Death of the 3-9 scope

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Actually my favorite is 2.5-8x although the scope on the rifle that I use when I've drawn a branch antler elk tag is a 3-9x. I hear all the latest technology advances but I've yet to see any quantitative difference showing that the new glass is better. If someone can explain a method of testing where I can compare scopes made in 1935 to present day and determine a numerical score for the various qualities I'd like to hear about it so that I can test the scopes.

Ray B
The best test to see the difference is to go outside 20 minutes after sunset and see what you can see with your scopes. The majority of good scopes will allow you to still see game. Lens coatings have improved over the years and my Meopta and Zeiss work well after sunset but my old scopes only look black and don't see much at all.
I hope this helps.
Meopta says each of their lenses transmit 98% of available light.
This makes them a lot brighter than scopes that only have a few of their lenses coated.
Cheers mate Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I understand the confidence and simplicity of fixed power scopes. At 48 I think variables were starting to gain popularity and possibly affordability.
Sadly I think the Death of fixed power scopes was eminent before the 3-9 made the endangered list.
What decent fixed power scopes are available New now? Point of interest.

CBH
Chris if you want to get rid of that ridiculous oversized 56 mill lens I'm sure I could give it a,good home on my hornet. That 8x56 Kahles is no good anymore in this day of V8 variables.
Seriously that Kahles is the best spotlighting scope in the world. A thousand pro roo shooters c ant be wrong. It's just a pity they are $1300 OZ.
Cheers mate Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

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.

CBH
Chris
And don't forget the newer 34mm tubes. Try getting rings for those at your local gunshop. Bigger tubes only allow more bondage and elevation adjustment not more light.
Cheers mate Bob

 

[leslie hetrick]

i do have a older gloss 6x leupold and a older gloss 7.5x with AO in my cash of leupolds not on rifles at this time..

 

[CBH Australia]

Ray B
The best test to see the difference is to go outside 20 minutes after sunset and see what you can see with your scopes. The majority of good scopes will allow you to still see game. Lens coatings have improved over the years and my Meopta and Zeiss work well after sunset but my old scopes only look black and don't see much at all.
I hope this helps.
Meopta says each of their lenses transmit 98% of available light.
This makes them a lot brighter than scopes that only have a few of their lenses coated.
Cheers mate Bob

Bob,
I have a Meopta Meopro and like it and low light ability. The 98% claim is interesting and part of why I bought it. And there has been a price hike since.
Some other big brands only claim numbers in the low 90’s
Some of those scopes may we’ll be better and should be for the price.
I’m sure the numbers can be substantiated but It’s interesting.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Bob,
I have a Meopta Meopro and like it and low light ability. The 98% claim is interesting and part of why I bought it. And there has been a price hike since.
Some other big brands only claim numbers in the low 90’s
Some of those scopes may we’ll be better and should be for the price.
I’m sure the numbers can be substantiated but It’s interesting.

CBH
Chris Meopta quote 98%per lens so in a,three and a half to ten that translates to about 91% overall taking into account all the lenses. Others may be overall.
BEWARE,of multi coated as this sometimes this means only the front of each lens is coated not both sides as in higher quality.
Cheers mate Bob

 

[Standard Velocity]

i do have a older gloss 6x leupold and a older gloss 7.5x with AO in my cash of leupolds not on rifles at this time..

I really prefer the gloss Leupolds but the last ones that were readily available were the VX III if I’m not mistaken. The Vari X line always had gloss available and once the VX changed to Arabic numerals it was custom shop only. I want the modern glass coatings but in gloss. I think Leica may be the only one still offering gloss.

 

[curtism1234]

I really prefer the gloss Leupolds but the last ones that were readily available were the VX III if I’m not mistaken. The Vari X line always had gloss available and once the VX changed to Arabic numerals it was custom shop only. I want the modern glass coatings but in gloss. I think Leica may be the only one still offering gloss.

I like the gloss scopes on bright blued barrels.

Bushnell Elite 4200's were made with gloss - that would be a solid choice if someone is ok with a used scope

 

[Dwight Beagle]

I totally agree in theory about not using a scope in lieu of binoculars. I also believe there are acceptable exceptions. I own 700 acres that I live on and hunt. One of my sisters and her husband own approximately the same amount of land. My mother owns several thousand acres. Two of my closest friends own around 1000 and 2500 acres respectively. I can count on one hand the times I’ve hunted land not specifically listed above. I’ve been known to use a rifle scope as binoculars on the properties I hunt. Not often but I’ve done it. I’m also intimately familiar with the land I hunt and know if anyone else is out hunting the property when I am.

