Is the 3-9 hunting scope dead?

This was the gold standard for the longest time. Seems like everyone is going high magnification.

If you were going to scope a general purpose hunting rifle, what magnification would you choose?

Leupold Rifleman is a 3x9 and still available, great out to 100 yds or so. Magnification just depends on your need ....old eyes may need more xx

General purpose, some of my favorite options:

2.5-10X
3-12X
3-15X <Top pick on this list. I have one

We have the option of a higher magnifier than 3X, I will use that option.

I don’t recall wanting more magnification but have definitely wanted less. Hunting with a 5-20 last year I was hating it. Had a doe come out at 40 yards, I sure was wanting a lower power. When hunting with a 3-18 I keep it dialed down and dial up as needed. I shot an Axis at 190-200 with it, dialed up until I was happy, it was on 7x. My favorites I think are fixed 4x or 2-7. I have a Meopta made 3-9 and it’s a great scope, I don’t find it a limitation at all. I like seeing people hunting in the woods with a 5-25, good times.

Was the 5/25 ffp?

FFP can suck for hunting

That's a good point. Maybe the 3X scope is dying so naturally we are going to get higher magnification on the top end. Seems like most are 5X or 6X now. Even 4X is not that common. Last year I hunted with a 4-16 but had it parked on 6X.

3-9 leupold vx2 has been good enough to 300 yards. Not sure I want to shoot further than that.

Then Night Force swung for the fences and made an 8x

On my 3 hunting rifles, I use a 2.5-15, 3-15 and a 4-16. First 2 are sfp and the 4-16 is a ffp. Out of them I prefer the 2.5-15 for my hunting optic. 50-300yd shots seems perfect for me.

Seems like the 3-15 or 4-16 range is what is popular for hunting now.

They sure did. I'm waiting for the 11X Spinal Tap line to come out.

I've picked up several Burris Fullfield II's recently in 3-9x40. But most of my main rifles are higher power.

I recently bought a Leopold vx3 3.5-10 for my BAR. Although not exactly 3-9, it's pretty close. A lot of my hunting buddies still use 3-9 or similar. Although not as popular, it's far from dead.

I have 4X fixed power scopes on most of my guns. But then, my hunting area doesn't offer many shots beyond 150 yards, and I mostly hunt with muzzleloaders.



If any of you guys have an old Leupold or Nikon 4X or 6X scope you're not using, shoot me a private message.

Have 2-7 on quite a few rifles and still have some 3-9 on others 2.5-10 and 2.5-15 on a couple others. Plus one 6-24 on one I use mainly for target and varmints. I like no more than 3 on the low end and that is where they stay a lot of the time.

Of all the scopes I have the 2.5-15 Swaro along with 2-7 and 3-9 Kahles see the most use. With my eyes I love some good clear optics.

ALL of my hunting is under 200 yards so a 3-12 or 4-16 does the job and have AO when it gets up close.
A 3-9 with AO works well on the 9MM AR rifle that's mostly close range but will stretch out to 100 at the range on occasion.
Generally keep them at lower magnification to get wider field of view but having 12 or 16 available is nice to help make sure of your target.

If a fixed 6x is a great options many talk about from times of old before all the high power scopes hit the market what is so wrong with a 5X on the low end?

I hunted for years with my longest shot being 130 or so yards with a 3x9. I only recall shooting 1 deer on 3x, vast majority were on 9x and under 50 yards. I also shot most of them in the neck or head. I like more magnification than less when Im trying to put a bullet in an exact spot.

My scope is almost always on 4X unless I'm in an open area. When I hunted Oryx in Rocksprings last year, I was using a 4-16 for the first time. Usually 8X-10X is my top magnification. Country was open so I had it on 6X. I never thought to touch it. Shot was about 200 yards.

I was on one hunt where a guy missed a deer at 50 yards because his scope was cranked up to 24X and it was a quick shot. It's better to keep your scope on lower power and dial it up if you need it and have the time.

It think that is why people like 6X Fixed, it's idiot proof. One less thing to worry about and they are much lighter.

I suppose a 9x is fine under 50 yards with animal feeding in a lane. An animal slowly moving and in the trees is whole different story. At least for my skill set. I much prefer the wider field of view.

