic.
I should have probably used the USO or IOR I had laying around instead. I'm sure that would have been spun to be about S&B though too.
Come on... police yourselves a bit and take the S&B shit to one of the 50 other threads discussing that topic.
So where are getting your facts Kruger that everyone copies S&B or are you just regurgitating info you read from somewhere else?
I'm done wasting my time you.
Orkan sorry for straying off topic, thanks for the video. that must be some amazing technology to make it tunnel like that.
I'm done wasting my time you.
Orkan sorry for straying off topic, thanks for the video. that must be some amazing technology to make it tunnel like that.
Something about this statement bothered me... as that does not reflect my personal experiences. So I just went and watched my video again. The Premier has MASSIVELY more FOV on low magnification than the S&B. Obviously I would like to take both scopes out and physically measure them, but just take a look at the video again. Something is clearly not lining up with the specs in the above list. In the video, both scopes had approximately the same POA, but notice how much more area you can see with the Premier?
I wonder if S&B had the mask out of their scope when they were measuring FOV? Clearly when comparing these two scopes, the Premier wins in the FOV department. Take a look at the video and let me know what you guys see.
Edit: I snapped a couple screenshots and put them side-by-side. As configured, it's obvious which has more FOV.
Last edited:
AZJonny Talk about dragging off topic
That was a question from another thread I asked because I don't know what year the S&B 5-25 was designed? and released to the civilian market!!
I got mine first PMII in 2007 I know they where out well before that, Lowlight got his in 2005 but couldn't really answer. Did Military and LE have them long before they released it to the Civilian market?
Does anybody know??
So AZJonny stop acting like a female looking though my posts trying to discredit me!
Answer some questions
What Info am i regurgitating?
Answer this
How many scopes prior to the PMII 5-25 had the following?
5-25 FFP
MRAD adjustments
Zero stop
34mm tube
adjustable Illumination
DT turrets,
26Mrad internal adjustment
10 mtr parallax,
DT indicator
56mm objective
fast adjustable diopter
How many????
Wasting your time lol you've just made yourself look like a joke you've answered nothing!!
Orkan has posted a video explaining tunneling and has stated that lots of scopes exhibit this characteristic fair enough!!
Give me a "Whatever" like a 16 year old girl!!
Great video. Wouldn't expect anything else from another S Dakotan.
Orkan.... WOW that FOV difference is pronounced! Can't be exact but I'd guess the Premier has 25-30% more. Any idea why or just the design difference.
The only premier I have at the moment is a 3-15, both set on 5x PMII and Premier. I just checked the Premier smashes the PMII for field of view!!! By 1.4 meters @ 100
Maybe i should have a disclaimer, obviously numbers where collected from manufactures specs.
Maybe i should have a disclaimer, obviously numbers where collected from manufactures specs.
There's definitely a design difference. If the S&B didn't tunnel, it would likely be much closer. It's pretty obvious that the S&B is "giving up something" to the other scopes which do not tunnel.
Hey, that's why we're all here man. Real world first-hand experience is far more valuable than manufacturer specs.
shhhhhh! Keep it down though... we don't want this too turn into a S&B thing again.
The real question worth asking is, do all manufacturers of scopes that tunnel bloat their FOV specs like this? I wonder if they even measure them in the real world, or if they are just computed based on optical measurements from the parts.
Last edited:
Which illustates what you said, that one really has to do the research for himself, and not rely on manufacturers' info. I was unaware of this phenomenon.
I understand one of the biggest advantages of running a scope on lower magnification is to increase the FOV, especially for shooting movers. This thread shows to check before you buy. Good to know. Thanks for posting this.
Just checked my SN-3 it does indeed tunnel from 3.2-5x, hell i never noticed it.
There's definitely a design difference. If the S&B didn't tunnel, it would likely be much closer. It's pretty obvious that the S&B is "giving up something" to the other scopes which do not tunnel.
Hey, that's why we're all here man. Real world first-hand experience is far more valuable than manufacturer specs.All I know is that for the last 4 years, every time someone goes off on how awesome their S&B is compared to my Premiers... I've just had to shake my head.
shhhhhh! Keep it down though... we don't want this too turn into a S&B thing again.
The real question worth asking is, do all manufacturers of scopes that tunnel bloat their FOV specs like this? I wonder if they even measure them in the real world, or if they are just computed based on optical measurements from the parts.
