Reading another thread the poster was talking about a lightweighthunting rifle that could be used to 600 yds. A response was that at such ranges a lot more scope would be needed. It made me think and I would have to disagree for big game. I don't think there are many instances big game hunting that a good variable in the std 2-7 or 3-9 power range would not really be sufficient out to 600 yds. If you take the rule of thumb that a 4x scope would make a deer 600 yes away appear to be at 150 yds and a variable set at 9x would appear as if at 70 yds. or so I can't see the need for a much larger scope myself. Of course I am prone to use a couple of trusty old 4x scopes on my rifles and can't help but chuckle to myself when I see a light weight rifle with 2 lbs of scope and rings strapped on top. I've shot numerous ground hogs with my old 22-250 and 243 at 200-500 ydswith an old k10 and 3-9 bushnell on top.

Recently put a fixed 4x Swarovski on top of a Kimber Ascent. Read your post, and took the rifle to back door. Have a white plastic corrugated sign board, roughly 14"x18" nailed to a tree on the other side of the pond, 392 yards. No problem seeing/discerning the target. BIG problem trying to hold steady on the target offhand with just a "lean" against the door frame. More "X's" would just make the wobble worse.

I have one 4x12 VXR scope on one rifle. Everything else is fixed 3x, 4x, 6x, or, variable 1x4 up to 3x10. Even when I have a larger variable mounted, around here, I find myself dialing it up to no more than around 6x when I take the shot. Really liking the 2.5x8 Leupolds and the straight 6x Leupolds.

Not knocking the guys that use bigger scopes to hunt long range, and the varmint hunters. Just not necessary for my style of hunting.

Regarding your fixed 4x Swarovski, how's the eye relief? What model is it and could you post a picture of or mounted on your Kimber?

Thanks

This, plus where can I get one?


Okie John

There's all kinds of hunting and all kinds of hunters. Some folks seem to think that the more X's on their scope the better and some like to snipe away at animals in the next county. My personal comfort zone is not much over 300 yards so 9-10 power on the top end is more than enough.

bangeye,

It's not about need. It's about want. Some can see deer antlers at 600 yards. I hunted with two guys like that. Others have trouble finding the deer. On my two light weight Mark V six lug Weatherbys are Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50s. After I find game with binoculars and I want to take a good look at it I can.

There is only one person I want to impress and that is me. I am constantly post sold on my scopes.

As far as drawing a bead goes I could do fine with 6x. Practice at distance and an accurate means of trajectory compensation come ahead of more magnification for me.

Some people simply prefer more magnification. They are more comfortable with the target looking larger, so that's why they "need" it.

I'm able to more quickly and easily relax behind the rifle when I don't see my wiggles and heartbeat greatly magnified by the scope. So that's why I "need" less.

For the type of shooting where I need more magnification to draw a bead on a little target I'm typically using a heavier and steadier rifle, rather than a lightweight hunting rig. On these rifles 20x is great.

I've shot plenty of varmints and other critters at long range with the old 3x9 Leupy's on a couple of my rifles, but as I get older I find my eyes aren't as good as they used to be so I compensate with a bit more horsepower in the optics.
A couple other things I've taken into consideration. For varmint hunting, many times the vermin like to hide and just peek out a little bit at a time to see if the coast is clear. I like enough power to see those little bits of target to be able to draw a good bead on. My 223AI and 22-250 wear 6.5 x 20 Leupy and 6 x 24 B&L Elite respectively and I really like having the extra power when rock chucks are hiding in the rocks waaaayyyy out there. Even my 22's get 4 x 16's for this reason for ground squirrels and other critters.

Same thing with my big game rifles. I usually hunt with a 2.5 x 10 B&L or 3.5 x 10 Leupy's, but will move up a bit this year with a 4.5 x 14. Many times the game likes to hide or walk though brush or trees. Being able to see an opening big enough to shoot through when game is feeding through can make a difference between having a shot and not. Not everyone gets broadside 250 yard shots at game or unobstructed targets every time. Have to make the best of what is offered.

Bob

Well I guess my real point was the diminishing returns that come into play, especially if you are concerned about weight. Like I said a 7x scope makes a deer at 600 appear to be about 80-90 yds which is pretty close. A 12x looks to be about 50 yds and 16 x looks to be maybe 40 yds. So how close do you have to be. To me once the image appears within say 100 yds. the real benefit of a scope is the single sighting plane afforded by the reticle. Again I'm talking about big game ,shooting prairie dogs at 600 yds. is a different ball game and I don't want a lightweight rifle for that anyway.

