HatchieLuvr

I really don't think that it does, not between a 2x7 and a 3x9 of like quality on a regular sized big game rifle. Realistically what you can shoot at with a 9x you can also do with a 7x. Obviously the 3x9 is the bread and butter of the industry still (tho 3 or 4x12s have made BIG inroads over the last 10-15yrs in the American market). Now if he were asking to compare a 2x7 to a 4x12+ for "universal big game hunting" on most long action calibers then yeah I'd say go for the bigger scope.

About the only thing you'll give up on a 7x33 vs a 7x40 is field of view, but at 250yds a 7x or a 9x for that matter will have PLENTY fov. (Again, all other things about the scopes quality and build being the same) For some reason alot of folks think a scope is a poc or they are handycapping themselves if they dont have an objective bell the size of a coffee can on their gun and enough magnification to see into tomorrow with. Having to crane your neck to get proper eye alignment on todays superbig scopes can potentially reduce your accuracy because it doesn't assure a proper cheek weld on the stock. (Thus the reason Leupold released the L series scopes a few years ago!)

Again, on a full size rifle there probably isn't enough difference between either 2x7 vs 3x9, but if you are asking about small guns or trying to shed every possible ounce then don't hesitate to look at the quality 2x7 or 2x8s out there today. It's still awfully easy to shoot deer at 200yds with a "lowly" fixed 4x today so anything above that is gravy!
HL

Mojotex

The 40 mm is a very popular size. In my opinion the bell is not so large that it has to be mounted too high to allow a shooter's cheek to say down on the stock, helping with steadying the long gun. 1.5-6, 2-7, 3-9 ... all work pretty well for both woods and open terrain hunting. I don't think you could go bad wrong with either choice as long as you stay in the higher quality scopes. Higher end variables with 32 mm's bell are excellent, bright, crisp scopes. I think that if you went with the 32 mm, and bought a low-end scope, that you'd be very disappointed with low light performance and longer range detail. I use the high end stuff most of the time, but I am convinced that there are several very good scope choices in the $350-$500 range. Everyone has a favorite maker .... my favorites in this $$$ range would be one of the Leupold, Conquest or Elite lines. I have has excellent results with all 3. If you are going to be "woods" hunting most of the time, I'd stay with the lower .... 2-7, 1.5-6, etc. range rather than any higher.

trigger45

2-7x33 makes more sense. most hunters i know put 4-12x50 with adj. obj. on there marlin .30-30win lever actions and hunt with it on 12x. just dont shoot enough to know what there doing.

nchawkeye

Problem is the OP might be a 14 year old wanting to put a scope on a Ruger .22, without asking you don't know...

Nowhere in the original post is big game or centerfire rifle mentioned...

He could also be putting this on a .243 or a 25-06 that could be used for groundhogs in the spring and deer in the fall...

I learned a few decades ago to get all the facts before I started spouting out my opinion...

HatchieLuvr

Easy nc, he asked a simple question of 2x7 vs 3x9. I still say that regardless of his application, if those are his 2 chosen options then either will work for him in essentially ANY situation! I have a 3x9x40 on a air rifle and one of my .22s likewise I have smaller scopes on bigger rifles. If he had asked for a comparison between say a 2x7 vs a 6x24 then yeah I can see where we might need to know what gun and intended purpose did he have in mind before recommending one over the other?

In 2+ decades of selling guns and scopes I learned that I always listened to the customer but when they ask for help/advice I'd shoot them straight and give them my .02c worth based on realworld experience, not what the latest "expert" on some gun site or magazine said to get based on what he was being paid to say. The industry has done the average outdoorsman a GREAT injustice over the last 20 years. Everyone, especially beginners or "part-timers" are guilted into believing they aren't as good or they can't perform if they don't have the latest, greatest, biggest, baddest bla bla bla. It's all about marketing and seldom about effectiveness or selling someone only what they need!!! As is ever the case today with everyday life, the hunting/fishing industry has overly complicated our beloved past time with all their marketing, gizmos, contraptions, gimmicks and outright CRAPOLA. (That and dealing with "Christmas rushers" is why I NO LONGER miss being in the outdoor biz!) Technology HAS given us a few good, solid basics that DO help. But past that, ALOT of it is just wind whistled up our butts that sadly only confuses the beginners and part-timers... and annoys a lot of us "old timers"!


HL

cjwink

Also keep in mind that the higher the magnification, the less light that comes in.. So if you crank it up to 9 on a 40mm, you may not gather as much light as a 7 power on 32.

Palehorse

If you are, as your name suggests, a Louisiana Bayou Hunter, then by all means a 2-7x, maybe even a 1.5-4.5. Hunting in bayou and thick immature forest in the eastern US requires FOV at low power to be able to pick up game quickly.

freebirdfb

The 3-9 is popular for a reason, and it gets the job done. Go shopping and pick the model that suites your hunting style. Like others said you might only need a 1-4x.
I have come up with a general rule. Rifles used at 100 yards or less are open sights. Anything that I might use over 100 yrds has a scope.
I have 2 rifles with a scope but one of them doesn't count (its on a youth sized 22 lr w/ original front sight missing.) The other rifle with a scope is a general purpose rifle with a 4-12x44. I have a 3-9x40 Prostaff for my inline that was a gift. When I was asked about scope advise, I said that the 3-9 was good for general use. If I had known that it was for me, I would have sugested a peep sight instead. The prostaff is sitting in the box because I eventually took it off and replaced it with the open sights.

CT-Hunter

I have glass on all my rifles and slug gun because of aging eyes. I have taken my fair share of deer. at ranges from 50 - 250 yards. With one or two exceptions I have always used the lowest setting. It is quicker to pick up a deer and hold steady on the target at lower power with its wider field of view and stability of the cross hairs.

Most of my glass is Leupold (VarX - 3, VX-3) but the last scope I bought was a Redfield 2 * 7. I am very happy with it, took a der at 75 and one at 125 yards at 2 power. . My suggestion is to get what you are comfortable with and what you are likely to use. If you can save a few bucks, spend the savings on ammo and practice, practice, practice.

jerry d

Exactly..... that's the first thing to ask. Then like someone previosly posted, fit the scope to the rifle.Personally i feel too many people over scope,especially the woods whitetail hunter.