Rifle Scopes Tunneling - Here's what it looks like.

[Bluejazz]

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.

I assume the TT was designed after he designed the S&B, so my question was geared toward what improvements the same designer felt he made from one design to the other.
Just curious. I don't own either scope, and have no dog in this fight.
I did own a Premier at one time, and thought it was a great scope.

 

[clmayfield]

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.

I have pulled the trigger on something on 5X maybe twice in 5,000 rounds. That is not to say that I don't ever put the scope on 5X. I am shooting at targets that are a range of sizes at a variety of distances from 25 yards out to 1,000 yards. For instance, sitting by a tank and popping turtles in the head. Even at 10X, I might be able to find them with my naked eye, but they can be hard to find with scope at closer range, so you have to crank it down to 5X to locate the target that you can plainly see in front of you, and then back up to 25X (or so) to shoot.

If I owned an S&B, I would never find a need to go down to 5X if the 7X has the same FOV as the 5X. So sure, I would never go below 7X either. It is not gaining me anything.

For tactical stuff where the targets are larger and generally farther away, yeah, I can see the lower range having not much use.

S&B originally designed the 5-25 for air rifles, which are often shooting small targets at close range. That was the reasoning behind a higher erector ratio. So the questions is, why not go with a 6-24X scope as opposed to a 5-25X? From a marketing perspective, I think folks are scared off by the higher lower range and also want the highest top end range possible. Practically, there is no difference between 24X and 25X.

BTW... I am not saying this is a deal breaker. I would rather have the S&B and should have bought one when the Gen 2 XL reticle and CCW turrets where still affordable. But again, I am puzzled by the design choice given the tunneling at lower mags.

 

[Lowlight]

I never asked him that, but also note that the changes to the TT line also added a lot more money to the equation.

It's not a $2800 scope anymore it's a $4250 scope...

The S&B 3-20x changed the eye piece, and came out over $3000 when the original 5-25x was less than $3k.

The turrets on the TT are completely different too ... so what does that say ? They recognized some issues there too and fixed them.

Understand right after the 5-25x came out, Andy left S&B... they started Optronika.

 

[jeo556]

First I must apologize that I cannot imagine some ridiculous reason to shoot my rifle at my own foot and therefor can't complain about the shitty ass S & B PMII's that all you luck bastards have been MADE to shoot over the last ten years, it must be hard when all you have to complain about is how shitty S&B's are.

Secondly, I cannot image that the gentleman that designed the S&B PM' scopes actually has the nerve to design another optical system after that first debacle. Guy has some nerve.

With all that significant info out of the way I'd like to add some information that totally doesn't pertain to this thread in any way, shape, or form. I checked my SS 5-20 HD and it doesn't tunnel at all. So for all you people that just cannot bring yourself to shoot the S&B PMII's any longer, I have a perfectly functioning SS 5-50 HD that doesn't do all that BS that your's does.........and I'm willing to trade, STRAIGHT UP!

 

[clmayfield]

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

My dad's Nikon Buckmaster is 4X. For our area, most rifle scopes are for white tail at short distance (200 yards and under, which most hunters will tell you is 400 yards). The Super Sniper at 3-9X is a perfect magnification range for south Texas deer hunting. If only I did just that.

The point of the low mag is not to observe as has been pointed out, but to actually find the target quickly. You need to be able to find the target with your scope before you can shoot, and that is the optical problem. The high erector ratio solves another problem, which is that I am using one rifle and one scope to do a wide variety of things. From turtle heads to deer sized targets and paper. From 25 yards to 1,000 yards. From Smack the Smiley to F-class. I like to save money and simplify my life by using one rifle/scope combo for all of these things... which is, yes, a personal problem... but it's not theoretical.

For the tactical shooter, which is your perspective, you are obviously the authority. This is your fault, though Frank. You created this site and, like it or not, it brings in all sorts of eyeballs not just snipers and tactical comp shooters. So there is a diversity of opinions and uses for the tools we are debating about.

 

[Bradu]

Lol, this thread is comical. I have a Nightforce ATACR that tunnels and don't give a shit about it. I have shot it a fair amount on 5x just to see what I thought about the "issue" and it doesn't bother me at all. I do a large portion of my shooting between 15 and 25x which is why I bought a scope that goes up to 25x. If I planned on using my scope on 5x more than I wouldn't have bought it, it's really that simple.

