Rifle Scopes Confused - question on new S&B

[RayDBonz]

Maybe someone here can offer some enlightenment. I've been looking at the specs published on the new S&B 3-20x50 scope and something just doesn't make any sense. (not sure why I was looking - I don't need another scope )

The 3-20 is listed at 385mm in length and weighs 920g.

On the other hand, the 4-16, which also has a 50mm objective, is listed at 394mm in length and weighs in at 933g.

How is that possible? The objective lens is the same size. The new version has a greater range of power and a higher upper magnification. Common sense and the laws of physics tell us it should be heavier and probably longer. Rumors are that it will be the same price as the current offerings. Common sense would suggest it might cost more if it were of similar quality.

What did S&B do to make this shorter and lighter? Did they cut corners somewhere? Use fewer lenses? Any ideas? I know these aren't out yet, but there are some industry insiders here who may know something.

 

[TEAMSENDIT]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

I have never heard of schmidt and bender cutting corners. i would bet new technology in materials and new design. or they may have just advertised the wrong specs it has happened before.

 

[jps2]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

If you looks at current variable power range, you will find that it was mostly a 3 or 4 factor (3-9, 3-12, 4-16). At schmidt, if you can look thru a 5-25, you'll notice that between 5 and 7 it seems to be an black ring limiting the field wide seen by user (seems to be a 4 factor 6.5-25 boost on the low side).

All to say that optically, there are formulas (rules) between number of lens, lens shape and variable power available.

to provide a 6 factor (Swaro with the Z6 series) and now S&B, they have to compute and test new formulas, with different number and shape lens.

Another way to explain the weight difference, is that components using to build lens, and the way they are polished may have be improved, reducing weight to optimize costs.

 

[Lt. Arclight]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

1/2 ounce. Wow-REAL weight savings.

 

[abersfelderami]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

The 3-20x50 has leichtmetall ( aluminum?) tube.

 

[Aries64]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: abersfelderami</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The 3-20x50 has leichtmetall ( aluminum?) tube. </div></div>
Yes, the 3-20X 50 PMII has an aluminum tube, but so does the rest of the PMII lineup.

Keith

 

[jasonk]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr. Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What did S&B do to make this shorter and lighter? Did they cut corners somewhere? Use fewer lenses? Any ideas? I know these aren't out yet, but there are some industry insiders here who may know something.</div></div>

The Hensoldt 4-16x50 is shorter and lighter than the S&B 4-16x50 and I can tell you that Hensoldt did not cut any corners at all. Maybe S&B just took some lessons from Hensoldt.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

Man people get wraped aorund the axle about some silly stuff. It's an S&B. It's top quality. They don't cut corners.

 

[Lt. Arclight]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

I'll still buy the S&B.

 

[Rob01]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

Dr. Bill, I spoke with our rep at S&B and got this response:

The 3-20x50 has of course the same quality as the 4-16x50. Concerning the number of lenses in the objective: We do have the same number of lenses, but the thickness and glass material may differ from lens to lens. The length depends mainly on the focal length of the different parts and does not have anything to
do with the diameter of the objective. For example - as one possible factor influencing the length - a larger field of view at the same tube diameter and high elevation range results in shorter focal length of the objective and thus usually also in a shorter objective.

Concerning the weight: We mechanically optimized whatever possible without loosing any stability and performance.

 

[RayDBonz]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lt. Arclight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'll still buy the S&B. </div></div>

So will I. I have three of them already.

 

[RayDBonz]

Re: Confused - question on new S&B

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dr. Bill, I spoke with our rep at S&B and got this response:

The 3-20x50 has of course the same quality as the 4-16x50. Concerning the number of lenses in the objective: We do have the same number of lenses, but the thickness and glass material may differ from lens to lens. The length depends mainly on the focal length of the different parts and does not have anything to
do with the diameter of the objective. For example - as one possible factor influencing the length - a larger field of view at the same tube diameter and high elevation range results in shorter focal length of the objective and thus usually also in a shorter objective.

Concerning the weight: We mechanically optimized whatever possible without loosing any stability and performance.
</div></div>

Rob - thanks so much for the detailed response and for taking the time to ask. That's great news.
Bill