If I have a good rest then I like to use higher magnifications regardless of distance. This is for shots where you have time. I find the 3-18x44's I use to be wonderful but they are on 3x 98% of the time. Only turn it up once I've spotted a target and have time. I have used 18x at 75 yards to make sure a deer didn't have knobs on its head (in tall grass and can't see most of the body). As for weight, Leupys and Swaros are light anyway. When you consider a 2.5-8x36 vs a 3-18x44 you're getting a LOT more scope for less than half a pound. The 3-18 is just so versatile in my opinion.

That said, I do have a couple of 2-7x33's I love and am itching for a rifle to put a 2.5-8x36 on.

Pictures below. Eye relief, with that scope, on that rifle, with the Talley Ex-Lows, just right for me. Close my eyes, mount the rifle, open my eyes, and I have a clear sight picture surrounded by solid black circle. It is a .270. So, not concerned about getting "scope bit". I did chamfer the front scope base to be able to slide the scope a little further to the rear. Titanium bolt knob already had a small scallop to clear the ocular bell on a Leupold 6x. Was sufficient for the Swarovski in the Ex-Lows as well. 6.00 lbs as shown.


I lucked into this scope, used. Either here on the 'Fire, or AR, or eBay. Can't remember. Can't seem to find them commercially NIB. Casually keeping my eyes open for another one, either 4x or 6x with German #4. ... A Left Hand version of this rifle would be a "forever" rifle for me.

I really like Leupolds 2.5-8 VX-3. While hunting in So. Africa, every animal I shot was on 2.5 power. None were 200 yards. But I have the option if I ever feel I need it.

CJ I too generally have my variables on their lowest setting . The beauty of variables is for load development and I'll admit to cranking mine to the top power when at the bench. I often joke I don't need a 3 to 9 variable but instead a 3 or 9 variable with a simple switch lever instead of an adjustment ring. Orion that's a pretty sweet zeiss.

I could live the rest of my life with nothing but 6x scopes. Close or far.

I'm definitely a 4x guy.

I was trying to find a Leupold FX-3 6x42 for my new 270 but they seem to be rarer than hens teeth up around here. Had to settle on a VX-2 3-9x40...

what sheister said😂

3x9 is pretty Elmer Fudd and gets more done than most will admit.

Straight 6x or 2-7x are just about all I look at anymore. I have a 2.5-8x VX3 on my Tikka 7-08 but don't find it appreciably better than my VXII 2-7x on my Kimber Bob.

For ranges at which I hunt regularly the LRD works just fine.

Yep, a 3-9 or 2.5-8 scope will do nicely for The big woods and thick hellhole hunting where I spend My Whitetail hunting time, but if I get the notion I want to shoot deer @600yds (which I never will) im going to want more scope...I'd probly mount a 4.5-14 on a long range rig but long range in the places I hunt is 100yds....lol..........Hb

alternative thread titles:

"Why do folks these days feel the need to twist
and fiddle with a rifle scope before a shot?"

or

"How did north american game animals get so hard to
see and so much harder to kill with a moderate
rifle cartridge?"

just a couple. . .

maybe one other:

"How movies like "Shooter" and "Sniper" has
affected the way i think about hunting and
the gear i use."

Most of the time a 3x or 4x would work fine for me.

I know I'm not the only one that remembers when a VXII 3x9 was the holy grail. At least for Virginia boys...

mississippi boys too ...

I run about 15 or so hunting rifles consistently, and all have either 4X or 6X scopes, with 1 exception...and that is a 10X on a 22 k-hornet which is mainly a play rifle with some varmint/predator forays.

My lone variable is a 1.5x-4x leupold on a .450 Marlin, but haven't fired it in several years...and plan to put either a 2.5x or 4x on it when I feel like shooting that heavy boomer again.

Thanks for the pics. That's a sweet little setup!

I have a lot of 2-7x and 4-12x scopes in service.

Weight wise, the Leupold VX-2 2-7x33, 3-9x40, and 4-12x40 scopes are all within 2 ounces of each other, from 9.9, 11.2, and 11.6 ounces.

I've shot a lot of pdogs with rifles topped with 4-12x40 scope with and without an AO.