I don’t believe I own as many rifles as most of you, eleven to be exact. Four of them wear 3-9’s, none of them expensive and none of them cheap. VX-2, two Zeiss Conquest and Bushnell Elite 4200 and I’ve ever felt under magnified. The longest shot I’ve ever taken was approximately 330 yards. The vast majority of my shots have been less than 250 yards. The opportunity is there for shots much longer than I’ve taken on all the properties I hunt but I feel uncomfortable shooting past 300.

My favorite scope is a VX-3 1.75-6x32 with a Custom Shop German #4 reticle which was mentioned by meigsbucks. I’m not really sure why it’s my favorite but it is.

 

[leslie hetrick]

VX-3 1.75-6x leupolds are hard to find, i bought a rifle with one on it just for the scope. i sold the rifle and that gave me the leupold for less than 100.00.

 

[postoak]

I have 3-9x40 scopes on most of my rifles and hadn't noticed they were going away. But then, when buying, I just look at what I want, I don't take note of what percentage of available scopes are 3-9.

Unlike others, I usually keep mine at 9x unless walking through brush. I find it ironic that half of those here say they keep their scopes cranked down from max power and the other half say 9 power isn't enough.

I'm also odd man out on scope price. Most of my scopes are in the $200 - $400 range and they've served me quite well for decades.

 

[CBH Australia]

I have 3-9x40 scopes on most of my rifles and hadn't noticed they were going away. But then, when buying, I just look at what I want, I don't take note of what percentage of available scopes are 3-9.

Unlike others, I usually keep mine at 9x unless walking through brush. I find it ironic that half of those here say they keep their scopes cranked down from max power and the other half say 9 power isn't enough.

I'm also odd man out on scope price. Most of my scopes are in the $200 - $400 range and they've served me quite well for decades.

Probably many good $200 scopes out there. Rugged reliable and clear enough. I think you are just among a bunch of gun nuts, some in a position to buy what they want and some aspiring to have some nice gear as a part of our interest, Dearer is Clearer but here I a point where the money is going into other technology like zoom ratio or coatings, marketing and some at prices that are hard to see how it can be proportionately better.
I have a few 1k scopes that took time to get and they are for carry rifles where I can look after them. This evening I was missing my Tikka CTR that’s is sitting naked in the safe. She is “Ugly Betty”and bought new on clearance for regular use and where she won’t get looked after. I have a Japanese made Tasco 3-9x40 doing nothing. Lightbulb moment, I can use it. Betty just got butt ugly and I won’t be searching for “the right scope” and trying to spend money I can’t afford just now.
Back to used guns looking for deals

 

[Standard Velocity]

Probably many good $200 scopes out there. Rugged reliable and clear enough. I think you are just among a bunch of gun nuts, some in a position to buy what they want and some aspiring to have some nice gear as a part of our interest, Dearer is Clearer but here I a point where the money is going into other technology like zoom ratio or coatings, marketing and some at prices that are hard to see how it can be proportionately better.
I have a few 1k scopes that took time to get and they are for carry rifles where I can look after them. This evening I was missing my Tikka CTR that’s is sitting naked in the safe. She is “Ugly Betty”and bought new on clearance for regular use and where she won’t get looked after. I have a Japanese made Tasco 3-9x40 doing nothing. Lightbulb moment, I can use it. Betty just got butt ugly and I won’t be searching for “the right scope” and trying to spend money I can’t afford just now.
Back to used guns looking for deals

I’ve been pleasantly surprised by cheap scopes made in the Philippines in the last few years. Burris can routinely be found for under $200 and looks pretty darned good in fading light. I did manage to damage an erector on one as I had neglected to adjust windage via the Redfield mount before adjusting windage from the turret. If you are a set-it-and-forget-it kinda guy they work fine.

Leupold VX3 is where weight, price and glass quality make sense to me. Other scopes are better but these work for me.

 

[Dwight Beagle]

Burris can routinely be found for under $200 and looks pretty darned good in fading light.

If I purchase a scope in the $200.00 or less range it’s going to be a Fullfield II 2-7 or 3-9.

Leupold VX3 is where weight, price and glass quality make sense to me.

Same here but I’ll add one other, Meopta MeoPro. Most of my scopes are Leupold and Meopta though my last couple of purchases have been Meopta.

 

[Goose Cracker]

I'll be the outlier here and say that I like more magnification, I love 30mm tubes, and I prefer 44mm and 50mm objectives. I also don't like glossy scopes or fixed power scopes. I've owned em all.

If I had my druthers, I'd have 3-15x44 VX5s or 3-18x50 VX6s on everything I own. For the price/value, those are my current favorites. And as I get older I like the illuminated dots on heavy duplex reticles more and more.

