Death of the 3-9 scope

[Standard Velocity]

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?

 

[Ridgewalker]

Standard Velocity, I couldn’t agree more! A fixed 4x served me well on a 30-06 for many years. It was my only big game rifle and If I did my part it worked fiNe to over 400 yards on antelope.
I do a lot of reloading experimenting these days and with my old eyes I have to admit it is much easier to test loads for accuracy using greater power.
But for hunting a 2-7x or 3-9x is plenty. After all I am a hunter and not a shooter.

 

[Art Lambart II]

I am a big fan of the 3 x 9 scopes but I don't shoot past 300 yards and normally my shots are 100 yards or less so I rarely move off of 4 or 5 power.

 

[Standard Velocity]

Standard Velocity, I couldn’t agree more! A fixed 4x served me well on a 30-06 for many years. It was my only big game rifle and If I did my part it worked fiNe to over 400 yards on antelope.
I do a lot of reloading experimenting these days and with my old eyes I have to admit it is much easier to test loads for accuracy using greater power.
But for hunting a 2-7x or 3-9x is plenty. After all I am a hunter and not a shooter.

Me too. Good binoculars pretty much preclude the need for higher than 4x where I hunt. Squirrel hunting is my favorite hunting. I use 2-7 and 90% of my shots are on 4x. If I have to zoom in it’s likely too far away anyhow.

Deer really don’t require that much magnification either. If a shot is greater than 200 yards it’s not likely I’ll take it. I try to rifle hunt like I’m bow hunting so shots are often quite close. The last deer I shot was 10 yards away.

 

[DrBob]

Technology marches on and to its own beat. More than power, a big jump in glass quality makes lower power scopes equal to older higher power versions. Factoring true value (correcting for inflation), even lower price optics are superior to the past. I posit that the present 1-6x or 1-8x is a better choice than the 3-9x. To paraphrase the Olympia Beer ad "it's the glass".

 

[curtism1234]

Imo a 3-9 is a good overall scope. I also consider a 4-12 it's only a couple ounces more and not too heavy to begin with. At 100 yards the additional magnification allows for easier sight in as well as confirmation where the bullet hit without having to put the rifle down to reach for binos or spotting scope.

 

[mark-hunter]

The technology (and marekting) advances... For today standard reasonable scope power comparable to 3-9, would be 3-12x.

 

[Standard Velocity]

Technology marches on and to its own beat. More than power, a big jump in glass quality makes lower power scopes equal to older higher power versions. Factoring true value (correcting for inflation), even lower price optics are superior to the past. I posit that the present 1-6x or 1-8x is a better choice than the 3-9x. To paraphrase the Olympia Beer ad "it's the glass".

Granted I’ve not been looking but are any of the 1-6 or 1-8 being made with reasonably large objectives (36-42 mm)? Everything I’ve seen is on the small side for full light hunting. I understand exit pupil size allows fairly small objectives at 4x but should you ever find the need for 8x in fading light a 24 mm objective may be a hindrance.

And I once regularly consumed large quantities of Olympia. It was the water indeed.

 

[leslie hetrick]

i think this leupold 1.75-6x is one of the finest low light mid range scopes i own.

 

[Red Leg]

Come on Guys - there are a ton of 2.5x10 and even 1x10's out there. From junker Burris Fullfields to the Leica Magnus series. Europtic lists dozens.

 

[mdwest]

I am a big fan of the 3 x 9 scopes but I don't shoot past 300 yards and normally my shots are 100 yards or less so I rarely move off of 4 or 5 power.

Probably 75% of my scoped rifles wear a 3x9 of some sort..

I dont know that its the best overall solution for most of my needs.. but.. its what I've grown up with and am comfortable with..

I have found myself leaning toward lower power variables with wider fields of view lately and have bought a few 1-6, 1-8, and 2-7 scopes... largely because I typically like to keep an optic on a low power until I spot game (1-3?) and rarely if ever use anything above 6-7..

If I lived further west or did more hunting in wide open spaces I might be interested in more power.. but the vast majority of the hunting I do involves shots at 150 yards or less.. I honestly cant think of but 2 occasions that I have ever shot at game at a distance greater than 200 yards (took a 240 yard shot at an impala in South Africa once.. and a 210 yard shot on a hog in Texas once.. and thats it..)...

 

[curtism1234]

Granted I’ve not been looking but are any of the 1-6 or 1-8 being made with reasonably large objectives (36-42 mm)? Everything I’ve seen is on the small side for full light hunting. I understand exit pupil size allows fairly small objectives at 4x but should you ever find the need for 8x in fading light a 24 mm objective may be a hindrance.

And I once regularly consumed large quantities of Olympia. It was the water indeed.

I Think today's optic technology allows for a shot to be taken during legal shooting hours. If you use your scope to judge antler size or if your watch is...running 5 minutes slow...then that might be an issue.

 

[BeeMaa]

Good binoculars pretty much preclude the need for higher than 4x where I hunt. Squirrel hunting is my favorite hunting.

Many times while hunting in Africa my scope was used as my binos.
After locating a herd or a particular animal with binos, I'd only use the scope.
This allowed me to make quicker shots when the PH gave the green light.
For that reason, I really appreciate good glass and higher power scopes.
My 416RM has a 1-8x, 375H&H a 1.7-13.3x , and the 300WM a 2-16x.

Obviously I'm not talking about squirrels, but it still applies.

 

[Standard Velocity]

Many times while hunting in Africa my scope was used as my binos.
After locating a herd or a particular animal with binos, I'd only use the scope.
This allowed me to make quicker shots when the PH gave the green light.
For that reason, I really appreciate good glass and higher power scopes.
My 416RM has a 1-8x, 375H&H a 1.7-13.3x , and the 300WM a 2-16x.

Obviously I'm not talking about squirrels, but it still applies.

You are correct. My stream of consciousness paragraph made it sound like I us binos for squirrel. Scope is sufficient for squirrel.

I would like to say I’ve never used a scope in place of binoculars but that would be a lie. I finally found a pair that are small enough to not annoy me but big enough to gather light.

I have missed several shooting opportunities in the transition from binoculars to scope. Down here in the South some areas are thick. One particular stand has thick saplings in the bedding area and you can see an antler or a patch of fur but only get about two seconds of an entire animal if he decides to show. He’ll be bigger next year.

 

[Divernhunter]

If you found a scope or binos that "gather light" you have the only one and they are worth millions. Scopes and binos do NOT "gather light" no matter how big the lenses are. The only TRASMIT light and that all depends on the quality of the glass and care of construction. The gather light is a common misinformation and wives tale

 

[CBH Australia]

Come on Guys - there are a ton of 2.5x10 and even 1x10's out there. From junker Burris Fullfields to the Leica Magnus series. Europtic lists dozens.

Red Leg, and others there are other options and I haven’t looked online lately but I think in Australia the 3-9 has been popular and versatile.
I bought my Zeiss 2.4-10 at about $1000 on sale a while back Swarovski z3 In 3-9 we’re running at round $1000. Their have been numerous 3-9 variety’s including various models.
3-9s seem to be popular , albeit be not indispensable but for many $1000 is a good scope and in Australia many suitable Leupold are sub $1000 ,
A 2-7 x32 is likely a good lightweight option but 3-9 is A popular option and compromise for weight, price , clarity and function reliability in an affordabe price point for many.
I’m sure the 1-6, others are great and scopes can be matched for purpose and preference but to see the 3-9 discontinued would be a shame. Particuarly for those who do not require something more specific or are looking for mass produced mid range scopes in a price point .

 

[CBH Australia]

If you found a scope or binos that "gather light" you have the only one and they are worth millions. Scopes and binos do NOT "gather light" no matter how big the lenses are. The only TRASMIT light and that all depends on the quality of the glass and care of construction. The gather light is a common misinformation and wives tale

I’m all for speaking correctly or being clear but it is commonly misstated and we are not all experts.
To be honest is the light transmitted from the light source , the scope is allowing the light to pass through the lenses and coatings. A radio transmits, the sun produces rays and light a light projects a beam?
Maybe I have the wrong terms here but I think the large lens allows a bigger field of view, What does this do? Does it capture the light, gather the light or just allow transmission of available light.
I certainly don’t understand optics that well but I started with cheap scopes, Nikko Stirling etc, an old Weaver secondhand, Even my better scopes now were sought on clearance sales.
I do know my Kahles 8x56 is great in low light and some of my 50mm objectives are pretty good and my First good scope. Leupold VxII 3-9x40 bought in about 1995 wasn’t that good spotlighting last I tried but it was possibly a decent hunting scope in its time.

 

[Rick Cox]

If you found a scope or binos that "gather light" you have the only one and they are worth millions. Scopes and binos do NOT "gather light" no matter how big the lenses are. The only TRASMIT light and that all depends on the quality of the glass and care of construction. The gather light is a common misinformation and wives tale

I'm not sure if my scope is gathering or transmitting light, but I am sure that I can see much more distinctly in dim light, through quality optics than with my naked eye.

 

[CBH Australia]

I used the term gather, that’s incorrect I’m sure but what I’m thinking is the scope doesn’t physically do anything except magnify an image. It is not producing anything or actively collecting , transmitting or gathering something.
If anything is a good low light optic or large objective object actually reducing the resistance of the available light to the user to focus with their eye that is physically focussing on the image with the available light.
This is not an argument but trying to clarify or understand the function of the scope.

 

[Jfet]

Many times while hunting in Africa my scope was used as my binos.

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.