I'll let you research that!! FOV spec's
Scopes are a personal tool not everyone uses them the same, I still prefer PMII 5-25 over premier 5-25 but its splitting hairs why, and it helps that i have Gen II XR PMII
3-15 LT/Hunter prem is my most used scope I had 5 of them at one stage now down to 2, I'd buy more of them I just cant get them
We have both gen2MD and gen2XR Premier light tactical's in stock.
Well there is your problem. You are referencing something that is not going to happen. If S&B releases another ffp 5-25 with the same features, the current one will no longer be made. Of course I would expect to pay less for older tech. This is a silly argument. I would guess there is nothing gained in the real world with a 5-25 that does not tunnel because it will never be used at 5x. If you find yourself at 5x by with one of these scopes you have the wrong tool on the rifle. Sure it would be cool if it didn't so I can brag that my scope doesn't tunnel, but it makes no damn difference in the real world.
I am no S&B fanboy. I will more than likely be purchasing the Beast from here on out for my 5-25 needs. After I test one one a rifle. However, for my use no one has produced a 5-25 that would make me leave the S&B. I liked the Kahles, but not as much as the S&B. Premiers are good as long as you got one without the parallax issue and limited on reticle choices. No clue why you brought up the Hensoldt that is almost $3,000 more than the S&B with limited reticle options? Tangent Theta? Is anyone using one yet?
Is it possible that others use their rifle scopes differently than you? Is it also possible that some people would enjoy extra FOV, even when you don't? Buying a 5-25 with the expectation to be able to use it to the fullest extent that other scopes can be used at 5x, is not an unrealistic expectation I don't think.
It is also worth noting, in my experience, scopes that tunnel have a less forgiving eyebox than scopes that do not. There are many things which can be cited which could be considered "real world" benefits among scopes that do not tunnel, vs. those that do. I respect the fact that you do not find those things to be important. Please respect the fact that others do.
Yes, people are using them. You'll be hearing about it in the coming months.
Thanks for the Vid ! Yea it probably don't mean much to a lot of folks , but if a scope I was buying did this ? Yes I would like to know and be aware of it , and be compared to the other possible options of manufacturers .
Not that I want to get into the middle of your furious debate,
But yous-all do realize that the Exact Same Person designed the S&B 5-25x and the Premier / Tangent Theta right?
Don't let that get in the way or anything, but Andy designed both scopes.
But yous-all do realize that the Exact Same Person designed the S&B 5-25x and the Premier / Tangent Theta right?
Don't let that get in the way or anything, but Andy designed both scopes.
Is it possible that others use their rifle scopes differently than you? Is it also possible that some people would enjoy extra FOV, even when you don't? Buying a 5-25 with the expectation to be able to use it to the fullest extent that other scopes can be used at 5x, is not an unrealistic expectation I don't think.
It is also worth noting, in my experience, scopes that tunnel have a less forgiving eyebox than scopes that do not. There are many things which can be cited which could be considered "real world" benefits among scopes that do not tunnel, vs. those that do. I respect the fact that you do not find those things to be important. Please respect the fact that others do.
Yes, people are using them. You'll be hearing about it in the coming months.
well said!!
Not that I want to get into the middle of your furious debate,
But yous-all do realize that the Exact Same Person designed the S&B 5-25x and the Premier / Tangent Theta right?
Don't let that get in the way or anything, but Andy designed both scopes.
Same designer, but obviously different design. For example, I understand the S&B parallax adjusts down to much closer than the Premier. And then there is the whole binding issue with the Premier.
Orkan has an interesting point about FOV and lower magnification. The only reason I reduce magnification in the field is to increase FOV to find things more easily. In this sense, tunneling does reduce the usefulness of the lower end of the magnification. At a square range, my mag is always left at the top. When I am hunting, the lower end gets a lot of use. So really, tunneling doesn't appear to be an issue, but reduced FOV is a real issue. I would be more disturbed if reported FOV's were incorrect.
It's 2.4 ft @ 100 yards ... Or 1/2 that if you consider both sides.
Pretty sure the focus debate cancels this out, as focusing is a shooting issue and FOV is a non-shooting one.
Would you rather see that extra 1.2ft off each edge or be able to actually focus, identify and shoot inside 50 yards?
