If you look at the web site under Spec's you would notice that the 2x7 would have the larger field of view . I just took my bushnel 4x12x 40 off the 338F and installed a Legend 2x7 x33 . Should be able to pick up a running deer a lot faster with this set up.

For a 30/30 I would be going for the lower power scope .A weaver 2.5 or something within the powder of one to four about, should serve the Marlin well . The range will probably be within 170 yards .
I have an aimpoint on the 307 BB for that possable snap shot.
On the 45/70 Guide I thought the 2.5 weaver with a german post was just perfect- thou the deer would disagree.

 

Going to scope my sons gun this year with a Leupold vx1.

Good selection. I've got a VX-I 2-7x33 on my 336. I like it. My only gripe with it is that the elevation and windage adjustments don't have "clicks". Eh, I can live with that.

We hunt a lot of thick woods and just wondering if the 3x9 40mm scope would give us a bigger field of view when looking and trying to first find the deer or trying to pick up a deer running if a second shot was needed.

Actually, the 2-7x33 has a wider field of view than the 3-9x40. The greater magnification comes hand in had with narrower field of view. This is a case of: Less is More. Less magnification means More field of view.

I have used a Leupold 3-9x40 (in particular, a Vari-X III on a Win 88 in .308 Win) in the past. Nice scope, but it bit me once -- the deer was way close (less than 20 yards, I was still hunting), and I happened to have it cranked up on high-9 and all I saw was a blur of deer hide. I did end up taking the deer, but the shot was, sadly, less than optimum. It went down DRT (literally, with powder burns), but I hit high and blew up some of the backstrap. :'( I was young. Lesson learned. Keep it cranked down unless you really need it. This is part of the reason why my 336 wears the 2-7x33. The other reason is that the 40mm scope will need to be mounted with medium height rings, where the 33mm scope can be comfortably mounted with low profile rings. On a 336, lower is better when mounting scopes. That's just what the geometry of the rifle demands.

What the 40mm objective gives you is the potential for better light gathering as opposed to the smaller 33mm objective. IMHO, it isn't all that much greater, and doesn't make up for the greater weight, higher mounting, and narrower field of view. 7x on the top is still plenty enough for still hunting at ranges even further than a 336 is capable - all the way out past 300 yards. And 2x on the lower end gives you a better field of view than 3x.

 

FWIW, Some people that have bought the Redfields say they match up really well with the Leupold VX I.

 

I use a Leupold FXII 4x33 great scope. 4 power is plenty for a 100 150 yard shot, and that is probably a max shot in the woods. Don't have to worry about what the power is set on.

 

i'd vote for the 2x7, mounted on low rings

 

vaslugger,

All good advice in the above posts.
Seems 2x7x33 is better suited to the conditions your son will be hunting. A good quality 4x would be ideal as well.

 

I had a Leupold Rifleman 2-7X33 on a 336/.35 Rem. and it was a good match up in my opinion. The scope is trim enough to not overbalance the Marlin. It has more magnification than "needed" for .30-30/.35 Rem. class cartridges but I did take the time to crank it up to 9X for a 200 yd. shot at a forkhorn mule deer. Mostly I kept it set on 4X and never changed it for practice or hunting.

Leupold FXII 4X is a wonderful scope. I have two of them but they are more $$ than necessary for a servicable scope on a Marlin. Now that Redfield has come home I would strongly consider one of them if buying a scope right now.

IMO, 3-9X40 is "too much scope" to put on a Marlin: too lengthy, too big around, too powerful, too heavy. That's just me.

 

I concur with most of the other responses, the 2-7x33 will give you (your son) a wider field of view than the 3-9x40. That being said, a 1-4x20 will give you a still better FOV than the 2-7x33, both set on lowest power. To go along with the idea of a quick second shot at a moving deer, I'd also suggest you take a look at the VXI 2-7x33 SG scope (or the VXI 1-4x20 SG) with it's Heavy Duplex reticle. This bolder reticle might be something to consider.

 

Going to scope my sons gun this year with a Leupold vx1.I had a 2x7 33mm for a long time and it was great.But was thinking of getting a 3x9 40mm for his Marlin 336 30-30.We hunt a lot of thick woods and just wondering if the 3x9 40mm scope would give us a bigger field of view when looking and trying to first find the deer or trying to pick up a deer running if a second shot was needed.Just wondering how many lever gunners use a 40mm scope and how do you like it.Thanks for any help you can give. Mike

A couple of things in post jumped right out at me!

