Death of the 3-9 scope

[Wyatt Smith]

I love a 3x9 and will probably buy a VX3 2.5 8 sometime. (Almost the same)

 

[Tra3]

I’m ok with the technology change. I just added swaro Z6 scopes to my rifles: 2.5-15 and 3-18. I have other similarly high magnification scopes and I only use the high end magnification when looking at targets at the range. For hunting, the scope tends to be at a low power and then turned up if needed.
Why didn’t I buy something in 3-9? Because of greater versatility on a rifle that I plan to use a long time.

 

[BeeMaa]

Please remember that your rifle barrel should be pointed in a safe direction at all times. You only point your rifle at an animal when you are ready to shoot. Using your scope to judge animals is not a safe way to handle your rifle. Let's be careful out there.

Of course, in a safe direction at all times.
Hence the "while hunting in Africa" qualifier in there.

And IMO, as long as no people are in the herd and there is a backstop...it is a safe direction.
I appreciate your view however I will have to disagree with you on this one.
I will continue to judge animals through a scope...as long as it's pointed in a safe direction.
I've spent several hours looking through a scope at animals, waiting for a good opportunity.
Judging behavior and trophy size while discussing shot angle and other possibilities is part of hunting.
After all, I'm not looking at the neighbors BBQ through a scope.

 

[Tra3]

I’m with @BeeMaa My scope is regularly used to look at game animals.

The benefit of high magnification is to judge an animal and determine if it a stalk should ensue. Mountain hunting frequently requires more magnification that my binoculars, a top magnification 15 to 18 power is really helpful.
I don’t hunt with a round in the chamber. Although now with the benefit of the Blaser safety I may begin doing so.

 

[BeeMaa]

I’m with @BeeMaa My scope is regularly used to look at game animals.

The benefit of high magnification is to judge an animal and determine if it a stalk should ensue. Mountain hunting frequently requires more magnification that my binoculars, a top magnification 15 to 18 power is really helpful.
I don’t hunt with a round in the chamber. Although now with the benefit of the Blaser safety I may begin doing so.

Not to get too far off topic...
But yeah, the Blaser decocking system really simplifies things.

One of the benefits you mentioned of a scope over binos is the magnification.
While the guide or PH may only have up to 10x on his binos, you could have much more with a scope.
Talking back and forth, verifying you are both looking at the same animal...it's critical.

I had a situation on my first stalk with my PH and I'd only been in RSA for 18 hours.
He and I were looking at 3 Kudu in the shade of a tree.
He says "The one on the right is a shooter", and I say "The one in the middle is bigger".
At this point I've violated the Cardinal rule of Don't Guide The Guide.
He drops his binos and looks at me, as if to say "Who the F*%$ are you to tell me...."
I hand him my Leica 10x42 HD-R and ask him to look again.
He does...then smiles and turns to me and says "The one in the middle is bigger".
He had an old set of Vortex Diamondback 10x42 that were not up to the task of judging in low light.
I left Africa without my Leica's.

The quality of the glass has as much to do with it as the magnification.

 

[Alistair]

Personally, I'm not a fan of the 3-9 format.

To my thinking, it doesn't quite offer a low end low end to be a viable big game, action shooting or driven scope, whilst 9x isn't quite enough for a long range target scope.

What it does offer however, is a good option for shots from 50-300yds. Now that sounds great, but you know what else is great for 50-300yds? A fixed power 6x or 8x. The fixed power will be lighter, more durable and have better light transmission, whilst being better value for money (I can get a fixed power scope with premium euro glass from Swaro, S&B et al for the price of a mid range 3-9). As such, and knowing that actually, I'd probably stick it on 6 or 9 and leave it alone for these distances, I tend towards the fixed power.

Case in point, I have 3 scoped rifles.

A 375 with a 1-6 power for close range, driven and potentially big game, a 270 with a fixed 8 power, and a long range 6.5CM target rig with a 5-25. In this context, the 3-9 offers me nothing.

Now a scope with an bigger zoom range, something in the region of a 1.5-12 or a 2-15, would be viable for both driven and the 50-300yd hunting. Additionally, a scope in the range 3-20 would be viable for hunting and long range, potentially allow me to use a single scope for multiple applications, possibly even all 3, albeit at the cost of weight and well, money. But 3-9? Nah. Not enough utility for the additional price over the fixed to be justified.

Al.

 

[CBH Australia]

And we haven’t mentioned 30mm tubes yet, a shop once tried to tell me I need a 30mm tube for lowlight use. I’ve read a lot contrary to this advice.

 

[jduckhunter]

As long as I'm still hunting the 3 x 9 scope will be alive and well. That's about the only power scope I've hunted with since the 70's. Yes my scopes may be a little dated but hell so am I.

 

[Philip Glass]

For me 3-9 was always just OK. 4-12 is my preference as far as a standard run of the mill scope. Of course there are just unlimited options now.
Philip

 

[Firebird]

I prefer a little extra magnification-so not a big fan of the 3-9 but won’t knock a guy for using them. I got an e mail today from europtic with this ad inside-I own a couple z5 scopes and love them. If a guy still wanted a 3-9 I would sure want to check this one out from Swarovski-

 

[Standard Velocity]

And we haven’t mentioned 30mm tubes yet, a shop once tried to tell me I need a 30mm tube for lowlight use. I’ve read a lot contrary to this advice.

Most of the higher end scopes are now 30mm tubes. I understand that the additional adjustment travel is useful for long range but I don’t need it. I don’t twirl turrets in the field, though the Leupold system is pretty dummy proof.

 

[Standard Velocity]

View attachment 342604 I prefer a little extra magnification-so not a big fan of the 3-9 but won’t knock a guy for using them. I got an e mail today from europtic with this ad inside-I own a couple z5 scopes and love them. If a guy still wanted a 3-9 I would sure want to check this one out from Swarovski-

I like the z3 size quite a bit. It’s a really nice compact scope. The z5 series is a marked step up in glass quality though. Which z5’s do you own?

 

[CBH Australia]

View attachment 342604 I prefer a little extra magnification-so not a big fan of the 3-9 but won’t knock a guy for using them. I got an e mail today from europtic with this ad inside-I own a couple z5 scopes and love them. If a guy still wanted a 3-9 I would sure want to check this one out from Swarovski-

If those were Au $ they would look good at those prices
Is there a difference in z3 and z5 glass? I thought i read glass is the same it was the extra spring on the erector system. I dont own one. The other obvious difference is cost increases with magnification range options.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I received an email promotion this morning for a sale on 3-9 scopes specifically. Scrolling through the models available from all the different manufacturers I realized that not only were all of the scopes listed from disposable brands or entry level models, but I haven’t seen any high end 3-9 scopes in a very long time.

I understand the pros to having a 6x zoom ratio and a 2-12 scope but, for me personally, there are more pros to the simple 3-9.

They are lightweight, provide adequate magnification for 10-300 yards on game and are simple mechanisms. My preference has shifted towards the 2-7 range but still the same idea.

It looks like the most popular scope configuration during most of my hunting experience has been relegated to receiving minimal attention from manufacturers.

Anyone else see any merit to this old configuration or am I just receding further into curmudgeondom?

Standard Velocity
Most of my scopes are 3-9X40 including my Zeiss. These have simple Plex reticle. I also have two 3.5-10x44 Meoptas same Plex reticle. It's a toss up which is better I like both.
The only big scopes 8 have are a,3-12×40 on my 222 Remington and my son sometimes uses a 6-24 for target shooting but he prefers the 3-9 any day.
Cheers mate Bob

 

[CoElkHunter]

Don’t laugh too hard, but I have a mid ‘90s Simmons Aetec 2.5x10x44 in Leupold rings/mounts on my Browning A Bolt .338. That scope has been banged around, hunted below zero F, in heavy snow, rain, sleet and has never failed me or lost it’s zero? Sometimes you get lucky I guess?

 

[Longwalker]

I am a dinosaur in today's market. I do appreciate modern lens quality and coatings, but other market trends don't fit my preferences. But then again I don't normally shoot at any game animal that is over 300 M away.

Simplicity, small size and ruggedness are attractive to me. I actually like fixed power scopes, and currently use a 2.5x Leupold, a 4x Karl Kaps, 4x Zeiss, 6x Swarovski, and 6x S&B. I have two variable power scopes that "feature" quick twist turrets on top. Dislike them both just because I don't want to worry about my scopes vertical setting when hunting. I am a "set it and leave it that" way hunter.

Three of my rifles are equipped with 3-9x scopes. I like them but find I almost never use them at 9x and usually have them set at 3 or 6x depending on game and terrain and leave them set that way during my hunt. I am served just as well by 1-4x on dangerous game or brush rifles, or 2-8x on general use rifles.

Here's a theory: high end magnification of 10x, 12x or even 16x in current hunting scopes is popular because about 80% of all shots taken with those scopes are at a shooting range, and people get satisfaction from seeing their bullet holes appear in paper and they also find the pursuit of tiny groups satisfying. But high magnification is not actually very helpful for most hunting or shooting from field positions. If one does the majority of their hunting from fixed positions like blinds, or snipes game at very long range, higher magnification becomes more attractive and useful.

 

[Catahoula]

I’m a big fan of 3-9x and lower power variables, and use them on all of my big game rifles. I have a Leupold 1.5-5 on my 30-30, a 2.5-8 on my 8mm mag and a Cabelas/Meopta 3-9 on my 30-06. I don’t see a need for any more magnification on a big game rifle in most hunting situations. I do tend to limit my shot distances.

 

[curtism1234]

Don’t laugh too hard, but I have a mid ‘90s Simmons Aetec 2.5x10x44 in Leupold rings/mounts on my Browning A Bolt .338. That scope has been banged around, hunted below zero F, in heavy snow, rain, sleet and has never failed me or lost it’s zero? Sometimes you get lucky I guess?

That was their top of the scope back then - it was about $200 if I remember right. I liked the Simmons scopes of that era, they were quite the bargain. I have a Simmons 22mag series scope which was 50-60 dollars in 2000 on my 22 and never had a problem. Imo Tasco and Simmons is junk now though

 

[James Adamson]

Never been a fan of variable power scopes on hunting rifles. It's just my preference, both my 6.5x55 and 30-06 have schmidt and bender 8x56 scopes, nothing to adjust, just point and shoot. Seems to suit my hunting here in the UK.

 

[Firebird]

Both my Z5’s are the 3.5-18x44 model. I bought one, liked it so much I bought another exactly like it-both have custom turrets built to fit my hand loads using Swarovski system. One sits on my .300 wm and the other on my 7mm stw-so yes I like to shoot out to some distance. And I do like to poke paper but also very confident in animals at distance-the caveat being that I’m a hunter more than a shooter and love a good stalk. Nothing like feeling your heart ramp up as you cut distance on a big animal!