I'm similar but a little different. All mine are 4-12, except one 3-9.

Higher mag to me isn't about seeing or hitting a deer. The higher magnification allows more PRECISE bullet placement.

IF, WHEN you hunt with antler point restrictions -- higher mag makes seeing number of points easier/accurately at longer distances.

Jerry

Straight 4 power or a good 1.5 x 4...

I hunt predominantly 30/30 ranges...

2 x 7 if needing a variable..

Here also. I know they will start with the binocular rant soon, and I carry binoculars, but most times you do not have time to change back and forth. I know that it is a deer, so no danger as to target, just need to count points. I can analyze the rest at the same time. miles

I remember well, I had one too. A 9-10 power 40mm has always worked for me. I used a VX2 forever and then went to a vx3 3.5x10x40 when they came out and have been using it every since.
I've also always preferred a 40mm over a 50mm.

Got a 50mm back before cataract surgery, and it helped. Still use it and have no problem with the size. I was gifted a Ziess a while back, a 6.5-20X50 that I am going to give a try. It has knobs sticking out all over and will give most here a fit just thinking about, but I figure that I can kill a deer with it. miles

Currently, my favorite scope is the SWFA 10x42 SS. I hunt from elevated stands with solid rests, over big agricultural fields. I have a couple of rifles with 4-16 Vipers, 3-9 Conquests that work just fine.

I don't need a bunch of hashmarks and I am very comfortable with a plex scope in a Leupold 3.5-10x40 scope on most of my deer rifles. I will probably never again shoot any game animal at over 300 yards.

We have antler restrictions here in PA and my 67 year of eyes need a little help these days.

donsm70

For me, magnification is not nearly as important as the mechanics and reticle. To 600, a 6x would do, but my aging eyes prefer more. I use a 10x and 3-12 now, but I could definitely make do with a 6x and the right turret/reticle combination.

John

My scopes range from fixed 2x to variables with a 14x upper limit.

They all work.

A 3x9 would be on the upper end of what you will ever need for hunting the vast majority of what we hunt.
Truthfully 95% of your shots are under 200 yards, most hunting cartridges shot relatively flat out to 300 yards. You don't need dots, you don't need to spin turrets, at the closer ranges game wont put up with much fiddling.........I like my true hunting scopes to be like my pocket camera...point and shoot.

This makes a lot of sense.

That said, the next scope I get for a deer rifle will probably be a fixed six, which should cover both bases pretty well and look good and carry easy to boot.

Makes no difference what magnification your scope is, what makes the difference is can you see your target clearly,if the answer is no or I can see pretty good you have the wrong scope for you. Rio7

While we are on the subject of scopes I'll take this opportunity to ask those of you with industry contacts (i.e.MD et.al.) to encourage redfield to add a copy of the old long tube M8 4x to their revolution line. I like the leupold fx and weaver but both are a bit short in the tube. I think a sub $200 4x revolution would be a nice addition. Another option would be to convince weaver to adapt their current quality 4x to a configuration that matches the old steel ElPaso made k4's

I need about 20 oz. of scope on my serious hunting rides. Minimum.

Shoot 600 yards on a life-sized target, with a 2-7 anything, and please post your results. I'm genuinely interested in the results.

Dean I don't recall actually ever shooting a live target at 600 yds. though I have killed a several groundhogs at around 500. That would have been with either a 3-9 or my old K10. Back in m groundhog days that's all I could afford. I will admit that I missed more than I killed but it wasn't because i couldn't see them. Doing that I came to appreciate the fact that a sudden puff of wind or just a slight miss calculation of distance would cause a miss. Also I was using a rifle that had enough power that even a marginal hit (gut shot) was fatal to a groundhog. I was also shooting at the same place where I pretty much had the yardages worked out as in the fence line is 250 yes, the old collapsed shed is 375 and so on to the tree line which was about 540 yes from our favorite spot.there fore the hold overs for drop were more or less known. The same is case when I shot bp cartridge matches at known distances . All of those situations were at known ranges and situations where I had the sight adjustments worked out and had fired spotter rounds.
That experience is also why I would never take a shot like that at a big game animal while hunting because I haven't fired a half of box of shells getting my sight adjusted for the known range I don't have wind flags ever 50 yds. And so on. A wind gust doesn't cost me a x ring or steel ram but it instead means a gut shot animal and I'm not hunting deer with a 500 gr bullet at 3500 fps mv which would be proportional to shooting a ground hog with a 22-250 and Thus providing enough energy to probably kill it with a poor hit. So you can probably ascertain my attitude on shooting at big game animals at long ranges and thus why I see no need to hump around a big scope on the off chance I have to shoot an animal at 400-500 ads through a hat sized opening in the trees. I would be interested in how many posters have actually done that. Ymmv

