[quote=Jordan Smith]We've discussed this many times. The 3-9 is optically better (VX3+) but the 6x is pretty darned good (VX2+, IMO), slimmer, has lower-profile turrets that are firmer and splined. The 3-9x is more svelte. The fixed 6x has adjustable parallax and a larger range of erector travel.[/quote
It never hurts to hear from someone new. I asked about the comparison to the 6x because he has one.
Mr. Smith, how about compared to the 10MQ especially in low light. I have a 6 and a 10 and have had some difficulty finding coyotes in early am and pm with the 10. Trying to determine if the 3-9 is enough better to justify the cost or just stick with the fixed 6. There are times when a little more scope power would be nice.
Thanks
Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as irritated. I was just trying to suggest that you can find a bunch of info on the comparison if you search the forum.
The reticle in the 3-9x has the same subtensions and design as that in the 6x MQ, which is a bolder design than the reticle in the 10x. The glass quality combined with the bolder reticle make the 3-9x a better tool than the 10x MQ for low-light work. Whether the 3-9x is enough better than the 6x in low light to justify the cost is a personal decision, but IMO it is enough better all around that I prefer it over the 6x if adjustable parallax and maximum erector range aren't top priorities for a given rig.
