How many of you think 3-9x40 scope is enough for long range hunting? Say 600 maybe 800 yards.

I have been told 4.5-14 is ideal, while others believe 6-20 is ideal. I have taken a Coues out to 517 yards with my scope on 9x, but I was wondering if 9x is too low for shooting at a 100 pound deer at 600 or extreme and may never happen 800 yards?

Thoughts?

Did the shot feel 83yds shy of max?................

Enrique,

While for such uses I certainly prefer more power and parallax adjustment, a 3-9 can certainly get the job done. If for some reason you don't like/want higher power or sidefocus don't be afraid of a good 3-9--especially since you always have giant binoculars around so you won't need the scope to count points on the rack or anything.

Personally I do better with higher power; seeing the target a bit better, eliminating parallax completely and it helps me judge the wind. But a guy can get a lot done with a really good 3-9 (the SS is my current favorite).

Of course the best idea is to try it with both and see how much a difference it makes to you.

Enrique,

If you read my post on comparing the Minox 3x9 to my Leupold VX3 4.5x14.

I was able to see 6.5 holes at 200 yards with the Minox set on 9x. I had to put the Leupold on 11x to 12x to see those same holes. At 300 yards I was still able to see 6.5 holes with the Minox. With Leupold I had to put it on 14x.

That tells me I can field a lighter maybe more compact scope into the field and it do the job of a heavier longer scope because of the better glass.

The click adjustment on the Minox are true and marked where you can see where to dial up quickly. The turret thing is small though but very doable for a long range hunting shot past 500 yards. It's not like your a sniper and have to dial all over the place.
Take the cap off and a quick dial and you're there.
The Minox has 60 moa and that should be enough to take you to past 800 on a flat shooter.
I bought the BDC reticle, it's not big dots but finer slash marks that don't hinder your view, aka, garbage up your look through.

I don't think a guy can go wrong for $299.00 for the Minox via Doug.

A couple of days ago we were shooting a 10" armor plate gong at 800 yards using a Leupold vx1 cds 3x9, very doable.

i used a Tasco 3-9x40 to repeatedly shoot a 18" gong at 600. i had no visibility issues at all. YMMV of course.

i think 9x is plenty at 600 yards. no experience on live animals but lots of busted pumpkins and milk jugs to prove it

When I took that Coues at 517 yards, my 308 had a 3-9x40TV Tasco World Class from the early 90's. Actually that scope is still on it.
What I figure is the Vortex, Zeiss, and Minox scopes have better glass and overall are better than my old trusty Tasco. That being said, I would have no issue at 600 yards if my Tasco still had plenty of distance left to be max'd out. I might hesitate beyond 600 but I haven't used the newer scopes yet to say for sure.

The experience you guys share is greatly appreciated.

Kique

Be curious to hear about the holdoff or comeups?.............

Minute of duck, kind of like shooting fish in a barrel.

Likely not nearly that tidy................

I shoot out at 725 yds on our local range with the scope set on 6 power all the time, in a variety of calibers.. I never feel handicapped...I can see it just fine...

I think it is more what your eyes get use to using...I actually shoot larger groups at long distance, when I increase a scopes magnification power...

This is certainly true. There are lots of good ones out there now. The three above are all big steps above the old Tasco. Though for LR use, I strongly believe the best value is the SS 3-9. Excellent turrets, dead nuts reliable tracking, tons of travel, very good reticle, very good glass, built to survive Army DM use so it's very tough. Here's mine on my light little 7-08:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mmv7tKh5CJU

Howdy fellow coues hunter,

I know that coues hunting is your passion. It is mine too.

I have used a 3-9 x 40 in the past but in recent years I have gone to higher magnification for my coues hunting along with turrets. Last year was a real eyeopener. I was using a 8.5-25 x 50 LR scope and under the same early morning conditions I looked through the other rifle I brought, which my friend was using. The other rifle had a 4.5-14 x 40 AO. I used both set on 12 power to look at a couple of bucks at 400 yds. The difference was very evident. That LR scope ran circles around the 4.5 x 14 due to a clearer and brighter picture. I was so impressed that I put a 4.5-14 x 50 LR on the loaner rifle.