Where is the priority shooting @ 25m or observing at 5x ... Most like to focus and shoot, cause that 2.4ft is probably just a millimeter of rifle movement to check the edges. As pretty much all the debate on the other side is hypothetical, which is why nobody has stated a real world reason to shoot a 25x on 5x. It's been acknowledged over and over the majority stay over 8x under the most practical of situations. The rest has been, well, what if I... Could it happen, sure, but the odds roll the other way. If you are hunting and believe the quarry is gonna require a 5x shot with your 25x scope you might have chosen the wrong tool that day.
Pretty sure the focus debate cancels this out, as focusing is a shooting issue and FOV is a non-shooting one.
Would you rather see that extra 1.2ft off each edge or be able to actually focus, identify and shoot inside 50 yards?
Where is the priority shooting @ 25m or observing at 5x ... Most like to focus and shoot, cause that 2.4ft is probably just a millimeter of rifle movement to check the edges. As pretty much all the debate on the other side is hypothetical, which is why nobody has stated a real world reason to shoot a 25x on 5x. It's been acknowledged over and over the majority stay over 8x under the most practical of situations. The rest has been, well, what if I... Could it happen, sure, but the odds roll the other way. If you are hunting and believe the quarry is gonna require a 5x shot with your 25x scope you might have chosen the wrong tool that day.
What is the advantage of a scope that reduces power but doesn't have the optical ability to continue zooming out and increasing field of view? As many have said over many posts, they NEED the lower power as much as they might need the higher power. FOV is an important issue.
Another question regarding this is does it allow more light when reducing power that last 2x? If it won't increase FOV size how does it let in more light? Is the only issue FOV? Is clarity increased with decrease in power. Obviously size decreases.
I have once on a friend rifle then dream on....
Actually, no. I have not. I haven't purchased scopes with the magnification spreads I'm seeing today. So, I'm also not familiar with seeing it in scopes. I have heard the term before.
My point was the people complaining are the ones who don't own or have used the scope. I have owned many and used them in competitions for years and I have never had any issues with the 5-7x area when I rarely used them. This subject has been beat to death for years. You can search the forum and find many threads on this subject.
Honestly I don't care if people like it or not or buy the scope or not. Doesn't effect me one bit. You don't want one then don't get one. Plenty of other options out there if the 5-7x tunneling is such a bother. Lowlight pretty much covered it.
That's all fine and good, but as someone who doesn't own one, is there any reason to put one on 5X? Or is it jus a quirk of the design and what you really have is a 7-25x? Nothing wrong with that, just wondering if there is something in the optics that makes it worth putting on 5X despite the tunneling?
With the scope being able to dial parallax down to 10 meters there really isn't unless you are shooting inside about 15-20 feet, which I have done at matches a few times, and just want to try and clarify your image like you can do with other scopes that only adjust parallax down to 50 yards and you dial down power to get a clearer image inside that range.
I just took a peek through one of my SB 5-25 PMIIs, and see about 52 mils in the FOV at minimum magnification. If I'm capable of doing math on a Sunday morning, that's about 15.6' of FOV at 100yd. This makes me think that the stated FOV of 22.5' must not include the internal aperature that causes the tunneling.
That being said, I personally don't find this to be an issue with my use of the scope. If someone else has an honest problem, fine; I respect that. If someone just wants to troll without providing any useful information or commentary {cough}Phillip{/cough}, then I'd be happier if they did it elsewhere.
Last edited:
The FOV you have on the S&B is assuming no tunneling. I put together a spreadsheet for my personal viewing pleasure. I took a screen shot of part of it showing the S&B. It shows the calculated FOV and the actual FOV on the upper and lower range. I would love to have the actual FOV in all ranges but would need the scopes to measure each one. When my BEAST comes in I plan on doing it for that scope.
Why drag me into this? I didn't start this thread? I've said since the beginning of time that different people make different choices for different reasons. The choice I made was based purely on available funds. Others may make their choice on brand name, others on mag. range.....what ever, you bought it, be happy. Like Frank said "Fly your flag". As an uninformed buyer If I saved my money for months and I bought a 5-25 "any brand scope" and found out later that it was actually a 8-25 I would be somewhat disappointed and felt like I had been taken advantage of. If I was a "Informed" buyer then I wouldn't care because I knew it going in.