A $350 VX-2 in 3-9X40 with dots is as much as I need. I've not shot game at 600, but have shot that far at targets. I'm not good enough to be shooting at game past 400 and a better scope won't change that. I do believe that if I were more skilled, that I have enough scope for 600.

Haven't shot any life sized targets at 600, but plenty of clays at 500 with a 6x. Still twice as far as I'll ever need.

I live and hunt in very open country and most days there's plenty of "shooting light" well past legal shooting hours. Light isn't much of a concern and neither is finding the crosshair. As such I mostly hunt with either 4-12 or 4.5-14 Leupolds. I carry them on the bottom power and typically only turn them up for a longer shot at an unaware stationary animal.

I do have a Kimber MT 7-08 w/6x42 that I have no trouble keeping on a 12x20 plate @ 750yds.

3-9x40 is plenty for big game hunting on my rifles. Since that size is so common, it's also where you'll usually find the best deals on hunting scopes.

I have a Zeiss HD5 2-10, and I really like it, but I'm not sure that it really provides any hunting capability that a decent 3-9 wouldn't for about half the price.

I'm with bangeye in wishing for some scopes with longer tubes. I bought a 4x fx Leupold and had a heck of a time finding a rifle it would fit on. I had purcheased it with the intent to mount it on my Ruger No.1 (home made base with Talley rings) but it was just no good on that rifle. It works OK on a Mauser. The Ruger now wears a mid-80's Scopechief 4x or a Leupold M8 3x. The old K-4 Weavers fit well too. The point is, I think scope manufacturers are doing a fine job of making scopes to fit short-actioned rifles but little else.
In shooting at the 500 meter silohuette rams, all of the four powers work fine, the Leupold 3 and weaver K-3's are also OK. An old Weaver K-2.5 is beyond it's usable range at 500 but I can shoot the 300m pigs with no problems.
I have only one variable scope on a hunting rifle; a 3-9 Bushnell. I don't care for variables and prefer fixed powers from 3x to 6x and feel they cover me for any hunting situation I am likely to encounter. I confine mylong range shooting to the range and am unlikely to take a shot at big game beyond 400. GD

Greydog. I have one of those 4x scopechiefs. They are pretty decent scopes. Mine is sitting on a LA savage110. For a #1 I have a old Burris 4x from the 80s . They have a different (unusual) turret spacing that allows you to pull it back further than say a leupold or weaver. They too are pretty good scopes and you can pick them off eBay for a pretty reasonable price.

I was hunting sheep in Wyoming and the 4x scope I was using cost me a shot at a great ram.
I have tried 6x but found them lacking.
I would like a scope that has two available settings, either 3 or 9. I don't need the middle ground. I carry mine at 3 and crank it to 9 when I want more.
If it hasn't been hit, I don't shoot beyond a 1/4 mile.

Some of us Tennessee boys still use 'em.

6x

I could live with a straight 6x on everything, myself.

As far as magnification 2-7's are my favorites. Lately a 1.5-8 is my preferred magnification range. I prefer low power 1.5-2 power on the bottom. A lower low side on a variable is more important to me than a higher high side.

I don't understand the recent popularity of 5-25 power hunting scopes. I think maybe it's influenced by younger kids think they are going to be 1000 yard snipers.

Price wise,I would feel comfortable with a scope of about $300 and up for big game hunting. I do like higher end optics though. If possible,I would rather hunt with scope that cost as much or more than my rifle.

I have more scopes in the 2-7X range than any other, but do have a few larger ones. Some to see what the fuss is all about and to learn something new.

I do like variables though but keep them on the lowest setting. If time allows I put them on the highest setting to make a shot on a deer 200 yards are better away. Not always needed, but it does help me place the shot more precisely.

This year I shot a buck that was trotting r-l at` 150 yards with my .300 H&H. It has a 3.5-10 on it. 3.5x was plenty for the purpose and gave a nice, wide field of view on the moving deer.