My intention is not to be ugly but I don’t know how else to put it, if you can’t make a precise shot under 50 yards on say 3-4x then you should check on your eyes or your scope. Shooting bottle caps at 50 yards is very doable with a 4x scope of decent clarity for most anyone who understands how to use a scope and doesn’t have Parkinson’s.

Sure, by no means is it impossible or even difficult, but if I have a 3x9 and someone says shoot a bottle cap at 50 yards, Im not turning it to 3x.

I have 3-9x40 scopes on two of five rifles. One is a 6.8 AR, the other a Rem 700 .243. Neither is intended to be a long-distance rig so the scopes work fine. Killed a nice boar with the 6.8 yesterday.

All of mine are zerod at 100 yards. Basically I've got a scoped rifle beside me 2/3 of every day of every year. Magnification is as low as it will go. Focus is set for 100 yards. If it's turreted, that are set at 0, 0.

Whatever happens, I can shoot up close. I know if I need to shoot farther I can get a broad field of view and turn up the magnification to suit me for the situation.

1-6X
3-15X
3.5-21X
5-20X
5-25X
7-35X <<has not been lined up on an animal ever, but just got it this year

A 3-9 works fine for about 99% of my hunting situations, but hunting in an Antler Restrictions County my binoculars have gone from 8x to 12x to make sure sure 13 inches is 13 inches and does are really does .

Yep. I upgraded the quality of glass for my Binos.

Just put a Trijicon Accupoint 3-9 on my Wilson .300 Ham’r. Also have 3-9 on my muzzleloaders. Everything else has higher power.

I have, and have been using 3x9 for 50 years, never felt 'slighted'. I have one Leupold III in 3.5x10 but only use 10 for sighting in a 200yds and 9 would work just fine. To me the 3x9 is 'norm' - not exception.

I don't hunt varmints but suppose I would go higher but it's back to the weight 'thangy'. I don't shoot anything past 300 yards but feel capable 'if required' with a 3x9 and a steady rest.

Have a 3x Tactical on AR pistol and love it. Thinking about same on another AR.

I'm with Bill. 35 years of 3x9s on my rifles (yeah...only vintage calibers too). I'd think this configuration will always be around.

Quick look at the SWFA website tells me that the minimum magnification of the overwhelming majority of variables is 3x, but 9x just edges out 25x to lead in the maximum magnification of rifle scopes.

The 3-9x is still hanging on. It’s been trusted and been the standard for a very long time.

It has just become so much cheaper to build them, and to build variables that have lower minimum settings with higher maximum settings, that are brighter than scopes of the past.

It will be beat by the variables that max at 10x or a little higher, with mil dots or etc. because most of the lower end “mil dot” scopes are only true mil dot scopes at 10x magnification. And can be had for the same or sometimes less money than the same scope in a 3-9x. Even though most people can’t or won’t learn to use them or even shoot that far.

There will always be people that use a 3-9x as sure as thee will always be a 30/30 reticle.

Dead no, but it could use some improvements. My longest shot on a Mule Deer was made with a 3x9x40 on a 7-Mag and it was around 450 yards. What I want from a 3x9 is more field of view. The old Wide field Redfield was a great scope in it's days.

Not dead at all. I've got a bunch a 3x9x40 & 3x9x50 scopes.

I like straight 3 and 4 power scopes for hunting. That said I have used 3-9 power scopes also for years seldom using them set at more than 6 power. You guys must be legally blind.

I have upgraded most of mine and might have one left on a smoke pole. They are dead in my house, I like the 3-15x range and it normally lives between 6-8x but is cranked up if shot.

Deer vitals at 100 yards, under a feeder, is pretty easy to hit.

Add some yardage and other animals that are smaller, and more magnification can help.

Not dead in the ultra light rifle segment.

But loosing traction in normal market. Lot better mag option for a small weight gain that's normally not noticed in a everyday deer rifle

Obvious geographical difference here. The increased magnification with today's glass and coatings have no down sides except weight. I'm a fan of 3-15

Agree. It really comes down to a weight trade off in most hunting situations. If I'm target shooting, I love a having 15x or 16X on the top end.

Of course the argument comes in, maybe I should get in a little better shape to carry the extra 8-12 oz of scope weight.

For many traditional rifles, the 3-9 just looks right.

didnt read all this thread but for me it died in about 1970. I had a Redfield 3-9 on my first rifle .270. Killed a bunch with it. but now I like a WIDE range of power

8-32

Did a lot of hunting in Wyoming for many years with two rifles, a 30-06 Springfield topped with an old Leupold M7-4x and a Mauser 270 topped with a Weaver K4. Used very effectively out to 450 yards on Antelope and 400 yards on Elk, 300 yards was my longest shot on a Mule deer. A 4 power scope makes an animal at 400 yards look like he is standing 100 yards away. Not such a hard aiming point. That and I like those rugged light scopes on rifles I lugged around the mountains near Bondurant and Davy's Junction. If they were good enough for Jack O'Connor they were good enough for me. I bought my first 3-9 in the mid nineties. I used the reticle for a rangefinder and kept it set at a bit over 6 power to get the reticle to subtend just right. My coyote/gopher gun was a Remington 788 in 223 topped with a 4 power Leupold. Those rifles put truckloads of meat in various freezers.

That would be by last choice for a hunting rifle. I could never live with 8X as the lowest setting and I'd never use the magnification on the top end for hunting.

There you go, you have different yardage restrictions.

Jack would of used what ever he was paid to sell that day, which would of been the latest and greatest technology for that time period.

I'm personally a fan of 3-15x out west, but I can so see the allure on sub 6 lb mountain rifle also

Leupold 3x9 has been my go to for a long, long time. I doubt I will ever been in a hunting situation where I need more magnification than that. Heck I have 2 rifles with fixed 4X scopes and I wouldn't hesitate to use either on any hunt I'll go on.

Not dead. My son's CZ 550 .270 Win wears a Sightron S1 3-9x40 scope, and his Mini-14 a Bushnell 3-9x32 scope. Both work just fine at seeing animals just before they become food.

Hah that old Springfield was nowhere near sub 6 pounds, more like 8.5 ready to go. I far wish I were in shape enough to climb mountains all day long carrying those rifles. In actuality 450 yards was no yardage restriction and most of the time I was able to get much closer. I prefer to keep my shots under 350 yards no matter what magnification my scope has available. I feel if you need more than 6 power you are moving into specialized situations. You can't always have a predictable wind or a solid rest.

Have a couple 3 x 9's left, most have been replaced with 4 x 16 or 3 x 12.

OK, 5-30X50

I can live with that Buzz.

I don't have anything over 12x and I only have one of those. The vast majority are 3-9x, with a sprinkling of 2-7x, 1-4x, and a couple fixed 6x.

I have old tastes in firearms. I put period scopes on my rifles. I put a Weaver K6-60B on my 40's Husqvarna 8mm Mauser and a Bausch & Lomb 2.5-8x with a Buehler Micro Dial mount on my pre-64 Winchester Model 70.

On my custom .264 Win Mag I just built, I put a Leupold VX-3i 2.5-10. Light and handy scope and clear.

The 3-15 SWFA SFP is one of the best all-around scopes I've ever used, and it's very affordable. Decent glass, reliable tracking, good reticle for hunting or precision work...it's just a good scope. SWFA 5-20 HD is another bulletproof option for a hybrid hunting/target scope.

I did buy a 3-9 for my AR-15 and would consider the same for a 22, but would prefer a 3-12 or 3-15

3-9 is just fine for clean shots on deer and hog, 50 to 200 yards, where most of us hunt. With decent glass, it will work out to 500 yards.

I've had a 3-9 SWFA on a .308 for years and don't see it ever getting replaced. That said, I likely would not buy one today.

For hunting a 3-9x would do most anyone just fine. I prefer a little more magnification at the bench, so I like 4-16 or 4.5-14x.

On my centerfire rifles I have:
Three 3x9
One 3.5-10
Two 2-7
One 1.75-6

I used a 3-9 opening weekend. It still works.

I think a lot of the reason more high magnification scopes are coming out is the increase in the long distance and precision rounds. Seems like every other rifle on the shelf is a 6.5 creed, and is bought by some dude with aspirations of making a 1000 yard shot.

A second reason is technology improvements in the lens making process. In years past there was only a handful of manufacturers that would get into the high powered optics. Now it seems like quality glass is being produced by a dozen different mfgs.

So to answer the OP, 3-9 scopes are still sold, and still arguably the best all-around for hunting. But they just aren't the new and flashy products to put in the front of the display case.