For our specialized coues hunting really high magnification isn't needed but it is nice to have at least 12X instead of 9X. FYI your 3-9 x 40's 9X is really a 8.6X according to Leupold's site. If there were a perfect magnification range for coues hunting I'd say it was 4.5-14 preferably with a 50 mm objective. I realize that some rifles don't lend themselves to the larger objective due to cheek weld. My LR rifles have McMillans or Laminates with higher cheek pieces.

If we ever get together I can show you some of the combinations that fit and work well for me.

Ross

Of all of Leupie's glass,the 4.5-14X would be right amongst my last choice...for anything and especially Hunting.

Keep X's at 10 or less,thank me later..............

What do you guys think of this scope if I decide to go higher magnification?
http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/vortex.pl?page=vortexcrossfire6-24x50ao

Kique

Don't start "thinking" and make easy things difficult............

I recently had a chance to shoot steel at 600yd. with a 3.5-10X scope, no problems at all. I can't imagine 9X would make any difference on steel or critters.


Nail

That a big heavy somewhat a specialised scope..The AO adds more bulk to the objective...If you are intending building a medium or heavy long range rig for that to sit on, no big deal. if you want a rifle for walking with, the whole set up might be too heavy.

Personally I think that other than for quite specialised roles, a 4-16 is plenty for most shooting and for out to 600m a good qaulity 3-12 is fine...

Oftenimitated,

I agree with your opinion that 9 or 10X is max for most hunting not for our coues wt. I will admit I don't crank up to 14X often but the 4.5-14 works very well for our situation. We use "big eyes" too but most guys would not be well served with 15 x 56 binos on a tripod.

Enrique,

That scope looks great to me. If the glass in it is as good as my 6.5X32 Vortex binos, it will be fine.

Most of the guys here have eyes like my buddy. He can get by judging antlers at two miles iwth my Nikons set on 7X. I am not kidding here. But I like all the magnification I can get. Therfore I have a 4 1/2-30X50 on my .257 Weatherby. Inside it there is a 6-24X.

Right..

Oops. I'm sorry Ross, you must have forgotten you're at the Campfire here. Maybe you didn't get the memo. A fixed 6X is best for you. It is. Really, it is. It's best for everything. Including you. Or I'm sure you will be told.

While the price is tempting, I'd hate to see you depend upon such a low quality scope. I'm pretty sure that one is made in China and it shows.

A much, much, better choice is the Viper 6.5-20. I've used the 50mm version quite a bit and it's one of my favorite entry level LR scopes. The glass is very good for the price level, the tracking is accurate, precise and dead nuts repeatable, it has a lot of travel and has a couple reticles available that can be used to hold over or hold for wind.

I really don't think you can do better for the price. How much I liked this scope was one of the big reasons I ordered two PST's sight unseen. That's been a disappointment so far, but that's another story.

Like the video. If you look closely you can see the vapor trail.
Excellent shooting I might add.

Enrique...

A few things... one guy says he shoots worse with more X.... that can be the case.. you see the wobble more and it gets to you mentally. As a general note when you compare scores in long range matches... the difference between iron sights and scopes is generally not nearly as much as you'd think... often only a handful of Xs different with same over all score IE more shots better centered but same size overall group more or less.

But this also tells you you can hit a target a long ways off without much X. Actually without any really. But sometimes target identification becomes more difficult in certain situations. Not all the time but sometimes.

My longest shot has been on 14x through a Conquest... hair over 800.... It could have easily been made with a fixed 4x from years ago... but I have to say, that I could not quite as easily and precisely placed the shot since I could see on 14x a small tuft of off color hair that lent itself to a repeatable aiming point in case I missed.. first shot was called good but a hair low so I put another in... referenced that same exact spot and gave er a hair more.. and dropped the second round into the same animal..... With 6x or 4x I could very easily have made the shot, but possibly not been as precise with the second as a reference.

You have to take it from there.

As to parallax, if you do everything behind the scope correctly... you don't have to worry about it..... if you have AO.. but trust the marks for distance on the scope without verifying... you might be better off without AO...