Many others on this very thread have said they would be pissed also and now being informed will not buy the scope. why ain't ya'll mad at them? They feel the same as me????
It's not my fault my scope works perfectly throughout the entire magnification range. Don't be a hater. The fact that you S&B owners have such fragile self esteem issues is not my problem. I'm proud of my scope choice, be proud of yours.
What Reticles work below 8x ?
Very few unless they have tall lines that are thick enough to see... So 5x using a duplex is what you'll get most of the time.
It's why we have options,
if the low end is of consideration get a scope that handles the low end, though other than in writing on the internet most chase the high end of the magnification over the low end.
They may move around looking for a target (observing ) at the lower end, but most shoot closer to the high side. I have yet to encounter a need for 5x or less ... If I felt it was necessary I would buy the appropriate tool.
The difference between shooting and thinking about shooting is heavy in these threads lately.
Very few unless they have tall lines that are thick enough to see... So 5x using a duplex is what you'll get most of the time.
It's why we have options,
if the low end is of consideration get a scope that handles the low end, though other than in writing on the internet most chase the high end of the magnification over the low end.
They may move around looking for a target (observing ) at the lower end, but most shoot closer to the high side. I have yet to encounter a need for 5x or less ... If I felt it was necessary I would buy the appropriate tool.
The difference between shooting and thinking about shooting is heavy in these threads lately.
The manufacturer reported FOV in this case is clearly completely wrong Frank. The above screenshots prove that. Those numbers aren't even close.
There has been many instances where I've gone down to 5x when hunting. Hell, once I was shooting rats and I couldn't see them with the naked eye, but I could see them at 5x. They were popping out over a wide area of field around a garbage pit, and having that wide FOV was an asset. Use of these scopes goes far beyond competition or tactical scenarios. In the civilian sector, there are plenty of reasons one might want to observe at 5x. At no point am I saying you can't effectively use a S&B 5-25. I'm simply saying that these are aspects of that scope that many first-purchasers that had never used one could be surprised about.
I do agree that one of the very strongest points of S&B's is their ability to parallax down so low. However, if I were to argue the way most people seem to be arguing this, I'd simply say "well you don't need to shoot inside of 50m anyway." It seems that everyone is quite content to argue their point while telling everyone else what they need/want simultaneously. I think it would do everyone well to just stick to arguing the facts, and the facts here are that scopes that tunnel seem to have a much narrower FOV, possibly a less forgiving eyebox, and no practical use of any kind at their lower powers. (regardless of anyone's position on FOV)
I do not think it is unreasonable to expect manufacturers to truthfully report the specifications and capabilities of their rifle scopes. If they won't, then at least the truth can be discovered here. Then everyone can decide for themselves what they need or don't need.
Would be curious to know if he felt he made improvements over his first design.Not that I want to get into the middle of your furious debate,
But yous-all do realize that the Exact Same Person designed the S&B 5-25x and the Premier / Tangent Theta right?
Don't let that get in the way or anything, but Andy designed both scopes.
I would assume that to be the case.
I'm just curious to know why a company would spend the $$ to manufacture a scope that has a "identical" range from 5-7 power in the first place. Why not save the manufacturing costs and just make a 7-25 power.
It may not sound like a lot of money but over the approx 10 years that this scope has been made I'd be willing to bet the manufacturing savings would have been quite a bit.
Does that 5-7 range serve a function that I'm just not understanding? (NV/Thermal)
Am just curious.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It may not sound like a lot of money but over the approx 10 years that this scope has been made I'd be willing to bet the manufacturing savings would have been quite a bit.
Does that 5-7 range serve a function that I'm just not understanding? (NV/Thermal)
Am just curious.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Haven't you been reading? No one uses it, no one needs it, and if you want it you are wrong!
j/k Mood needs to lighten around here a bit. Haven't you been reading? No one uses it, no one needs it, and if you want it you are wrong!
I get that. I just wonder why you'd even make it to begin with if it served no function. That's all. I'm just looking at it from a business standpoint.
Do they really...
Cause this scope has been around much longer than any other 5-25x on the market and you never hear these complaints.
Unless there is an agenda to bring them up.
It's well known that every scope manufacturer currently do scopes that compete have an S&B 5-25x on their desk used to compare too.
