3x9x40 Scope on Varmint Rifle: Stupid?

The scope is plenty for my needs, but I don't want to get snickered at by fellow hunters putting a smaller scope on a bull barrel rifle.
Click to expand...

What somebody else thinks is the last thing I worry about, especially with my guns. For coyotes and deer, a 3-9x40 is fine. I thought you were talking about a rifle for p-dogs or woodchucks or something. My main deer rifle wears a 3-9x40, although it doesn't have a bull barrel.

You still haven't revealed to us the rifle and cartridge... Inquiring minds want to know :D
 
When considering scopes, I ask myself... self, are you planning on carrying this around a bunch, or setting up and shooting a bunch.

For example: I have a couple of .223 bolt rifles that are completely set up differently. One I carry, it has a light 3-9x40 while the other is set up for prone/bench shooting, it has a pretty hefty 6-24x50. The first is a joy to carry, and still manages sub-MOA, the second is a boat anchor, but regularly shoots .3s and .2s.

So, for me it is a matter of weight of the entire rifle set up oftentimes being the biggest factor when considering scopes.

Balance on a carry rifle also is high on my priority scale.

The beauty of the situation is scopes are not that hard to change; if you decide that you don't like the one on any given rifle.

I once met a guy out moose hunting. His rifle looked like it had been left outside for a few Alaskan winters - very rough. The sling was literally a couple of old boot laces. I don't think that the moose that he shot with it even noticed... or cared...
YMMV
 
AZAK- Your reason is one I keep hearing and just can't understand. It's the scope thing and if you are going to be carrying it. Really now-The weight thing.
This to me ( maybe just me ) is the most lame excuse I have ever heard. My scope weights 5 oz's more than yours. If your walking is affected that much by such a small weight, we have issues already. I'm old,I have a bad back and legs, but never would that small of a issue ever stop me from walking.

Now In support of your statement- You are not alone, as I said I keep hearing what you said- I just can't understand it.:eek:
 
As far as appearances. I don't have an issue with a smaller scope being mounted on a varmint rifle. Keep in mind varmint hunting can be accomplished by a lone hunter. It's not a team sport unless you let it be. I also hunt the same State as you. But my hunting takes place up on the Iron Range. Unlike some others I prefer only one close buddy to hunt with. He's the shot-guner and in charge of the caller & decoy. I'm the eye's and stationary rifleman. Perhaps you should give some thought to limiting the amount of fellows your willing to hunt with in the field too. BTW since you commented your shots are 200 or less and your primary goal is the taking of coyotes. 3-9 is sufficient for the purpose. After all you shouldn't make head shots if your intending to skin & stretch. But a yote with Mange take how ever you please. Like you I'm hoping this winter comes to a end. What a winter this one's been. Almost had to clear cut a 40 just to stay warm._:)
 
It's ok, but I prefer to have a little more - at least a 12 to 14 top end, if shooting past 100 yards.

I think you get diminishing returns on magnification past about 14 or so, in terms of mirage, resolution, etc., depending upon glass quality and objective size. But in that 9 to 14 range, with reasonable quality glass (mid-level), I think you get significant returns on magnif., and espec. on the smaller targets. Also depends on your crosshair thickness.
 
Really now-The weight thing.
This to me ( maybe just me ) is the most lame excuse I have ever heard.
Click to expand...
If your walking is affected that much by such a small weight, we have issues already. I'm old,I have a bad back and legs, but never would that small of a issue ever stop me from walking.
Click to expand...
I live in Alaska and get out hiking about 350 days a year; I have posted this on this forum many times in the past. I have been to the tops of mountains, and across valleys, and through/on/across rivers on a regular basis... and to me having a lighter, well balanced rifle with a lighter scope makes a difference. Could I use a heavier scope and rifle, of course; did it for years. Do I enjoy carrying lighter hunting rifles, heck yes! I find that I carry my hunting rifles far more than I shoot them.

I enjoy my rifles with larger optics, actually shoot them far more often than my hunting rifles. Long bull barrels, bi-pods/bags, high power optics are great; for what they are meant for. I love my Vortex 6-24x50, and have other higher power optics. But, they come with some costs, namely weight and un-weildlyness. (Not to mention limited field of view when hunting.)

When one is logging thousands of miles a year in the terrain that I hike in, even 5 ounces in scope weight is a big deal, to me. And for some of my scopes it is closer to a pound than 5 ounces.

Try this, get a light rifle and go for your walk, then grab a heavy rifle and go for that same walk...
YMMV
 
How do you get across those rivers, anyhow?
Click to expand...
Walk, snowmobile/machine/go, dog sled, skis...
and when the water is not solid... canoe, waders, waterproof boots, float plane...
It is far easier to get around during the Winter; which seem to be the better part of the year, at least half, seriously.

Sometimes I think that we really do have four seasons: Winter, break-up, Mosquito, and Winter!
 
