Zeiss Diavari 3-9x42 , 1" tube

[Hales Smut]

I can buy ( low price) a Zeiss Diavari 3-9x42 with plex reticle and 1" tube. I am used to the n°4 for low light on all my other rifles.
As I have a Krico full stock rifle in 243 with EAW swing off mounts// 1" rings it would suit. There is an old Swaro 6x42 on it.
The tube of the Swaro is slightly bigger 25,8 mm, wich was the old 26 mm. As the EAW is 3/4 rings I think it should fit.
Anybody experience with this scope in low light and mostly with the plex reticle?

 

[Steff]

I can buy ( low price) a Zeiss Diavari 3-9x42 with plex reticle and 1" tube. I am used to the n°4 for low light on all my other rifles.
As I have a Krico full stock rifle in 243 with EAW swing off mounts// 1" rings it would suit. There is an old Swaro 6x42 on it.
The tube of the Swaro is slightly bigger 25,8 mm, wich was the old 26 mm. As the EAW is 3/4 rings I think it should fit.
Anybody experience with this scope in low light and mostly with the plex reticle?

The 3-9x42 is nice and light-weight scope. But it is clearly not a dedicated low-light tool. It has its reticle in the second focal plane which means that it will maintain its size acrosss the magnification range. Depending on how dark your shooting conditions are you may have a hard time seeing the reticle.

Here's an excerpt from the 2004 Zeiss USA catalogue.

 

[HonestJohn]

It’s a great scope, I’d love one they ever were for sale in the uk.

It will fit the eaw rings just fine, they’re meant to take 1”-26mm.

You’ll probably find it stays on 6-7x the whole time

 

[Steff]

It will fit the eaw rings just fine, they’re meant to take 1”-26mm.

A ring is either 1 inch or 26mm. It cannot be both, even though the manucaturers advertise them as such. I've seen too many marred to damaged scope tubes to fall for this nonsense.
With 1/2 aluminum rings one might get away with it, with 3/4 steel rings you won't.

 

[HonestJohn]

A ring is either 1 inch or 26mm. It cannot be both, even though the manucaturers advertise them as such. I've seen too many marred to damaged scope tubes to fall for this nonsense.
With 1/2 aluminum rings one might get away with it, with 3/4 steel rings you won't.

Not quite true, the wrap over EAW and Rusan style takes both, it’s up to the user not to damage them by not over torquing and fitting them well. The old weaver wrap over 1” rings took 26mm just fine, as did most hillver 1” ‘Australian’ rings.

We can agree to disagree, but I’m right

 

[Steff]

Not quite true, the wrap over EAW and Rusan style takes both, it’s up to the user not to damage them by not over torquing and fitting them well. The old weaver wrap over 1” rings took 26mm just fine, as did most hillver 1” ‘Australian’ rings.

We can agree to disagree, but I’m right

You are right in that the rings will take up the scopes - somehow. But the fact remains that a ring can only have one dimension.

 

[HonestJohn]

You are right in that the rings will take up the scopes - somehow. But the fact remains that a ring can only have one dimension.

Scientifically, I can’t argue with that

 

[mak]

It’s a great scope, I’d love one they ever were for sale in the uk.

It will fit the eaw rings just fine, they’re meant to take 1”-26mm.

You’ll probably find it stays on 6-7x the whole time

The Diavari 3-9x42 along with the 5-15x42 were both available in the UK in the early 2000’s, of which 99% were Diavari V ( ring mount). They remained on sales for a number of years until being discontinued.

 

[Hales Smut]

Thanks. I tried them yesterday out of my window, next to the Swaro 6x42. Difficult, as the Swaro is on the rifle and easier to hold in the good position.
The Zeiss was difficult to hold steady. The eyebox seems small. The 6x42 looked brighter, compared to the Zeiss on 6x.
I'll take it this evening with me on the highseat.

 

[HonestJohn]

Thanks. I tried them yesterday out of my window, next to the Swaro 6x42. Difficult, as the Swaro is on the rifle and easier to hold in the good position.
The Zeiss was difficult to hold steady. The eyebox seems small. The 6x42 looked brighter, compared to the Zeiss on 6x.
I'll take it this evening with me on the highseat.

The variable will almost certainly be slightly worse in clarity and light gathering than the fixed, Ceteris Paribus.

 

[1894]

A great scope if a fraction long

 

[mak]

The variable will almost certainly be slightly worse in clarity and light gathering than the fixed, Ceteris Paribus.

The transmission of the 3-9x42 and 5-15x42 had a higher light transmission than the 6x42. Not by much, but it was higher (2%).