 

[Lowlight]

My dad's Nikon Buckmaster is 4X. For our area, most rifle scopes are for white tail at short distance (200 yards and under, which most hunters will tell you is 400 yards). The Super Sniper at 3-9X is a perfect magnification range for south Texas deer hunting. If only I did just that.

The point of the low mag is not to observe as has been pointed out, but to actually find the target quickly. You need to be able to find the target with your scope before you can shoot, and that is the optical problem. The high erector ratio solves another problem, which is that I am using one rifle and one scope to do a wide variety of things. From turtle heads to deer sized targets and paper. From 25 yards to 1,000 yards. From Smack the Smiley to F-class. I like to save money and simplify my life by using one rifle/scope combo for all of these things... which is, yes, a personal problem... but it's not theoretical.

For the tactical shooter, which is your perspective, you are obviously the authority. This is your fault, though Frank. You created this site and, like it or not, it brings in all sorts of eyeballs not just snipers and tactical comp shooters. So there is a diversity of opinions and uses for the tools we are debating about.

You don't have a POINT... that is the POINT.

Buy the right scope for the job, we have options. You keep saying the same thing over and over... as if we are advocating complete crossover optic. We are all smart enough to understand there are different tools for the job. If you want a scope that focuses close and has a wide FOV buy that scope. If you want one optic to do everything, it's not gonna happen unless you spend a ton of money.. S&B makes a 3-27x it's $6800... Hensoldt makes a 3-26x, it's $7700... buy it.

If you want a scope for the low end buy that scope... D'uh. Why argue a 3-9x is the best option in a 5-25x discussion at all.

The Tower shot at rifles only is 22ft, they put targets there, the closest we have shot during a SH Match was 11ft... and people hit with these inferior scopes. FOV is not the issue, Focus is. If you can get a better focus at 10m you can see better at 7x... it's that simple. The FOV is still bigger than 25x, but you can see. Many of these scopes need to dial down just to focus close enough to make it.

Some may recall when we did the 25 yard shot with a paper with letters on it, you had a spell out a word. The S*B could do it many others could not. The letters were only 1/2"

If you hunt in an area that needs 4x, get a 4x scope. how hard is that is that to figure out. Why would you consider a S&B 5-25x is you are gonna use it in a wooded area where 4x shots are common. If you find yourself there, you can either take the shot or not. If you want cross over they make a 3-20x... they make a 3-27x they make stuff to suit your needs.

Jeez...

 

[orkan]

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 ?

I didn't say I was shooting rats on 5x... you said that. I could have, if I wanted to, but I was observing. Watching the area, once I'd catch movement, I'd dial the mag up to 20x or better and whack the offending rodent. More FOV is better than less FOV in that situation. You say I don't need it. Maybe, but I damn sure like it! It had nothing to do with powering down due to lack of parallax, and everything to do with being able to detect movement in a wide area. That's not academic, that's a real world benefit that I personally experienced, and on far more occasions than just that one. When someone is spending big money on an optic, it's not unreasonable for them to want to use it in as many situations as possible. Not everyone is in our position to buy the best scope available to suite a specific application. Most people are not, actually.

You say nobody complains about S&B... well I do. So do others. We learned that when we do, we get tarred and feathered, because we couldn't possibly be anything other than a dumbass if we have a different viewpoint than others.

Other scopes meet my needs better, but I don't mind. I don't expect a 10yr old design to compete with today's scopes. That's an unrealistic expectation if ever there was one, and while I know you don't have that expectation, it's clear many others do. The truth speaks for itself. If a scope has a smaller FOV than a competing scope... THEN IT HAS A SMALLER FOV. That's the fact, and while people can say "you don't need that" all they want, it doesn't change the fact. It's up to the guy spending the money to decide if that's important to them or not. FOV is important to me on rifles that I kill things with. It's not very important on the 36x fixed scope I have on my smallbore bench rifle.