Personal preference for personal reasons is never wrong. My need based on my personal preferences puts the upper end, on big game scopes, in the 6x range. My need, based on my personal preference and desires for varmints, is somewhere around 12 to 16 x, maybe more, given the day. Predators is a combination or use of either of the above; however, most of the time the 6x is more than enough. If I'm feeling froggy and depending on recent coyote behavior and responses, I may want more Xs based on my then current needs.

300mags are popular to kill game at distances that .308win can do, some people apply the same approach
to the magnification of their scopes.

I like the size and power ranges of 2.5-8x and 4.5 -14x Leuplds.
I would also settle for a NF 2.5-10x

Depends on what you are using them for. I haven't used anything over 10X. I have two 3.5- 10 X scopes. Several 3X9, a 2X7, and two fixed powers - a 6 and an antique Leupold 3, and have owned straight 4's. I like 6's!

Have you noticed how hard it is getting to find fixed power scopes? I'd like to get a couple more 6's, one of my favorites. I hardly ever use more than that anyway, unless open country (sheep, caribou).

The farthest I have ever killed an animal was a caribou well in excess of 500 yards, and the 3X9 steel Weaver ( now needs cross hair repair) was inadvertently set on 3, after helping slaughter 9 others earlier, bolting out of a ravine at 30 yards. We had room on the sleds for one more, and she was standing broadside on a hillside. The .25-06 was zeroed 5 inches high at 100- have no idea what range that would be- probably 350 or so. And I needed over 2 feet hold-over above that.

Took two shots- I saw where the bullet kicked up snow on the hillside below her, and applied the appropriate Kentucky windage, high and into the slight wind. Took her through both shoulder blades. Only then did I realize the scope was still set down.

So I guess 3X is enough...... . But my eyes were decades younger then.

I have a 3.5 X 10 on my heavy barreled Mauser 30-06 for caribou hunting. Most of my shots are 300 yards and out (self limit 500- the gun is likely good to 1,000), and I carry it on 10X, tho that's more than enough. The 2-7 (on 7) did just fine on the .260 when I was using that before I rebarreled the Mauser.

Just out of curiosity, how did the 4x scope cost you the shot? Do you mean you missed the shot or were unable to take the shot? As I said, I am simply curious. I can certainly understand how the low powered scope can be a handicap if one is trying to judge a head or count points but for aiming the rifle at 400 or less, I feel OK with them. GD

Waiting on a rifle to put this one on. Zeiss Conquest 4x.
Bob

Bob, the rifle is here in my hands. Let me know if that needs a good home!

Since we have antler restrictions and our bucks don't do much standing still.When one walks out time is limited to evaluate whether it is a shooter. I like a variable. 10 x is enough on the upper end for me to judge them as far as I'm likely to shoot. But I leave the scope on the lowest setting 99% of the time.

At least one with an objective lens the size of a lard bucket!

I've got everything from a 1.5X x 4.5X on a 9.3 x 57 to a 24X on a 219 Wasp.
I tend not to use more than 4X or 5X except on a bench rest.
Too much magnification just magnifies my shaky offhand.

I like the 4.5 x14 power scopes!

I put that scope on my wife's 6.5x55. She was upset that it wasn't a higher variable. I told her I would trade her, but try it first. Well that was 7 years ago and it is still on her rifle. She says I am not getting it.

Sharpsman - " At least one with an objective lens the size of a lard bucket!" Like it...that way you could count the rings of Saturn on a moonless night when one grows bored waiting in the stand.
Say one of those with a 56+mm objectives set at 24X. Homesteader

I just mounted one today on own of my own rifles. Weaver 3X.

When is Redfield, Vortex, Leupold or Burris going to make the scope that we all really need, instead of the scopes that they are saying we need?

99.5% of all shooting would be better served with a scope of 3-4X power. Fixed! The tube should be tempered spring steel and rugged/strong enough to use as a hammer without damage to the internals. It should be 30MM and have an objective lens of about 40MM.
The Reticle should be a tapered cross hair from the top and sides with a single line going down to 6:00, with cross hashes set at 4-MOA on it, going all the way down to the bottom.

That's it and that's all. Basic! A super clear, super rugged sight.
No gidgits and gismos. Something to aim with. A hunters sight!!!