My rule of thumb was always 3x per 100 yds. I've since found that a 4x to a 2-7x is plenty out 300. Good out to 400 with BDC and some practice. I still haven't given up on the 3-9x though. I do like to get my eye close to what I'm shooting. As far as weight goes, a 4x, 2-7x, and a 3-9x are all going to be very similar in a 1" tube scope.

I use a Burris 2-7x more than anything. Its pretty slick for what it is, but I do find myself wanting a little more lens around dusk. I recently bought a Trijicon 3-9x40 that's going on a lightweight .308 that I think will be just super out to 400-450 yds. I don't think I'll ever take game out the far, but I think water jugs and bowling pins won't stand a chance (maybe at first, but at least they won't run).

In the end, you just have to try out everything and see what you like. I think picking glass is more subjective that picking the rifle. I also think that when you get to shooting dog and deer sized targets, you'll find that you don't "need" as much zoom as you thought even though you may "want" more.
 
I was in the beginning happy to overglass, as the rifle was for target/range work and I found I could use the scope for spotting the holes and size/weight were not an issue. The first time I took an overglassed rifle hunting, though, I realised I was actually "underglassed" at the low end, so to speak.

That 3X per 100 yards actually sounds like a pretty reasonable rule of thumb for a hunter, especially of big game. If you're going after varmints, you might argue 4X per 100 yards, but target work is just too dependent on exactly what sort of target discipline you're shooting for hard-and-fast rules. The Metallic Silhouette shooter whose competition allows glass probably wants the same scope his/her hunting rifle uses, while the dedicated 1000+ yard competitor arguably wants all s/he can get and still have it fit on the rifle.
 
My smallest scope I have is a 6-20 x 56. I find it very easy to dial down to 6 power for in close shots,yet still have the ability to go to 20 power for long shots.
 
Who cares how it looks?

Does it work for you?

If so, then its fine. If not then you may want to up the power to what does (12 would seem to be more than enough out to 200 yds).
 
Nah!

I've got a Ruger 77V, an early one in 22-250, and swap a vintage Weaver K12 and a V-9A (3-9 w/ AO) back and forth now and again. The K-12 is good on crows through the summer......the V-9 is a bit more tidy in the fall winter for coyotes. The old K12 is so long, the V-9 actually makes the rifle look more balanced, and a tad less muzzle heavy. And the v-9 seems brighter at all hours, the K12 a bit dim in all but the best light.

The 12x does make crows at 200 plus a good bit easier.
 
Walk, snowmobile/machine/go, dog sled, skis...
and when the water is not solid... canoe, waders, waterproof boots, float plane...
It is far easier to get around during the Winter; which seem to be the better part of the year, at least half, seriously.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I meant summer - I figured winter would be easier.

I just thought maybe it was commonplace up there perhaps, to build simple cable bridges (with 2 or 3 cables), between trees on each side, since I should think that on a rager, a canoe is not safe (and certainly not wading!).

That's what I'd do - use that frozen winter to string the cables across the ragers I want to go across in the summer (one bottom to walk on and two top to hang onto). But if summer=mosquito season, maybe it's better to just stay home.
 
A 2X Scope, theoretically, is equally accurate as a 20X scope, but that depends on how well a target is made up for the size of the crosshairs.

When it comes to walking about, I like variable scopes that are under 10X, especially if there are woods involved and moving targets, like coyotes. I've found AO scopes to be a nuisance under those conditions.

Years ago, I used a B&L 2-8x Balvar 8 that was a pleasure, both in the woods and in most Maine field conditions. The optics were very clear and the tapered crosshairs never changed appearance with power change.

These days, most of my rifles use Leupold 3-9X, VX2s with finer Long Range Duplex crosshairs. Depending on the woods, I'll walk around with them set at 3 or 4 and turn them up as-needed for longer shots.
 
Last edited:
Longshot4

I believe for the distance of 200 Yds. Deer and coyote a 3x9 is a good choice. And hear is a good example why. Yesterday my Son sent me a picture of his first coyote he shot with his 270 Mod. 700 with a Leupold 3x9 on it. Shot through the neck at what he figured was 250 Yds.. Now for the bull Barrel we know you have plenty of capability if it is a center fire. In my opinion if there is going to be criticism it would be for carrying all that weight. But you are the one carrying it so no body will have any thing to cry about. Now here is a question for you. Can you carry it?
 
I used a 3x9 on .22-250s for decades. 300yds, woodchucks/crows, etc. Quite satisfactory.

Later I got a 6-18x. Found out that while the higher magnification was useful for looking at things, the additional distortion from mirage, heat shimmer, and the increased "movement" of the crosshairs due to my heartbeat (and every other thing, including a light breeze) meant actually hitting small targets at long range was more difficult with a higher power setting.

Experience with a 24x also the same thing, even more so.

For me, I found that dialing it back to 9x for shooting increased my hits.

high power scopes are fine for some things, especially things that don't move, or move much. Varmints (not predators) are generally shot as they stand still. Try and follow a trotting coyote (or anything moving faster than a slow walk) with an 18x (or, for that matter even 9x) is either very tough, or an outright exercise in futility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top