Mojotex

As you can tell the opinions are about split 50/50, and probably will remain about that through out the comment string. The truth is that either will work fine. I have hunted very little where 300-500 yard shots were even a possibility. Most of my hunting is far tighter than that, with a 200 yard shot being "long". My vote - 3-9x40.

As already mentioned adequate eye relief is critical, as are clarity, a chrisp image and peroirmance in very low light. Buy the best that you can manage. You will not ever regret having done so.

redgreen

I use 6.5X20X50 or better Leupold. My shots tend to be long, and the greater magnification is perfect when I go prone.

Murdy

I have mostly 3x9s; one 2x7; and a 1.65x5 on my ML. I like the wider field of view at low magnification. Maybe if you were planning on shooting 400 yards a 4x12 would make sense, but in my opinion, for most situations, I'd go with the 3x9.

Tnhunter444

I pulled up the specs for the Diamondback models you mentioned. For me neither would be a choice as the eye relief (as some have already mentioned) on both is well under what I would put on any .300mag. FWIW, I happen to own four rifles in .300mag in one form or another. With eye relief as low as 3.1" and 3.3" both those scopes are a no-go for me.

I'd suggest a Leupold VX1 or Rifleman in 3-9x40 instead, for just a bit more $$. They have eye reliefs of no less than 3.7" and up to over 4" depending on what power it is set on.

Bbj270

my leupolds are vx1 or the older vari x 2 scopes.I killed a deer at 495 yards no proplem with a 3-9x40 scope vx1 on a 7mm rem mag. have a 4-12 Leupold on a 35 whelen.

Murdy

A Minox ZV-3 would run about the same price and has more eye relief.

jandrey

What about the red field revolution? I've heard pretty good things about them and I think they're made by leupold and have the same eye relief.

jandrey

As far as eye relief goes is there much of a difference between 3.3" and 3.7"...that's just the distance from the scope your eye can be to see the whole view with no black spots in the scope, correct? Do I need a greater eye relief due to the 300 win mag caliber and it's recoil so I don't smack my eye when I shoot or is that not the reason. Thanks

Bbj270

the redfield revolution is equal to the leupold rifleman. I prefer the vx 1 guide has the vx1 3-9x40 for $199.
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/c...p=WX2&i=235375

Lunkerdog

As far as scopes go I've always been a fan of Leupold, but these days there are many good choices when it comes to optics.

One factor many don't consider when buying a scope is the exit pupil in low light conditions. You can always use a sun shade in bright conditions.

A 40mm objective lens will give you a 13.3 mm exit pupil at 3 power, it's reduced to a 10 mm exit pupil at 4 power.

If you go to a 50mm objective lens at 3 power you will have a 16.6mm exit pupil, and a 12.5 exit pupil at 4 power

The differences in exit pupil can be a huge factor in low light conditions. The average human eye will have a 5 to 7mm pupil in low light conditions. A large exit pupil from your scope is a great advantage.

Exit pupil is just one thing to consider when buying a scope, but IMHO it's one of the main things to consider when making the choice of power, and objective lens.

http://www.shootingtimes.com/2011/01...cpupil_061907/