I have a couple more weeks and I could always swap to a higher mag scope, but won't if I don't need to.

You need more---9 or 12 power variable

I'd want more, too. I have used a 2.5-10 and a 3-12 and been glad I did.

My M70 300H&H has a 70's vintage 4X Leupold. I took gembok, Kudu and an assortment of lesser plains game, all at about 200yds, or so. A lot of low crawl, but worth it. Bob

I have a VXIII 2.5-8x36 on my RSM 375H&H. I set the scope on 4 power before I left home for Namibia last summer, and didn't touch it again until I got back.

I'd upgrade to a 3x9, at least, although I did most of my plains game hunting set at 3.5x. Did however, take a gemsbok at 14x at 300+ or so.

I took a 2.5-8 Conquest on my .375 H&H to Namibia. I had shots out to almost 400 yards, and never turned the power over 6X. almost all of my shots were taken on 2.5X. I've used 6X for shots on prarie dogs out to 580 on a few occasions. If your comfortable with the existing scope there really isn't any need to go any higher.

I took a 4X Leupold on my CZ 550 in 9.3X62 to Namibia last May, and it was up to all that was asked of it. My advice is don't sweat the scope, but get plenty of practice with your hunting load from field positions out to about 250 yards.

Three years ago, when I went in Namibia the first time, I had a S&B 4x on my 9.3x62, I ended with 18 animals bagged. More than enough I think.

I use a leica variable(can't remember the correct magnification)which I have used twice in Namibia and three times in zim, on my 30-06 and don't remember shooting anything with the mag set above 4

thanks guys, I guess I will shoot a little more before I go and not worry about switching the scope out.

Phoenixdawg,

Think your last post is on target, I have hunted most of my 63 years with a 4x, all over, long and short ranges, I just don't see the need for the big scopes unless you have a rest that is as steady as a bench rest. My 375 has a 1.5-5 vxiii that I used in Namibia with the longest shot at 298yds, range estimation is or can be a problem as we thought this gemsbok was 225, so hit lower than ideal, still worked though. Practice about twice as much as you think needed, do all you can to find a range where you can practice with sticks, sitting etc., versus just from the bench as many public ranges now require.

4 X will serve you well. I'd recommend 32mm+ on the objective lens. Those small straight tubes 1 X 4's with 24mm or so objective lens just don't have the field of view I want.

If a plains game animal is too far away to see it well enough to aim accurately at it when magnified four times, then it is too far away to shoot at with any magnification. Making a springbok 400 yards away look larger in your scope doesn't make it any easier to hit it. Bigger ain't always better. Four power has always been the universal power that provides an amply wide field of view for close/running game and plenty of magnification for game as far away as you want to shoot.

These aren't ground squirrels or one-inch bullseyes, you know. Leave your scope be.

In big game hunting, the animal is "big game" and all that is required is to put the cross hair on the shoulder and squeeeeeze the trigger...no need to count the ticks on his body...

I have never seen an instance wherein a 4X was not enough for big game, neither did Jack O'Connor come to think of it...

I can see an elk well enough to shoot at him at 1000 yards, but I limit my shooting to 300 yards on all big game.

The scope companies have done and excellent job of brain washing the baby boomers!

Pheonixdawg,

4X will do the trick but I've found 6X to be very useful for longer shots and cats on bait. To me a 1.75X6 or 2.5X8 are about perfect for all round African use even on 375 or larger calibers.

Mark

I have always used a 1.5-5 on my 9.3 but I'm going up to a 3-9x40 because of the range estimating reticle. I'll probably not use it over 6X. It doesn't wobble around so much at lower power.

quote:

The scope companies have done and excellent job of brain washing the baby boomers!

It seems that gun rags are complicit in this too. If it doesn't have a top end of at least 12x and a 50mm lens with a 30mm tube then it is relegated to the short distance shooting category and considered marginal for most hunting! - or thats the way it seems to be portrayed.

Most of my hunting has been done in bushveld, where I have been served well by 4x. I do think that 6x (or even 8x) is nice to have in really open country and of course higher end magnification is great for playing on the range, target shooting etc, hence the versatility of the old boring 3-9

I've hunted in Namibia twice. I've taken the 1.75-5X off my 375H&H & fitted a 2.5-8X. I find it gives me more confidence & IMO, adds to the flexibility of the rifle. Please note that I'm NOT talking of hunting the big 5 here. But hey, if you've been hunting for years with a 4X & know the trajectory of your bullets, why mess with a good thing?