As for what "top shooters" use... that list of data as it pertains to brand is far too skewed by sponsorships and industry alliances to have any practical value. It's cool to check it out, and some of the things do have value. However, I've talked to many competition shooters that told me something like "I'd rather shoot with so-and-so's (insert piece of kit here), but they won't sponsor me so fuck em." Obviously that is not true in every situation, but I know it happens enough to make any brand correlations virtually invalid. Also, just because top competition shooters choose certain kit, doesn't mean Joe Bob needs or wants the same thing for shooting vermin off his porch.

Some scopes tunnel, some don't. Some have higher FOV than others. Some have thicker reticles. I have no problem being truthful about S&B's 5-25 strong points, as well as it's weak points. Truthful and unfiltered representation of product specs and capabilities should be everyone's goal. Then everyone gets to buy what they want, and avoid what they don't. I don't see this as a bad thing. Not everyone needs or wants the same thing.

 

[Bluejazz]

Orkan
I will state that the few posts of yours that I have read are very imformative, and steer clear of personal attacks. I will have to keep my eyes out for more of your threads.

 

[10fp]

Frank, can you confirm no tunneling on the beast ? When I tried one I noticed crazy good eye box even better than s&b, glass was awesome but I never checked for tunneling. My 2 atacrs do have tunneling on the low end. The beast and atacr were the only scopes after the s&b that gave me the wow effect at first sigh picture.

 

[orkan]

The beast doesn't tunnel... at least not the ones I've looked through.

 

[Lowlight]

So the question is, if you know a person has the potential of using the low end, if in fact the low end is even a consideration do you recommend the 3-20x

Cause it seems to me it's about one optic that does it all, and we know that is not gonna happen though it can do more if you are willing to spend the money, so do you recommend a better tool for the job ? If the consideration is the end user, knowing the customer, etc, do you say, "well you might do, A, B, C, so you better invest in the 3-27x or 3-26x doesn't that recommend talk to Facts and giving the user what they want.

You can point to 1000 what if situations that require a different solution, yet there is zero mention of that as nobody here complaining about the tunneling saying, "use the 3-20x"

The tar & feathering comes from the material misrepresentation of the use or the fact you can solve that problem as I have never met someone who missed anything with a 5-25x, you can bitch it's not perfect, but neither are the Premier Scopes, the reticle sub tension is not good at lower power, the parallax, the turrets, and while they have been corrected on many levels, that were addressed in the TT line by 1. Increasing the cost significantly, 2. materially changing the scope, yet the reticle considerations have not changed, which most Premier Reticle Choices are useless below 8x. That is also fact and speaks directly to the compromises and trade offs around all of these.

You can argue 5x is easier with Scope A, but nobody is saying you can't do it on 7x ... cause you can. If you are observing and scanning you are still observing which requires scanning and movement by the shooter. it has not cost anyone a hit on target. Clearly, after all the SEALs and SOCOM choose the S&B over the competition.

 

[orkan]

If you are observing and scanning you are still observing which requires scanning and movement by the shooter.

A wider FOV means you have to move less, which is nice.

 

[sandwarrior]

After reading this thread I find it informative. The rolling of eyes and gnashing of teeth however isn't conducive to good information dissemination. What I'm taking away from this is while the S&B does tunnel from 7x down to 5x, the focus is close enough you can hit from as short at 11 ft. For the intended purpose of the scope, this is fine. It isn't intended to shoot small rodents in the head up close. Nor is it really intended to be an observation device, so the FOV while being as large as most scopes in it's class is not as big as the manufacturer states. Knowing the difference and being able to make a change in your purchase is what the thread brings about.

So, the rub I find with it is pretty minor but noticeable. The information presented here on this thread explains some of the things you might hope for but not getting. Minor issues that don't meet your needs on one end of the spectrum. I don't think I would have the problem some do with it. But, I can see my way of spotting may not work for others. I usually "slow sweep" an area rather than just hold. If I know some varmint is coming out of a hole I find I can pick up movement better if I do not look directly at it. Sweeping usually has me off to one side where I can see the movement and re-center on it after I pick it up.

Which leads me to say what I've found here. If you think the tunneling issue is going to be a problem for you with a high range scope on low power, you might want to look for another option. [MENTION=20064]orkan[/MENTION] has shown what to look for, if you already own an S&B and find this issue a problem, there are ways around it. Without even buying a new piece of glass I might add. If it's not a problem then drive on.

No sense in making this a negative thread. There was good information here.

 

[Fitz]

The tar & feathering comes from the material misrepresentation of the use or the fact you can solve that problem as I have never met someone who missed anything with a 5-25x, you can bitch it's not perfect, but neither are the Premier Scopes, the reticle sub tension is not good at lower power, the parallax, the turrets, and while they have been corrected on many levels

+1 on this. Kind of rendered the PH's I have had in the past useless below 8x power for other than for a scanning function essentially.

 

[Twisted .308]

Damn , you guy need a 5x25 to shoot something at 11' ;-)

 

[sandwarrior]

Damn , you guy need a 5x25 to shoot something at 11' ;-)

To be clear, when you have a magnified sight mounted on your rifle that you cannot quickly remove and use backup sights, you need that magnified sight to be able to focus that short. It's not really a choice so much as a requirement while fulfilling other 'choices'.

 

[JSF]

I didn't say I was shooting rats on 5x... you said that. I could have, if I wanted to, but I was observing. Watching the area, once I'd catch movement, I'd dial the mag up to 20x or better and whack the offending rodent. More FOV is better than less FOV in that situation. You say I don't need it. Maybe, but I damn sure like it! It had nothing to do with powering down due to lack of parallax, and everything to do with being able to detect movement in a wide area. That's not academic, that's a real world benefit that I personally experienced, and on far more occasions than just that one. When someone is spending big money on an optic, it's not unreasonable for them to want to use it in as many situations as possible. Not everyone is in our position to buy the best scope available to suite a specific application. Most people are not, actually.

You say nobody complains about S&B... well I do. So do others. We learned that when we do, we get tarred and feathered, because we couldn't possibly be anything other than a dumbass if we have a different viewpoint than others.

Other scopes meet my needs better, but I don't mind. I don't expect a 10yr old design to compete with today's scopes. That's an unrealistic expectation if ever there was one, and while I know you don't have that expectation, it's clear many others do. The truth speaks for itself. If a scope has a smaller FOV than a competing scope... THEN IT HAS A SMALLER FOV. That's the fact, and while people can say "you don't need that" all they want, it doesn't change the fact. It's up to the guy spending the money to decide if that's important to them or not. FOV is important to me on rifles that I kill things with. It's not very important on the 36x fixed scope I have on my smallbore bench rifle.

As for what "top shooters" use... that list of data as it pertains to brand is far too skewed by sponsorships and industry alliances to have any practical value. It's cool to check it out, and some of the things do have value. However, I've talked to many competition shooters that told me something like "I'd rather shoot with so-and-so's (insert piece of kit here), but they won't sponsor me so fuck em." Obviously that is not true in every situation, but I know it happens enough to make any brand correlations virtually invalid. Also, just because top competition shooters choose certain kit, doesn't mean Joe Bob needs or wants the same thing for shooting vermin off his porch.

Some scopes tunnel, some don't. Some have higher FOV than others. Some have thicker reticles. I have no problem being truthful about S&B's 5-25 strong points, as well as it's weak points. Truthful and unfiltered representation of product specs and capabilities should be everyone's goal. Then everyone gets to buy what they want, and avoid what they don't. I don't see this as a bad thing. Not everyone needs or wants the same thing.

Which scope in this mag range do you prefer over the S&B? I have used them all and too me I would not pick any of them over the S&B. I hope the Beast performs as good as I think it will after seeing it at Shot Show because I would like to save a little money on my next purchase in a couple of months. I just think this whole argument is ridiculous. There are many other more important things to consider when purchasing a 5-25. If someone is worried enough about this they are probably buying the wrong tool.

 

[steve123]

Damn , you guy need a 5x25 to shoot something at 11' ;-)

I haven't used my S&B 5-25 to shoot that close but I've used it a lot inside of 55Y and down as low as 10Y in our Field Target air rifle matches. Then the next week used it on a big centerfire for ELR shots out to 2356Y.

There are precious few scopes that a guy can do this with effectively.

Then on top of that add a Horus reticle and holdovers/holdoffs are very doable even at ELR distances.

For me the "versatility" alone of having both of these attributes in one scope is simply a awesome thing.

 

[orkan]

JSF, I'm going to refrain from commenting, simply because it would only serve to fuel the fire here.

