Bigger advantage in a VX-3i Leupold riflescope?

[WVgoodguy22]

I finally have narrowed my scope choice for my Savage Model 110 Long Range Hunter in .300 WSM that I bought last September to two Leupold VX-3i scopes. One being a 4.5-14x50 CDS-ZL2 (30 mm) Side Focus with Duplex reticle and the other the 4.5-14x40 CDS-ZL2 (30mm) Side Focus with Windplex reticle. When I first bought my rifle I added a 20 MOA rail as well, but I am sure that I don't need that rail for shooting ethical hunting distances, even though it would be fun to try and hit steel at a 1000. I with the advance of many of you knowledgeable and helpful folks as well as my brother who got a mule deer in Idaho last Oct. at 400 yards with a 4-12x40 VX-Freedom with a Tri-MOA reticle, have reigned way in my thought of having to have a 18+ large end magnification scope.
Anyway my question is which would be more advantageous the larger objective with the duplex reticle or the 40 mm objective with the Windplex reticle? I know there is a 1.4 ounce weight savings with the smaller belled scope to go on my already 8.4 lb rifle.
My rifle currently has a Redfield Revenge Hunter 4-12x42 scope that is good scope (and has taken many whitetails on my brother's gun) that was on my brother's .270 before he switched it out for the VX-Freedom and gave the scope to me. I am thinking of getting one of the VX-3is and putting that scope on my .17 HMR (I know 12 power is too much for most if not all rimfires) which would be an upgrade over a hand me down Tasco. Any advice would be appreciated.

 

[utah400elk]

I have used the 40 mm objective on most of my hunting rifles. in fact, I have the VX 3I 4.5-14.40 on three of my hunting rifles. I talked with Leupold tech several years before and he had suggested that the 40mm would be a great scope. I am trying to remember his exact explanation but it was basically that the 40mm would do everything my 40 year old eyes could handle. I am now much closer to 50 and it they are/have been great. I have never felt I needed a bigger objective.

I have purchased a few VX5HD for the lower magnification and those scopes are a huge leap up from VX 3I.

 

[LaSportsman]

I moved from 50mm down to 40's to get a lower mount and better alignment with cheek weld. Seems 40mm is preferred by most hunters. I have VX-5HD 3-15x44. I like having the side parallax. I also like windplex reticle.

 

[huntandfly]

VX-3i with the Zero Lock now only allows one turn of the dial which is a pretty big restriction if you want to shoot at the range out past 800 yards for most calibers. It is perfect for hunting in my opinion. I have a 40mm and 50mm both with windplex reticles (which I recommend). I like them both, but definitely prefer the 40mm for hunting as it is more compact and lighter

 

[riley]

Go with the 40 with windplex,
smaller ,
Lighter, ( only a little but it all adds up)
And windplex is one more little piece that could help you make a good shot.

 

[WVgoodguy22]

Thanks everyone for your experienced advice. I too would prefer the better reticle over bigger objective, I have never tried a 50 so I wasn't sure of the optical difference in an 10mm larger objective. My brother likes the windage marks too even though it is a CDS "Click Dial Shoot" but it doesn't take in account the wind.
I really would love to get the VX-5HD 3.5-15x44 like many who have it and praise its worth. It is my top choice. I am not sure my girlfriend would let me take that big of a jump in price, that chunk of change difference. I have shot though a 3.5-10x40 on my neighbor's Christensen Arms .450 Bushmaster rifle and it was sweet especially with that fire dot. I don't hunt enough to validate the price, even though I really need to change that.
I heard that it was only one rotation, thanks for letting me know how it would affect me if I wanted to push my .300 WSM and learn how to shoot steel that far. Not sure I would want to develop a long range target load and a hunting load too. I am having some issues with my hunting load development, but I took a break and want to get back into it soon.

 

[elkhnter]

Get the VX5HD and dump the girlfriend. You’ll never regret doing both 5 years from now.

 

[LaSportsman]

Contact @schmalts and ask for a quote. He's a sponsor on the site and will get you a great price on Leupold

 

[EastTNHunter]

Lower mounting=better cheek weld=more accurate, comfortable, and quicker target acquisition

 

[44hunter45]

I moved from 50mm down to 40's to get a lower mount and better alignment with cheek weld. Seems 40mm is preferred by most hunters. I have VX-5HD 3-15x44. I like having the side parallax. I also like windplex reticle.

+1

I have a 4,5-14x50 side focus duplex on a m77 Ruger. Love The scope but now need add on cheek pad. More stuff to go wrong and more weight.
Wishing I had gone 40ish.

 

[noharleyyet]

The 4.5x14x40 (30mm) SF WPlex Double stop would be the perfect scope were it Firedot (in Green) optional.

 

[ImBillT]

Leave your 20 MOA base on. Being able to zero at 100yds a little below the mechanical center of your scope is nothing but an advantage.

 

[Boarmaster]

I like a 40 for a hunting rifle. I had a few 50s but have traded them off for 40s. I view it as a personal preference if your not trying to keep weight down or working up a lightweight rifle.

 

[WVgoodguy22]

+1

I have a 4,5-14x50 side focus duplex on a m77 Ruger. Love The scope but now need add on cheek pad. More stuff to go wrong and more weight.
Wishing I had gone 40ish.

That does make more sense, a 50 is good a on target rifle especially with all that mirage, and you are not worried about weight, etc... My rifle is the new Savage Model 110 Long Range Hunter in 300 WSM (that I got for $565 down from $900) and they come with the Accufit stock with different length of pull shims and different height interchangeable cheek riser pieces. It helps fit me to whatever scope I have, but I have the second tallest one on a 40 mm and either low or medium rings I am not sure which one of the top of my head. My brother likes his 4.5-14x40 VX-3i CDS that he now has on his previous gen M110 Long Range Hunter in .300 Win Mag after not being able to get that 7mm Rem Mag that he had upgraded with muzzle brake, pillar and glass bedded and limbsaver butt pad to shoot any loads consistantly. I wouldn't think 1.6 oz would be that big of a difference though, but that downfall you mentioned definitely makes sense.

 

[WVgoodguy22]

Leave your 20 MOA base on. Being able to zero at 100yds a little below the mechanical center of your scope is nothing but an advantage.

I am going to, that combined with the 30mm tube will give me the ability to squeeze a little bit more adjustment out of my system. Thank you for that confirmation and reasoning.

 

[WVgoodguy22]

I like a 40 for a hunting rifle. I had a few 50s but have traded them off for 40s. I view it as a personal preference if your not trying to keep weight down or working up a lightweight rifle.

My rifle is 8.4 lbs, yes I shouldn't be looking to add more weight if I can save some with a great all around scope size like the 4.5-14x40. Even though I have shot my Dad's Winchester M70 in .300 WM and some other friends or family rifles, I have only really hunted with a late 90s Savage M110 .270 Win with a wood stock for 20 years. I wanted to try something different and add another rifle so I figured a .30 cal would do the trick, I have always thought that since the .300 WSM came out that it was a interesting round. I was considering other .30 cals including the classic standards in .308 and .30-06.
There are two schools of thought, one being a heavier platform to help with a magnum cartridge recoil or go lighter weight to make it easier to pack. The one I had been looking out forever was the Tikka T3x in .300 WSM which is 6.5 lbs, but I never got to try and shoot a lighter rifle in that caliber, plus I couldn't pass up the deal ($300 off original MSRP) in the Savage LRH, so I went that route. Hopefully I don't regret it and go back to the drawing board and get that Tikka or lighter weight rifle in say .308.
Thanks for the insight, I have decided that it would be better to get the better reticle in the smaller profile, lighter weight scope.

 

[mrjashu]

+1 (or 2 or 3?) on going with the 40mm objective. For a hunting rig the lower you can get that scope down the easier it's going to be for you to use. The 20moa base is going to raise the back of the scope up more than a flat rail, so having the small objective will help you keep it low.
That's the way I look at it anyway.
I've shot (and handloaded for) the 300wsm quite a bit. It's a fun little cartridge, but I peronsally wouldn't want to shoot one very much in a lightweight setup without a muzzle brake. I'd guess you're probably going to end up around 10.5lbs which is not bad at all. That little extra bit of weight will help you shoot it better.
Let us know how it goes!

 

[WVgoodguy22]

+1 (or 2 or 3?) on going with the 40mm objective. For a hunting rig the lower you can get that scope down the easier it's going to be for you to use. The 20moa base is going to raise the back of the scope up more than a flat rail, so having the small objective will help you keep it low.
That's the way I look at it anyway.
I've shot (and handloaded for) the 300wsm quite a bit. It's a fun little cartridge, but I peronsally wouldn't want to shoot one very much in a lightweight setup without a muzzle brake. I'd guess you're probably going to end up around 10.5lbs which is not bad at all. That little extra bit of weight will help you shoot it better.
Let us know how it goes!

Thank you very much for those points, they make quite a bit of sense. I will keep the rail on it, the scope on it now shoots certain loads accurately after we remembered that it was there when making our initial adjustments.

That is great, I am glad that it has kept up enough popularity with hunters and even long range target shooters that manufacturers have much more ammo available for it than when I first got interested in the .308 to the .300 Win Mags .30-06 aka the .300 WSM. Heck as you know brass isn't that hard to find at least when online shopping if I wanted to go that route and get new brass instead of once fired. I have reloaded some for it, but the results were sporadic with the Nosler 165 grain ABs in front of IMR 4350 and H380 that I have tried. I do have some 150 grain Barnes TTSX that was highly recommended to me and I bought 180 Accubonds and a couple other powders like H4831sc, IMR 4064 and Winchester 760.
Thanks that is what I am hoping for, the Long Range Hunter has that muzzle brake to go along with that extra pound of weight over most rifles. When I first picked it up I was surprised that it didn't feel as heavy as I was thinking a rifle with a heavier 26 in barrel would be. But of course when comparing to say a Savage 12 FV in 22-250 there is a whole lot less metal in the barrel since it is a .30 cal vs .22 cal. I might have had to spend an extra $300 or whatever it would cost to have a brake put on that Tikka for me to help mitigate that. I know when my brother put a brake on his .7mm Rem Mag and a 1" limbsaver pad it ended up feeling like the recoil of a .243. Sadly he is going to be selling that gun sometime soon.
I will keep everyone updated if and when I make that move for that VX-3i 4.5-14x40 SF (30mm tube) scope from Leupold.
Thanks again.

 

[std7mag]

I'd leave the 20 MOA base on.
I'd also ditch the CDS. But that's just me.
I prefer MOA. Both reticle and dials.

I now have 3 of the Redfield Revenge scopes and love them!
While not as clear optics wise as the Leupolds, i use the built in rangefinding often.
Mine are the 4-12X40 Varmint reticle, and range anything from gophers, coyotes, deer, and elk out to 600 yards.
They have worked well for me!

 

[Gila]

I am looking at the new tikka veil in 300 wsm. I have been hunting with a tikka in .270 with a 50mm 6x16 illum MOA. I have the ballistic profile loaded into the rangefinder that spits out range and MOA so it is just a matter of lasing the target and using the recticle for elevation. I like the capability of diailing up elevation and windage if I want to. Having an illum reticle with large field of view has made a big difference for me during low light. I do not carry a camp on my back so wieght of the rifle isn't an issue for me. If I do buy a 300 wsm the new scope will be the same model that I have on the .270. Shopping for a scope is good thing......have fun!