IMHO the big plus of using a scope at all is, having everything you´re looking at on the same focal plane. The magnification is secondary and almost irrelevant.....unless you want to use your scope as a pair of binos. In Namibia, I find 6x better, but 4x is fine. Dont give it another thought.
boet

Ya mean you guys use scopes?!? Hell... back in the day when sheep were nervous we used open sights to 500, peeps to 1000. baby boomers, sheesh! I'm goin to have another scots whisky.

quote:

The scope companies have done and excellent job of brain washing the baby boomers!

Wow Ray, you ARE old! We baby boomers are mostly nearly 60 and can still see game with a four power scope. It's the Gen-Xer's that think a 6.5-20X with a 30mm tube, a mildot reticle, and a 56mm objective is a "brush gun scope".

I'm with the rest who say 4x is enough. I've got 3-9's on all my rifles - ALL of them, regardless of caliber, and I rarely find myself using them above 6x. I suppose if you can't hit it on 6x, the additional magnification and associated wobble from field positions will just make the shot more difficult. I would think you'd be fine shooting anything with a 4x scope.

Now that I think of it, the many 1.5-6 scopes on the market are just about perfect for any hunting situation.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Malinverni:
Three years ago, when I went in Namibia the first time, I had a S&B 4x on my 9.3x62, I ended with 18 animals bagged.

I like it.

Hunting in Namibia varies a lot. Depending on where you hunt, you can encounter wide open ranges or the thickest bush.

In any event, if a 4x scope is what is on your rifle, I'm sure you'll do just fine with it.

- mike

500grains,
excuse me but I would like to know what you like: the scope (S&B 4x), the caliber (9.3x62), the animal bagged or the all together factors? Please understand me english is not my mother language.

There are another reasons in my answer: the animals that I hunted were often in movement, too much magnification does not help, the max shooting distance that I found was about 250 meters, and 4x is enough, the closest was about 50 meters and too much magnification can be harmful. And if you are using a variable scope and you have forgotted to put it on a medium low magnification, and you are too close, you will loose time to correct it.
The things that there aren't, do no break and do not neeed to be fixed or correct. A fixed 4x is one of the best choices by my opinion

quote:

Wow Ray, you ARE old! We baby boomers are mostly nearly 60 and can still see game with a four power scope. It's the Gen-Xer's that think a 6.5-20X with a 30mm tube, a mildot reticle, and a 56mm objective is a "brush gun scope".

Well being a "gen xer" if 40 qualifies for a gen xer, I don't think I fall into the 6.5x20 scope. I will be hunting with a Kahles 1.1x4/24mm.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Malinverni:
500grains,
excuse me but I would like to know what you like: the scope (S&B 4x), the caliber (9.3x62), the animal bagged or the all together factors? Please understand me english is not my mother language.

1. The 9.3 x 62 is one of my favorite, if not my absolute favorite, hunting calibers.

2. I like to hunt for a challenge. Using a 4x instead of a 14x increases the challenge to some degree, although as you pointed out with moving animals the higher powered scope can be a disadvantage.

3. 18 animals bagged on a single safari sounds like wonderful fun.

The 375 H&H I took to Namibia has a Leupold M8-6 power scope on it. It did fine. My wife's rifle and my daughter's rifles both have 4 power scopes and they also both did fine.

Hi
may be i am too old,but i find low magnification scopes easier when shooting off-hand and or at moving targets and in hunting situation you may need to shoot off hand and 4x power is good for shooting up to 300-400 yards depending to the target's seize.
regards
yes

Us curmudgeons would rather shoot a Lion at 500 yards with a 4x than the same Lion at 10 yards with a 12 x, trust me on this one!! Down with the high end varibles..I suppose my all time favorite scope has been the 3X Leupold, hopefully someday the light bulb will get bright again and todays hunters will demand its revival, but I don't have a lot of faith in these baby boomers, their folks musta smoked to much wacky tabaccey! I'm on the run now!!

quote:

don't have a lot of faith in these baby boomers, their folks musta smoked to much wacky tabaccey!