Thanks.

If you have a bright and clear scope it can be done with less. If it is a dedicated CWT rifle, I wouldn't handicap myself with 9x. When I was 21 it might have been OK but not anymore. I have two 4.5-14 Leupies and recently put a 4.5-30 Elite on my CWT rifle. WOW is all I can say. It is fun shooting at 30X. In the field, that might be a little excessive but I can easily turn it down to whatever works.

Personally, I would use a 4.5-14 minimum and a 5-20/5.5-22 being even better.

That said, I shot an 8" (I think) gong last year with Schmitty out to 500 with my 260 Mt rifle and a 2.5-8 VX3 with B&C reticle on it.

Here is a group I shot off the Gunclaw at 500 yds with a 260 Mt rifle, 108 grain Scenars and a 2.5-8 VXIII using the B&C reticle only.

For Coues I use a 4-12x42 VXII. I used to use a 3-9x40, but for my eyes the advantage rests with the higher magnification when hunting Coues. It stays on low mag unless I see a shooter buck on another mountain.

Other than Coues, I'm not sure 12X buys anything. Doubt it does much harm, either. I just keep it on low mag and don't twist the ring unless the animal is holding still and distant.

I would rather spend my money on lower mag., dependable and clear glass than lower quality, higher mag. glass. I would take this scope over the one you cited:
http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/vortex.pl?page=vortexviper3-9x40

I routinely shoot milk jugs and 8" party balloons out to 800 yards, and I use nothing but 3-9x40 scopes. My longest shot on flesh to date was a coyote at 942 yards. Took 1 shot on 9x to seal the deal. If you're using a bright scope with high resolution, you can fore go a lot of X's and still see the target just fine.

Jordan Smith,



What do you think of a high quality higher powered scope?

Jordan,

I totally agree that high quality, dependable glass of relatively lower mag trumps lower quality, high mag glass. However, I hadn't ever considered the Leupold VXII to be of questionable dependability or quality.

I'll check out the Vortex you mentioned. If it beats the Leupold VXII for quality and dependability at the same price point, and doesn't have a fast-focus eyepiece, I'll consider it for my next scope purchase.

For coues I have always tried to keep it under 600 yards. All but one shot have been over 500 yards. With that being said a 3-9x40 has been all I have needed.
Now since I am expanding my range to be able to shoot out to potentially 700 or 800 yards, I wondering my 3-9x40 is enough or if I need more.
From what I am gathering now I need to at least look at a 4-12x40 or bigger. I am starting to think a 3-15x42 Minox or 6.5-20x44 Vortex would be my best options for my new rifle.

Seems as soon as I get a scope nailed down, I go back to square one. I think I need to do an impulse buy and be done with it.

Nothing wrong with that, either! But those cost more money, I was comparing scopes in the same $$$ range.

I don't mind using my 4-16x40SF Hawke Frontier from time to time. I've got that scope mounted on my .22-250. For serious work (hunting), the 3-9x40 comes out.

Here's a thought: Find a few rocks at 700-800 yards and see what you can do with your 3-9x40. Then make your decision.

If that impulse is to buy a 3.5-10x40 with turrets you'd be headed the right direction.

4.5-14 and 4-12 are bonafide shcitt boxes... can't really explain why, but seeing is believing.

4-16 bushnell 4200's are really something else when it comes to deer hunting...Clarity !

With this scope, you can see 7mm bullet holes at 400 yards on paper.

Light gathering ability on the 40mm is really fantastic, beats the 4.5-14x50mm hands down. Tiny "hunter" target knobs are fantastic and track perfectly.

Remember, you can always turn the power down.

I just got my first 4.5-14 w/ parallax adjustment. My highest power next to this was a 3-10x. It might be a bigger heavier scope but it is more capable of shooting accurately to long range IMO.

I think when I go to the range even to shoot 100 yards do I use low power or high power to shoot my most accurate groups? You may not need all the power for closer ranges but you maybe glad you had it if the opportunity is there and you know how to adjust the scope for the distance.