Where are the complaints of the eye box, or the tunneling, or of people using them on 5x cause we all know the reticles don't work that low, and most people are not doing it. Plenty of "What If" reason but few from a practical standpoint. As I said in the other thread, I have had my S&B since the very first shipment in the US. I was one of 3 people to get on that I know of, and I have never shot it on 5x I can recall, or do I recall of using it on 5x for observing. That is not to say someone won't try, or think they need it, but I find I can do more, with more in this case.
How many fixed, dedicated hunting scopes are 5x ? You have 8x, 6x, you can dig up 4x but then we are in another class of optic. If you need that wide of FOV and can afford a S&B, get a set of binoculars ... LOL
you can say they might, or they could have a need, but you'd be hard pressed to find it in the real world. I think any case where the idea to use comes into play it was an accident, not a purpose driven reason.
You said you shot rats on 5x, well, the S&B will focus closer on higher power, so why could you not see the rats on 8x, 10x or 12x ? If the scope will focus to 10m could you not see them ?
Nothing you pointed too lends to FOV but more to moving to lower the power so you can see because the optic you were using can't focus that close. The lower you adjust these other scopes the easier they are to focus and see... At least that is how I read it.
If the idea was a cross over hunting scope, why not use the 3-20x... and S&B does make a 3-27x like the Hensoldt does the 3-26x you mentioned at $1000 less. So it's not like it is not out there. As has been noted, there was absolutely positively no only scope on the market that competed with the S&B 5-25x until about 3 years later. And S&B has not stood still either, they have offered other models as well.
This is not to say I would not pick a BEAST today over an S&B, as I personally would if it was my money, but that doesn't mean the argument from the start is agenda driven as nobody complains about the S&B ... at all. Just look at the "Top Shooters' Thread with the gear used. Two years in a row the S&B is one of the most used scopes by the top shooters. The next closest is the Bushnell because of Team GAP.
Cause this scope has been around much longer than any other 5-25x on the market and you never hear these complaints.
Unless there is an agenda to bring them up.
It's well known that every scope manufacturer currently do scopes that compete have an S&B 5-25x on their desk used to compare too.
Where are the complaints of the eye box, or the tunneling, or of people using them on 5x cause we all know the reticles don't work that low, and most people are not doing it. Plenty of "What If" reason but few from a practical standpoint. As I said in the other thread, I have had my S&B since the very first shipment in the US. I was one of 3 people to get on that I know of, and I have never shot it on 5x I can recall, or do I recall of using it on 5x for observing. That is not to say someone won't try, or think they need it, but I find I can do more, with more in this case.
How many fixed, dedicated hunting scopes are 5x ? You have 8x, 6x, you can dig up 4x but then we are in another class of optic. If you need that wide of FOV and can afford a S&B, get a set of binoculars ... LOL
you can say they might, or they could have a need, but you'd be hard pressed to find it in the real world. I think any case where the idea to use comes into play it was an accident, not a purpose driven reason.
You said you shot rats on 5x, well, the S&B will focus closer on higher power, so why could you not see the rats on 8x, 10x or 12x ? If the scope will focus to 10m could you not see them ?
Nothing you pointed too lends to FOV but more to moving to lower the power so you can see because the optic you were using can't focus that close. The lower you adjust these other scopes the easier they are to focus and see... At least that is how I read it.
If the idea was a cross over hunting scope, why not use the 3-20x... and S&B does make a 3-27x like the Hensoldt does the 3-26x you mentioned at $1000 less. So it's not like it is not out there. As has been noted, there was absolutely positively no only scope on the market that competed with the S&B 5-25x until about 3 years later. And S&B has not stood still either, they have offered other models as well.
This is not to say I would not pick a BEAST today over an S&B, as I personally would if it was my money, but that doesn't mean the argument from the start is agenda driven as nobody complains about the S&B ... at all. Just look at the "Top Shooters' Thread with the gear used. Two years in a row the S&B is one of the most used scopes by the top shooters. The next closest is the Bushnell because of Team GAP.
Of course he does... he is not standing still, no company is.
As it has been noted, replacements are available even from S&B ... A company that rests on its hands dies.
Ask yourself how much did Tangent Theta change on the Heritage ? Quite a lot. That scope has no where the time in service.