I'm tellin' ya', Ray, you must be older than John McCain! "Baby Boomers" were the product of returning WWII vets and their brides. The "baby boomer" generation is considered to be those born from roughly 1946 to the mid 1960's. The first of us are eligible for Social Security this year.

The "baby boomers" were the ones that smoked the alternative herbal products, and their children are the "Generation X-ers", otherwise known as "Gen-X". It is typically these under-40's that are the market for outsized, over-powered optics that you mount the gun to rather than mounting on the gun.

If a person can afford to go on an expensive hunt, then adding a $500 variable scope to a rifle is no big deal.

Fixed power scopes are fine for woods hunting in West Virginia or bears over bait, but heck, you are missing a lot by not using the greater magnification on a quality scope.

I would take a 3.5 x 10 VX III Leupold on nearly any plains game hunt out there. If makes no sense to scrimp on optics..

Having taken multiple deer, antelope and a few elk(typically with one shot)with an old 4X weaver on my .300 I always made fun of those who relied on fancy assed scopes and range finders and the such. Then 3 years ago I am out in the morning deer hunting in a 4 point or better area and stumble into a group of 7 or 8 deer with the rising sun to there backs mostly does with one fork horn and one decent looking buck, for the life of me I could never get an accurate count on the big boy, I stared at him for close to 10 minutes through the old 4X and it just never got clear enough for me to take a shot and be confident I was legal. After waiting for so long I finally reached for my binos and off they went, had I the 3X9 Zeiss variable that now resides on the gun I could have most likely dialed her up just a bit with very little movement and known the truth. To this day I still don't know if I passed on a nice 4x4 or the 3X3 it sometimes apppeared to be.

Now most guys I know screw with the power too much, but if you can leave it alone except when necessary I think a variable of reasonable power is a very useful tool.

quote:

Originally posted by mho:
Hunting in Namibia varies a lot. Depending on where you hunt, you can encounter wide open ranges or the thickest bush.

- mike

I agree; most seem to think only of the wide open areas and forget about the brush. I personally used a 3-9x40, and only rarely turned it up above 6.

Just back from hunting NW of Grootfontein - the bush was so thick that 3x seemed too much at times!

As mentioned, the variety of terrain is amazing. Talk to the PH on the ground for a update on YOUR local conditions.

Rgds Ian

As a avid rifle shooter I find there is a place for low powered and high powered optics....your scope should be fine....but so would a high powered variable. I own several rifles with both styles and they each are effective tools.
Best idea is using what you are familar with.

If it's a variable it has to be a GOOD one.........

Personally, I like more magnification....but there is a trade off in weight.

500grains,
only a minimal correction, "on a single hunting trip".
Three years ago I was there with a classick TDC (Tony DaCosta) hunting package, 10 days, 10 animals.
While we were arriving at the first hunting area near Wdhk, Mabel the wife of Johan the outfitter, saw a jackal. I've been asked to fix it for free, and I did. Then while we were on hunting in Kalahari, Johan asked to me to shoot a steenbock for the skin and while we were hunting the blesbock I decided tht the one that I have already shot, was fine but not enough and we hunted another one.
At the end of my 10 days hunting trip I was at 13 animals bagged not counting a big bird that I took for meat.
Then I went north, Oshakati, to meet Oom Flip, an AR Member very active at that time, and he asked to me if I've bagged all tha animal I wanted. I said that the only one that I had not occasion to shoot was the warthog. For this reason we went to one of the family farms where, while we were chatting of hunting, guns&ammo, beer and women, an old Faco arrived to drink and was definively knocked down. 14. Time to have something for dinner and we went to the second farm, where we spent a pair of hour hunting Duiker and steenbock for meat. In the night with the lamp. I do not love too much this kind of hunt, but in less than an hour we took 4.
As I told 18 animals bagged

500grains
only a little correction, in only a single hunting trip.
Three years ago I was in Namibia for a 10 days 10 animals, but I finished with 13 because a jackal for free, a steenbock for skin and a blesbock, because the one I had already bagged was not fine enough.
Then i spent some days too meet Oon Flip, an Ar Memeber. We spent a day visiting his two farms, both little for the Namibian standards, but big enough to bag a warthog, a steenbuck and three duiker for meat.