I have lots of Vortex Vipers in 4-16x50 also and am a fan of the value they offer - $500 or less in many cases. There is no doubt that the VX5 is better glass, especially at dawn/dusk - a buddy and I tested them side-by-side. But the Leupold is more expensive also. I like the Vortex BDC reticle in hunting situations. I shot a pig in the south GA swamp last Friday with a favorite Nosler M48 7mm-08 that sports one of those same Vortex scopes - and I had it turned up to 15x at dusk to ensure I made a clean headshot. You definitely don't want to track a wounded boar through the mosquito and moccasin south GA swamp at night! I've only wished I had less magnification than 4x once in a hunting situation but there have been several times with an old 3-9 1" tube that I wished I had more.

Today's glass is loads better than it was 30 years ago when I purchased my first scopes. The 30mm tubes offer much better FOVs at the same level of magnification as 1" tubes IMHO. Most of today's rifles allow you to mount scopes with bigger objectives low enough to have a good cheekweld.

Let the flames begin!

 

[woods0824]

Swaro Z3 3-9 is the perfect scope for a lightweight mountain rig that you're going to carry often. Everyone's eyes are different, but the Z3 line really works well for me in low light conditions compared to other scopes I have owned (i.e. Zeiss conquests, leupold VX3's, etc.). When you can get such a bright clear image in a 3-9, I don't have much use for a heavier higher magnification scope for the majority of my hunting.

 

[nztimb]

Everyone's eyes are different,

And this is the definitive statement of the whole thread. Our eyes are different and for many of us there is no point in buying more quality than our eyes can percieve.

And welcome to the forum @woods0824

 

[CBH Australia]

And this is the definitive statement of the whole thread. Our eyes are different and for many of us there is no point in buying more quality than our eyes can percieve.

And welcome to the forum @woods0824

Agreed, wholehesrtedly but I also think good or bad eyes a clearer scope will/should benefit. Whether we can grade the difference or justify the expense is subjective. I believe you hunt reguarly and are well experienced and at a guess happy with your scopes. If someone could offer you a free upgrade for a good hunting scope i would think you should be able see a difference. Can you see the difference in value? Particuarly when we go from say from a $1000 Leupold /Swarovski model to a $3000 model say Lieca or something. Is it 3 x better? Thats inthe eye of the beholder. Hopefully there is meaningful gain.
I like an 8x56 Kahles for spotlighting but i think the Europeans like them for driven hunts. Horses for courses. And excuses to set up different configuration s
I think its dawn and dusk that matters.
I believe i read the Swarovski glass doesnt change among models? Perhaps the coatings do? I used a z6 in Africa,my mate loves his z6 and has strong glasses.
I also believe i read somewhere a Ziess Terra was the same specs as Meopta Meopro rebranded. If so we missed some good clearance prices.
Most scopes work. Reliability may be the ost important factor among suitable reticle type for purpose, clarity then low light performance counts about an hour of a hunting day unless its used at night.
A Tikka is accurate so are Howa and bothwork well intheir market, but there are other desirable features on other models and the costs go on. I think the main thing i could see on a Rigby is you are paying for a bespoke firearm mostly hand crafted raising the price. Nice but out of my league.

 

[Standard Velocity]

I'll be the outlier here and say that I like more magnification, I love 30mm tubes, and I prefer 44mm and 50mm objectives. I also don't like glossy scopes or fixed power scopes. I've owned em all.

If I had my druthers, I'd have 3-15x44 VX5s or 3-18x50 VX6s on everything I own. For the price/value, those are my current favorites. And as I get older I like the illuminated dots on heavy duplex reticles more and more.

I have lots of Vortex Vipers in 4-16x50 also and am a fan of the value they offer - $500 or less in many cases. There is no doubt that the VX5 is better glass, especially at dawn/dusk - a buddy and I tested them side-by-side. But the Leupold is more expensive also. I like the Vortex BDC reticle in hunting situations. I shot a pig in the south GA swamp last Friday with a favorite Nosler M48 7mm-08 that sports one of those same Vortex scopes - and I had it turned up to 15x at dusk to ensure I made a clean headshot. You definitely don't want to track a wounded boar through the mosquito and moccasin south GA swamp at night! I've only wished I had less magnification than 4x once in a hunting situation but there have been several times with an old 3-9 1" tube that I wished I had more.

Today's glass is loads better than it was 30 years ago when I purchased my first scopes. The 30mm tubes offer much better FOVs at the same level of magnification as 1" tubes IMHO. Most of today's rifles allow you to mount scopes with bigger objectives low enough to have a good cheekweld.

Let the flames begin!

I do like the illuminated reticles more and more. Small dots over traditional reticles like the Firedot appeal to me. No so much the Hubble telescope levels of magnification and objective but you know, different strokes for different folks.

 

[Ray B]

One thing that I don't understand, particularly when "experts" say that a scope has less light at the ocular end than at the objective is: how come when I look through a scope in dim light I can see more looking through the scope than I can with no glass between me and the objects?