Ok guys what scopes do you have on your 300 mag?

4-12 X 40 LR Leupold

6x36 leupold--Never needed anything bigger.

3-9x50 Leupold VariX II, installed on a Browning A-Bolt II in .300WM, both new, back in 1996. It has taken some 60-70 African species as well as NA species. Never a problem. BTW, you don't need the 50mm objective.

i had a Leupold 3-9x40 on it.

3.5X10X44 Zeiss Conquest

Leupold 3X9X50...best possible scope for your needs. I have two .300s and each is scoped similarly. One has been used on 3 hunts in Africa. The other has taken bear and sheep in Alaska.

quote:

Originally posted by LionHunter:
3-9x50 Leupold VariX II . . . BTW, you don't need the 50mm objective.

Truer words were never written.

I've got a Leupold 3-9 Century (same as a VX-II) on my Sako .300. I like the 300-400-500 yard reference dots and the "old fashioned" gloss finish.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
3.5X10X44 Zeiss Conquest

+1

6x18 vxll. with the Long range varmint duplex. It's a cheap scope, but the LRVD works with the 180 grain bullet at 3100 fps.

Sight it in at 300 and all the aim points to 600 are right on at 18 power.

Put a Stoney Point finger adjustable dial on the elevation knob and your set.

Mine wears an older Vari-X II 6-18 AO.

All my 300's carried VxII 3x9,never a problem!

Swarovski 2,5-10x42 on my Blaser R93.
Leupold Vari X-III 3.5-10x50 on my Rem Sendero.

2.5 X 10 X 42 IOR. I second that you don't need a 50 mm obj.

+1 Andre, good choice.

Swaro 2,5-10x42 on my R93 also. It's not intended for night hunting anyway, Waidmannsheil, Dom.

3X9 Kahles

6x18 redfield on the m70..... 3x9 redfield on the BAR....

3x9x40 - most popular scope in america, and for good reason.

I have the Leupole 3X9X40 on my 300 Win Mag.

On my 300 Ultra Mag I have a Burris 4X16X50

Mine wears a Varix2 3x9x40 on a 30-338.
Works for me.

I should have mentioned that my IOR is FFP. I don't think you can get a better application. I love the FFP for hunting.

I have a S&B Zenith 2.5-10x56 with flashdot nr. 7 on my Sako 85 Laminated 300 win mag.

3x9x40mm Nikon nMonarch.

Leupold Vari X-III 3.5-10x40mm on a Winchester 70, .300 Wby

3x9x40 Zeiss conquest, and I like it better than the 2 Leupolds I have and it was cheaper.

Nikon 4.5x14x40 Buckmaster on a 300 WBY Vanguard

zeiss 3-12x56 victory on sauer 202.
3-9 leupold are boring.

For cheap use a Nikon 3x10 with the new side focus feature.For a great scope a Zeiss Conqust.

Swarovski 2.5-10x42 w/4A ill. ret.

All my rifles have 3x9x40's either in Leupold VariX III or II until a year ago. I have started useing the Nikon Monarch (Old Style) 3x9x40 on my last 4 rifles and like them just as good but the Nikon doesn't have as long of eye relief as the Leupold.

Any good scope is normaly made a great scope or a piece of shit by mounting it in junk rings/bases or not doing the job of (Mounting) properly.

Zeiss, 1.5-6x42

quote:

Originally posted by speed:
3-9 leupold are boring.

You'd be bored to tears 11 times over here in that case.

3X9 leupold,
VX3 if you are hunting, if just wanting tiny groups on paper get a varmint scope.
...tj3006

My carrying rifle, a Win M70, wears a Weaver Grand Slam 3x10. My long range gun with the heavy Krieger barrel has a Burris Signature 6.5x20.

quote:

3x9x40 Zeiss conquest, and I like it better than the 2 Leupolds I have and it was cheaper.

I have both scopes - you don't need more than 9x magnification.
I have found that 6x works the best for me shooting off hand.
Try locating your target at 6x and 9x and see what is the quickest - larger FOV.
At 6 x my eye gets a full circle view easier than at 9x.
At 6x you have a larger exit pupil and seems just ideal.
I go by what gives me the best view when I shoulder my rifle quickly.
9x and more is for long shots over a dead rest when you have plenty of time.
I hunt mostly between 3x and 6x depending on terrain.
For busveld conditions 3x is needed to gain FOV to track a moving herd easier.

I like the Conquest a bit better for its sharper image.
You also have constant eye relief with the Conquest.
So your head position does not have to shift based on magnification.
The Leopold looks better.

Warrior

Hey Oldun, If you are simply asking to find out what other people use, then you can see all the variation.

Most of the responders are obviously Hunting Game much closer with their 300WinMag, than I did with mine, so they are using less Power. Likewise, I believe there are only two mentions about the type of Reticle the responders use and no mention of Crank Turrets. (Perhaps that is covered in the Model descriptions and I just do not recognize the shorthand.)

Most seem to have shorter Legal Hunting Hours than what I'm used to, so they are happy with smaller Objective lenses. I normally prefer to Hunt overcast days immediately after a rain at the extremes of the Hunting Hours, when Large Objectives allow you to see Game that simply can't be seen without either the Scope or Binoculars.

On Deer culls, if you do not have enough Power, you are sure to end up Killing(or wounding which some think is fine) Spikes that appear to be Does using weenie Power scopes.

I saw one mention of an Illuminated Reticle(though there may have been more) and I do appreciate one that is done correctly. They can be too bright at the Lowest setting which will create Night Blindness. The ones done correctly are absolutely amazing in low light conditions. And if not Illuminated, then the HEAVY Duplex works better than anything else - up close.

I really like Mil-Dot Reticles, but I'd be the first to say they are not the best Reticle for most folks. And I prefer an Illuminated Mil-Dot.

Side Aperture Adjustment is much MUCH easier and quicker to use afield, but I just heard yesterday that it can create a problem getting the rifle into some Cases. It is not a problem with the Gun Cases I use, but it is something to be aware of. Aperture adjustment is not needed by most folks who keep shots relatively close, so a Fixed Aperture is just fine.

It seems the Lens Coatings get more high-tech all the time. You can see things much easier with even the inexpensive scopes of today than the very expensive scopes of just a few years ago. This is always difficult for me to sort out, because they all seem to use something just a bit different and unless you actually get to look through one in low light, none of the marketing bologna means anything.

Lots of excellent scopes to choose from.

1.5x5 always worked for me on a 300Winnie. For culling deer on cloudy days in carolina, a 300WM wouldn't be my first choice or even among my first several choices.

quote:

a 300WM wouldn't be my first choice or even among my first several choices.

Agreed, a 300 Win Mag is not what I would call an ideal deer rifle. Its over the top, there are many less powerful cartridges that would cause less meat damage. My choice ... the 7x57 mm !!!

Warrior

quote:

unless you actually get to look through one in low light, none of the marketing bologna means anything.

quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:

quote:

a 300WM wouldn't be my first choice or even among my first several choices.

Agreed, a 300 Win Mag is not what I would call an ideal deer rifle. Its over the top, there are many less powerful cartridges that would cause less meat damage. My choice ... the 7x57 mm !!!
Warrior

Agreed! My deer rifle is a 7x57R, however, I have just aquired a 300 for taking a crack at Sambhur. Whilst the x57 is adequate I wanted a cartridge with a little more authority for such use. At the moment the 300 has a 1.75-6x Leupy on it and it will probably stay there.

As to meat damage, whilst I'm in broad agreement with you, loosing a bit of meat to a powerful cartridge is preferable to loosing a whole deer by using an inadequate one.