Recently inherited one in 300 win mag. Has a Leupold Vari-X II in 3-9x50, but I want something with a smaller objective. I'll use this gun primarily to hunt elk. Would a Conquest 3-9x40 be adequate for 300+ yard shots? Don't plan on taking many long range shots, but just in case, you know. Thanks for the input.

Yes a Conquest would be more than adequate for 300+ yard shots. But why spend the money? At least not until you use the one that is on it.

what is wrone with the VX1 3-9x40.
Conquest are nice but your fighting the Euro.
you could get a VX-111 2.5-8x36 or 3.5-10x40 for even money.

Hey Techsan. As you know from my rifles I also prefer a smaller objective. Yes, the Conquest would be an excellent choice. You could also replace it with a VX III 3.5-10x40. The Zeiss has a fixed 4 inch eye relief and the Leupold is variable between about 3.6 and 4.6. Take a look through both and let your eyes tell you which one you prefer.

Ken....

That's probably the only other scope I would buy besides the VXIII. I love the Ruger #1. If your's is a shooter, then enjoy a classic piece of hunting gear.

Every shooter should have a Ruger #1.

The scope that is on the rifle is fine.


I love the #1's

Sell that scope and get a Leupold 2x7x33 vari X 11, not an expensive scope, get a good used one for about $200 or less, the Leupold guarentee is so good I see no reason to buy new ones anymore....

"Every shooter should have a Ruger #1"

That's what I've been telling my wife, for years!

I do agree with your distaste for these big barrel-front scopes, I hate to have to hold my head up like an alert turkey just to see through my glass.

Sorry you had to inherit it but enjoy it anyway, that will do honor to the source.