Something that that is EASY to learn and use, and never fails.
No batteries. No BS. No huge price tag for a bunch of stuff that is really nothign but a load of gimmicks.

As with most consumer goods, market demand dictates what manufacturers design, make, and tweak to improve. If there was greater demand for low magnification fixed power scopes, more manufacturers would make them in more style and more volume. Until consumer buying habits change, the number and variety of fix power scopes below 4x is unlikely to change.

JO'C influenced my fandom of the Weaver K3, have a few in service, mostly on Marlin lever actions and Remington pump guns.

There is no universally correct answer. For myself, the answer depends on what I am hunting. More for prairie dogs, less for elk.

YEP.

Jerry

Not only what you're hunting, but also what you're hunting with. Love my 336Marlin re-bored to 38-55, but at nearly 65 my eyes are starting to question the peep I've been sighting with. A 4-12x would be silly on the short lever carbine, but then I've not seen many straight 2 3/4x lately.

eBay?

I've bought a couple of nice Redfield 2.5x and 2.75x scopes from other campfire members.

I don't own any Big Game rifles have the same trajectory at 600yds as a 22-250 or a 243 have at 500 so your comparison doesn't make sense .
I will ask this though,
Where do you hold the sights on deer at 600yds with your Big Game Rifle, even though it "looks" like it's only 150yds away?
If you're using a duplex reticle aren't you using a SWAG method for holdover?
Are you using a rangefinder to measure the 600yds? or SWAG ranging?
For my purposes, when shooting 600yds, I want holdover marks that I've proven at that distance or ability to dial for that distance.
It's not , How much scope? it's, How much precision?

A 10x top end is nice to have if we are truly talking hunting out to 600 yards. Really digging the NF 3-10x42 SHV. I stole it off my Kimber to try on my new 6.5 GAP, and I think I'll just buy another one for the Kimber.... It's pure gold on that 6.5 out to a lot further than 600 (at least on targets).

When shooting at those longer ranges, I find myself wanting more when I turn my scopes down to 6x to see what that's like. I much prefer 10x. For that matter, I like a 2.5 or 3x low end better than 6x as well.

It ain't sexy but a quality 3-10 variable will do a LOT.

Not sure I understand the point you are trying to make but for my 270 at 500 yds I'd expect drop about 5 ft Using 18"-20"as the average body profile of a deer from back to brisket you are holding right at. 3 deer high no matter how big he looks in the scope .A ground hog is about18" tall fwiw . To your point it isn't that precise and throw in shot angle , wind etc and it becomes even less precise. Same for ranging scopes as they are calibrated for a level shot and constant wind . That is why I am somewhat ethically opposed to shooting at big game animals at longer ranges. A gut shot ground hog with a 243 is still a dead groundhog in my experience . Unless you are shooting a 20 mm cannon not so much with a deer sized animal. That's why I basically sight in 2 " high at 100and shoot at hair out to 300 yds. A personal limit for me on big game..To be frank that's not been a problem for me where I hunt. Of course ymmv.

I was trying to point out that none of my big game cartridge with a 2-7 or 3-9 scope shoot at 600yds the same as a 3-9 on a 22-250 at 500yds for varmints.(your example)
Hit the ground hog or rock chuck around the fringes on the 2nd or 3rd shot with a guessed elevation/windage hold, no big deal, same end result.
600yds on Big Game,with a big game cartridge, on the first shot, using a 2-7 or a 3-9 duplex. Not me.
Shoot straight, I'm not trying to pick a fight

I'm a fan of 2-10x42 and 3-9x40-42 scopes for general hunting. That said I do have a couple 4-12x42's and a couple variables with 16 being the top power. Most of my scopes are 1 inch. Some of the 30mm scopes tend to on the heavier side.

No offense intended but we all do not have the same 'personal limit'. For you, what you use works. Not so much for me.

I've killed plenty of deer between 300-400 yds. A 6X would be good enuff for 'hitting' a deer. We have "Point Restrictions" and I've seen Xs when 8X wasn't enuff to see the points. I have posted a pic of a 175-178 lb buck with 17 1/2" inside spread that was ONLY 6 points. The pic is up close from over it, laying on the ground. EVEN at a distance of feet-- it's NOT easy to see anything but FORKED antlers. If anyone want to see the pic I can re post it. That is only 1 example.

For those of you who don't have point restrictions really don't appreciate the advantage of higher magnification.

As has been stated, higher magnification allows greater 'precision' placement.

Jerry

Big variation in rifles terrain usage contribute to the variety of choices here. With a modern rifle trajectory (30-06 shooting full load 165s or better) and a sight in distance of 200-250 for general conditions a 3-9 covers out to 500 yards pretty easily. I carry mine with on 3-5 power and would adjust the magnification to 9 power to use my Z600 reticle that is good for hits on deer vitals to 600 yards with my 7mm Remington mag. I killed a good sized boar with a plain duplex past 500. But I've been shooting that rifle sine 1977 so I have a good idea of what it does. The 300 Weatherby wears a 3-15 with a Z800 reticle and the trajectory matches all the way out.......beyond where I would shoot at anything other than a coyote. Both of those are open country deer and elk guns and might be used at 500-600 yards and I wouldn't dream of shooting beyond 300 without a laser rangefinder.

I'm guessing most game I have killed could have been taken with a fixed 4x but that doesn't mean I want to limit myself.

I have fixed 4x on my 'big game' rifles, because they are light and reliable. Most of my shooting is under 200 metres with the vast majority under 100 metres. I dont stress about coming across a deer that is 600 metres away that I cant stalk up on, apart from tahr hunting it doesn't seem to happen. Longest shot with 4x was 310 metres and I dont remember it being a hard shot. Probably miss the next one now after saying that.
Probably half of my rifles have open sights, and it doesnt cut my successes down much if I take one or the other.

Im a 2-10 kind of a guy. Like to have wide field of view at 2 power. but if I need to shoot 400 yards the 10 power is sure nice. Wish I had more $$ for VX6 2-12

Finally got around to sighting/zeroing the Kimber Ascent with the Swarovski 4x shown above. PPU blue box 130 gr ammo. Once I got it on paper, two 3 shot groups just under 1.2" at 99 yards. Not bench rest accurate, but for the first time shooting a 6 lb rifle, with a 4x scope, and factory ammo... I'll take it...

I would think optics quality woud be better than power. I have one of the early, 1970 vintage, Redfield 4-12x with adjustable objective lens. When I got it 47 years ago it seemed great, but when I took the rifle out a couple of weeks back, I just could not seem to get it to focus. Talked to a few of the range officers and one of them had an older 3x9 and said he had the same problem compared to our newer scopes.

send it back to Redfield and they will make it right.

The Redfield that sold his scope no longer exists. Leupold bought the name but is not repairing Redfield products made prior to them purchasing the name.

Most of my lever guns wear either a 3X or a 4X. Most of my bolt guns wear either 3-9X or 3.5-10X scopes, however my favorite grab and go bolt gun, a 65 year old .308, wears a 30 something Zeiss 4X. It works near and far.

Jack

Depends on the game... I don't varmint hunt but I could see more power helping with that.

My biggest scope is 14x I live in a very hot climate and have owned scopes up to 32x and anything over 16x or so gets psychadelic about 9 months out of the year.

That being said I would rather have very high quality glass in a lower magnification.

My hunting bolt rifles are topped with:

.223 1-6x VX6
.22-250 2.5-8x VX3//
.257 Roberts 3.5-10x Vx3
.257 Roberts 2-8x Zeiss duralyt
.308 1.8-8x Vortex Razor HD LH (great scope)
.338 Federal 1.5-5x Zeiss duralyt
.35 Whelen 6x FX3
.264 win mag Vortex Viper 4-14 (good for what it is, but looking to upgrade, rifle shoots lights out and could use some better glass)

Light weight tweener type scopes are the best for big game hunting imo
Any variable with 1.5x on the low end up to about 8x on the high end.
With a less than 40mm objective, perfect.

I have 2 X 7, 3 x 9 and fixed 6 power scopes. I could live perfectly happily with my straight six powers. When I am hunting with a variable scope I set the power to fit the time of day and the situation at the time. I found that, invariably, I would have the scope set at 6 power without consciously doing so.
I have little use for power above 6 except for target shooting. Our woods are thick and pipelines and high lines are narrow. When a deer or hog comes out there is seldom time to change a scope setting. I end up getting 3 X 9 variables now as there are more options with this type of scope. I am with the poster who earlier said that he would like a scope that jumped from three to nine power with nothing in between. I would really like to have a 2 x 6 or even a 2 x 7 with nothing in between.

I like 4x12 scopes.