The focus of this thread shouldn't be about S&B, and I really wish it would stop. It's about tunneling, and what the effect can mean regarding FOV at low magnifications. Though it seems that no thread about any serious subject will have a snowballs chance in hell of staying on topic in this sub-forum.

 

[datec]

Even with the tunneling the S&B 5-25 gives up nothing to its competition in regards to field of view @ 100 on 5x magnification

Field of view in ft on lowest x mag @ 100

USO 5-25x58 17 ft @100
NXS 5.5-22x50 17.5 ft @ 100
Beast 5-25x56 18.7 ft @ 100
Hensoldt 6-24x56 20 ft @100
Vortex Razor 5-20x50 22 ft @100
Kahles 624i 22.3 ft @100
S&B PMII 5-25x56 22.5 ft @100
Steiner 5-25x56 23.6 ft @100
Premier 5-25x56 24.9 ft @100
Vortex GenII 4.7-27x56 25.3 ft @100

That's all good but the fact is the site pic phys. gets smaller. Like when I bought my 70" HDTV and every once in a while when watching a perticular show it changes into a 50" HDTV the pic quality is still the same and gives the same as every other HDTV but just turns into a smaller screen while watching that show and when watching something else it changes back into the 70" I bought. I would have a problem with that as I'm sure you would too.
For what it is worth I have a 5-25 S&B being put on my rifle build and it did cost as much as my 70" HDTV. After seeing this, had I seen this before I made the blind purchase I more then likely would have have changed my mind as to what to buy and at the very least would have made the 200mi trip to see it in person, but I did the blind buy because of all the rave reviews as S&B being the "Gold Standard" by which all others are judged. Never once in all those reviews I read did they ever mention this, never once. My guess is if they had mentioned this as what to expect from this high a priced scope the review would have been null and void as a complete joke. With S&B's reputation and respected branding I never thought they would have ever let something like this out when there are others that don't have that issue and if they can correct it then why can't S&B. Now I am making referance to S&B because I have bought one that I have never looked through and I was totaly expecting a flawless performing scope that would give me everything I paid for with no exceptions.

 

[Hootiewho]

Damn , you guy need a 5x25 to shoot something at 11' ;-)

Not trying to call you out, but just explaining why I went with the S&B 5-25. If the scope has to be used in an LE enviroment, the scene will dictate the distance between the marksman and perp. That could very well be inside a structure. To me, the ability to adjust my paralax down to as close as possible is much more important than the FOV at 5-7x.

Would anyone here want their wife or kid being held hostage at 20 yards and the responding marksman have a scope that he is not 100% certain of his POI at that range due to paralax?

 

[mclevela]

Everybody that now hates their 5-25 S&B because they have discovered it tunnels at low mag send them to me. I can't speak of the current generation of optics but there is not much that comes close to the usability of the S&B 5-25x56.

 

[M40_A1]

If the scope has to be used in an LE enviroment, the scene will dictate the distance between the marksman and perp. That could very well be inside a structure. To me, the ability to adjust my paralax down to as close as possible is much more important than the FOV at 5-7x.

Would anyone here want their wife or kid being held hostage at 20 yards and the responding marksman have a scope that he is not 100% certain of his POI at that range due to paralax?

In the mean time, an innocent comes into view just as the shot breaks. FOV IS important!

FOV is also the reason, from what I understand, why the Marine Corps went to a LOWER power variable when they went with S&B, due to experiences in urban environments shooting movers. I'll bet the S&B M8541 doesn't "tunnel".

But, really, I think the OP was just illustrating a characteristic to be aware of when choosing a scope, since manufacturers don't tend to reveal such things in their advertising. To me, that is a valid point to consider, and I appreciate the education, orkan.

 

[Hootiewho]

In the mean time, an innocent comes into view just as the shot breaks. FOV IS important!

FOV is also the reason, from what I understand, why the Marine Corps went to a LOWER power variable when they went with S&B, due to experiences in urban environments shooting movers. I'll bet the S&B M8541 doesn't "tunnel".

But, really, I think the OP was just illustrating a characteristic to be aware of when choosing a scope, since manufacturers don't tend to reveal such things in their advertising. To me, that is a valid point to consider, and I appreciate the education, orkan.

