2-7x32 or 3-9x40?

Which of these two for general hunting?

  • 2-7x32mm

    Votes: 28 37.8%

  • 3-9x40mm

    Votes: 46 62.2%
  • Total voters
    74
2-7 is smaller and lighter and for hunting you don't need more power. All that 8-9x is going to show is more wobble in your hold.
 
you ALWAYS want a larger objective- even 8mm is enough to notice a difference- the glass tends to be of better quality as well- i've got both 3x9x32 and 3x9x40 and unless there's something like a problem with co-witnessing sights and the objuective getting in the way, the 40 wins every time- then again, for the REAL long shots, i prefer the 4x12x40- and a harris
i FORGOT to mention that i have 5 years experience at WILD-LIETZ-in the factory repair depot- which is now lieca- plus i've been at this game since 72-so i'm just not voicing an "opinion"- i've re-built the darned things on the survey side
 
Last edited:
7X gives the same sight picture at 350 yards as iron sights or 1X optics do at 50 yards. Basically, 7X should be more than enough magnification for shots out to 350 yards and well beyond that. As long as what is being hunted is larger than a gopher I think 2-7X is more than enough magnification, with the benefit of added field of view for close range shots in the bush. Perfect for a general hunting scope for me (actually I think 1.5-6X might be even better).
 
2-7x32 or similar unless I'm hunting really open terrain or smaller critters at long range. I rarely set my 3-9s higher than 7 or eight, so I may aswell use a smaller, lighter package.
 
I shot my moose last year - a bull in full rut - at 25' and closing. I had a 3-9x40. Granted, nothing but open sights would have been useful at that distance, but upon my return, I bought one of the recently discontinued 2.5-8x36 VX-III's. I believe it is about perfect for general hunting - in this part of the country, at least.
 
General hunting is too vague, so I did not answer. I as well have one of each.
a 3-9 on my 30-06 and a 7-32 on my "wife's" .303

I prefer the highest magnification possible when sighting in a rifle. The 40 theoretically will be better in low light as well. If I were hunting bush, I would prefer something even smaller. like a 1.5-4.

For general purpose the pros and cons will likely even out.
 
Given the vague situation, i chose the 3-9x40. Gives more option for magnification(If you don't want to use more than a 7 power scope.....don't turn it past 7!) But most importantly the bigger objective to let in more light at dusk and dawn.
 
Either is OK for a general purpose big game rifle, but I think the 2-7x32 has the edge for the following reasons:

1. The 32mm objective scope can be mounted lower. 40mm objectives don't always work with low rings.

2. 7x is more than sufficient magnification for big game at any reasonable range and 2x is better if you're faced with a really close range offhand shot.

3. The 2-7x32 is lighter and more compact.

Either scope has all the light gathering properties you need up to the middle of its adjustment range. Assuming a 7mm exit pupil, a 32mm objective is good up to 4.6x and the 40mm objective is good up to 5.7x; hardly a dramatic difference. For any magnification below that, you will not be able to detect any difference in light gathering properties unless you have freakishly large pupils.

I think the popularity of large magnification scopes with big objective lenses is driven by a combination of marketing "###y' numbers and a large proportion of people who do all of their non-hunting shooting off of a bench. If anything, 1.5-6x might be an even better magnification range than 2-7x.
 
Both have plenty of magnification for 95% of hunting in Canada . I think the real difference is the objective size and the amount of light they can gather.

I hunted deer with a 2-7x32 last year and wasnt' happy with the brightness in low light. Maybe it was because it was an older scope (Leupold Vari-X II) . My Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 was much brighter in low light. Im switching to a VX2 3-9x40 for Deer hunting this year .
 
Maybe it was because it was an older scope
Click to expand...

The difference in lens coatings is the most likely explanation as to why you found the Nikon brighter, unless you were frequently using both of them at high end of their magnification ranges. Generally speaking, large objectives realize the most benefit with higher magnifications.

Given equivalent glass, an eye can only make use of an exit pupil (objective diameter/magnification) diameter equal to its own pupil diameter, which is 5-7mm for most people.
 
I really like the 2.5-8x36 these days, but in real world (non-internet) hunting, you'll likely never see a difference.
 
tjhaile said:
The difference in lens coatings is the most likely explanation as to why you found the Nikon brighter, unless you were frequently using both of them at high end of their magnification ranges. Generally speaking, large objectives realize the most benefit with higher magnifications.

Given equivalent glass, an eye can only make use of an exit pupil (objective diameter/magnification) diameter equal to its own pupil diameter, which is 5-7mm for most people.
Click to expand...

Good point, Im sure a Current 2-7x33 VX-II would be brighter than the old one. Im pretty sure I was on the 2x setting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom