Burris Fullfield E1 3-9x40 or 4.5-14x42 at 300 yards?

[MI_Grouse]

I'm looking to put a Burris Fullfield E1 on a Savage 10 Predator Hunter Max .243. This rifle will primarily be used for yotes, whitetails and punching paper from 100 out to 300 yards. Is the 3-9x40 enough magnification at the 300 yard range or should I go with the 4.5-14x42?

[Hotolds442]

Personally, I'd go with the 4.5-14x42 given the two choices. A 3-9 just can't discern a bullet on paper at 300 yards.

[Smokey262]

I would go with the 3-9x40 if you are mobile while hunting. It is plenty for shooting targets and game at your desired distances, it is smaller and lighter, and you will not have to fool around with the adjustable objective.

If you are a stand hunter over bean fields or other wide open spaces the bigger scope may work better for your needs

Neither one is going to be perfect for seeing 243 bullet holes in the black at 300 yards

Of course the other nice thing is that the 3-9x40 costs less

I have both, in the previous iteration, the Fullfield II

[barrel-nut]

I have the older 4.5-14 x 42 Fullfield 2. Really no downside to the higher magnification, and you can still go down to 4x, which is plenty low enough for low light or up close situations. There's no comparison between 9x and 14x for target shooting. Personally, I'll never buy another 3-9x scope. I consider 15x to be about the minimum magnification on the upper end for any scope I'll buy in the future. And I've not been disappointed by any of the Burris scopes I've owned, FWIW.

[MI_Grouse]

Thanks for the opinions. I think I've decided to go with the 3x9. I'm more of a hunter than target shooter so it should serve me well and I got a deal I couldn't pass up. $199 delivered to my door. Plus, I'm in the market for a scope for another rifle, so I'll probably go with the higher magnification on that one. Can never have too many scopes I guess.

[mikein]

MI_Grouse, the minimum requirement is a piece of glass on every firearm, and a backup for each tucked away where your significant other is unlikely to discover them.;)

[barrel-nut]

^ good point, mikein.

[squirrelsniper]

In the eastern states, I'm a fan of 3-9x scopes for both yotes and deer. While the greather magnification makes things appear closer, it doesn't make you hold the rifle any more steady. I'm a firm believer than if you have a scope on 9x and you can't place a shot well at 250-300yds, you probably don't have a steady enough rest to be taking the shot anyway. High magnification has its place, but I still like a good old 3-9x for normal hunting.

FWIW, I have a Fullfield E1 in 3-9x40 that I alternate between a 22LR squirrel rifle and a 243 coyote/whitetail rifle. So far it has been a good scope for the price.

[MI_Grouse]

MI_Grouse, the minimum requirement is a piece of glass on every firearm, and a backup for each tucked away where your significant other is unlikely to discover them.;)

Agreed. Would you mind speaking to my wife?

[MI_Grouse]

In the eastern states, I'm a fan of 3-9x scopes for both yotes and deer. While the greather magnification makes things appear closer, it doesn't make you hold the rifle any more steady. I'm a firm believer than if you have a scope on 9x and you can't place a shot well at 250-300yds, you probably don't have a steady enough rest to be taking the shot anyway. High magnification has its place, but I still like a good old 3-9x for normal hunting.

FWIW, I have a Fullfield E1 in 3-9x40 that I alternate between a 22LR squirrel rifle and a 243 coyote/whitetail rifle. So far it has been a good scope for the price.

Your thought process is pretty much where I ended up. I'm more of a hunter and less concerned about being able to see holes in the paper through my scope. I do really enjoy target shooting, but I have yet to commit the $'s to putting together a pure target rifle. When I do, I will go with a higher magnification scope.

Glad to hear good experiences with the Fullfield E1's. Based on everything I've read, I think I will be happy with it. Thanks to all who have replied.