Shooting with both eyes open can also help not to get sucked into the scope and loosing track of what is going on around. I completely agree with your point, everything is a compromise.

 

[phillip61]

But, really, I think the OP was just illustrating a characteristic to be aware of when choosing a scope, since manufacturers don't tend to reveal such things in their advertising. To me, that is a valid point to consider, and I appreciate the education, orkan.

+1 on thanks for the education. I never knew such a thing even existed.

 

[Edsel]

Won't it be a better endeavor to compile scope models and magnifications where tunnelling is present?

If appropriate, maybe a separate thread could be started.

I'll start:

Hensoldt ZF 3-12x56 SSG-P: tunnelling between 3-4x, absent beyond that.

 

[datec]

But, really, I think the OP was just illustrating a characteristic to be aware of when choosing a scope, since manufacturers don't tend to reveal such things in their advertising. To me, that is a valid point to consider, and I appreciate the education, orkan.

That is exactly what he was getting at. it had nothing to do with S&B by itself it just happended to be the one he used as an example. The example is also explained in that other high and low priced scopes do the samething and that some other high and low priced scopes don't. I feel (as I'm sure Orken does too) that if other high-end scopes that offer the same power range can get their's to not tunnel then why can't they all, my view is especially S&B with their pedegree if scopes and the respect they have they should be ashamed to have it especally given some lesser quality scopes don't. I was really shocked that the scope I chose has it (I never heard if it before this post) especally because I have gone to such extremes to carefully choose the best items for what I felt was the best rifle you could buy, I reciently found out that the Seekens rings I choose were not going to be used and were going to be sent back to me because the builder said they were not the best choice (I'm ok with that if he say's no then no it is) but the scope as the rifle I really resurched and the scope was a toss-up between the Night Force and the S&B and all the WOW from people and reviews I read sealed the deal for me. So now I have to wait to recieve my rifle and see if it is going to be bothersome to me (I shoot paper in my back yard and the range) but I'm glad to have seen this so that I'm not suprized buy the shift in size of the eye box, but it would have been even better if somewhere someone would have said it or shown it like Orken did, it would only be honest as to what to expect. Now if someone can explain to me what real benifit this provides? or why they haven't corrected it? I would really like to know because I'm sure S&B has recieved calls about it at some point and I'm sure they explained why but to just say you don't ever have to go that low is not a viable reason why? that is ones opion that dosen't need to be pushed off on everybody. If a person really likes something and I feel it is something that I don't need, want or care about and just don't correct it when you purchased it, would that make it right that I force my position upon you? That's how I feel things are going with alot of things not just the scopes and it is very disappointing, and unless these things are brought to light they will continue to just let it go without correcting anything because people will buy it anyhow.

 

[datec]

Won't it be a better endeavor to compile scope models and magnifications where tunnelling is present?

If appropriate, maybe a separate thread could be started.

I'll start:

Hensoldt ZF 3-12x56 SSG-P: tunnelling between 3-4x, absent beyond that.

I think that would be a great idea having a master list (make it a sticky) of scopes that are known to tunnel would be great also with the video included to make sure everyone understands just what it is and how to look for it.

 

[binnerscot]

I'll add:

IOR 3.5-18x50: Tunnels just a bit from 3.5X to about 4X, absent after that.

 

[Edsel]

Ok, I'll start another Thread:

http://www.snipershide.com/shooting...s-tunneling-between-magnification-ranges.html

Quoted the most recent entries.

 

[Redmanss]

Anyone else who has a legitimate need for the bottom end lack of tunneling and wants to unload their 5-25, I'll trade you straight up for my NIB S&B 3-20x50 PMII H2CMR CCW MTC, and you can have a blast with it with a wide FOV at 3-7x. H2CMR or MSR reticles and CCW DT only.

Still waiting for a taker. No tunneling at all, shoot at 3x to your heart's content.

 

[Iron Worker]

I hate tunneling effect ? What is the cause ? Zeiss 5x25x50mmHD,Weaver Tactical 3x15x50,Bushnell elite 6500 2.5x16x50 B&L 6x24x40mm and even my cabelas 3x12x40mm don't have that tunneling effect. I had a IOR 2.5x10x42mm it did . Why isn't it a concern for the designers of these ultra top tear scopes