First, Do you actually LOOK for deer thru your rifle scope? ..........If you do,I hope you don't hunt where I hunt!..........I've been "glassed" in the woods by another hunter, and I can tell you THAT hunter will NEVER do that again!.......... I think he's still living the experience of the reprimand!!......Its a little uncomfortable for me to "glassed" with a rifle scope knowing the guy has a round in the chamber.......He said he wanted to see if he knew me!!!...I'd suggest you don't look for game thru a rifle scope........You should use binoculars for that.........
As far as a 3-9X in thick woods???..........I'd sooner take a 2-7X set on 2 power...........The 40MM objective IMO is waaay too much scope for a lever rifle, and will change the balance and handling characteristics of the rifle....Also, with such a large objective, you'll be forced to mount the scope high to clear the front of the scope, and doing so will create a very unreliable sight picture as your cheek will be well off the stock.........You did say thick woods,If you'd said bean fields,Id still probably say 2-7X

In woods, and swamps I think you'd be much better off with a 1-4X or even a fixed 2.5X...........The Leupold M8 2.5X has been all the scope I've ever wanted or needed on my 336 35 Rem for the last 30 years......If you research the specs of quality scopes, I think you'll find the 1-4X, the 1.5-5X or the 2.5x will have as large, or larger field of view as the 3-9x with the 40MM obj.
I hope this helps in making your choice.

Tom

 

Forget the Leupold. Get a Bushnell Elite 3200 in 2-7X32. I think it's much better than the VX-I.

And as Tomray says, please don't be glassing with your rifle. I have a nice pair of Leupold (see I have nothing against Leupold) 8X30 binoculars that are light and super clear that I use for all my glassing.

 

Thanks guys for all the feedback.I believe you are right in going with the 2x7 Leupold.I used one for 15 years on my Remington 270 and loved it.But just wanted to get the right one for his 30-30 and I do think the smaller 2x7 will look better and balance it out better.He will turn 10 this year and has been using open sights and he shoots well but it is time for a scope.We do walk thru about 1/4 mile long pasture where we do see deer pretty often to get to the woods so the higher power like that does help if a shot comes up.In the mountains we hunt we hunt a river bottom and the longest shot you will ever get is 40 yards maximum.The scope does offer a huge advantage in that it helps to not shoot a limb you might not see 25 yards away when picking your shot.I shoot a Marlin 45-70 guide gun with a Burris 2x7 scope and I would not want to have to use open sights in such thick cover.Once again thanks for all the help guys.Here in Virginia a lever action for our mountains is a great gun to use and I dont know why I ever got away from them and went to a bolt action.But after using them again for the past eight years I will never get away from them again.They shoot as good as a bolt action and just carry and handle so much better. Mike

 

You might look at the Leupold VXII 2x7x28 ultralight . Kinda spendy but I just got one for my 218Bee as it will be a more open terrain rifle and paper puncher . These are short and light and just 3in. eye relief .

 

You'll never go wrong with a leupold no matter what size it is. I would go with the 2-7X33 though on a 30-30 just because they are cheaper and it's all you need for that caliber.

 

Forget the Leupold. Get a Bushnell Elite 3200 in 2-7X32. I think it's much better than the VX-I.

And as Tomray says, please don't be glassing with your rifle. I have a nice pair of Leupold (see I have nothing against Leupold) 8X30 binoculars that are light and super clear that I use for all my glassing.

That's the scope that I put on mine and I really like it, I highly recomend it.

 

I go along the same line of thinking as Tomray. Both my 35's and a 30-30 wear K-2.5 Weavers, got a Nikon Monarch 1.5-4.5 on a BLR in 7mm-08, and a VX III 1.5-5 on my 338 MXLR. Picked up another VX III for the BLR in 358 Win. and need to get 3 more for the M375, the 444P and the 1895 GS. Gonna have to look into the VX I 1-4 SG for them. Or just put one of the other K-2.5's I picked up at gun shows, got a couple of newer ones and a couple made in Japan that still have suprisingly clear optics. One of the best deals ever at a guns show, the 2 japan K-2.5"s, a newer K-2.5, and a 2 3/4 Redfield Bear Cub all layin on the table just before tear down, the guy said I'll take $15.00 a piece for em, offered $40 for all 4 and he took it! Kept lookin over my shoulder going out the door, waiting to be stopped for stealing. ;D DP

 

Leupold 3x9

 

My 336 SS sports a Leupold 2-7x33 VXII and it is used with great success from treestands and also on driven hunts.
Sometimes the roe deer come really fast, but the magnifiction at 2 does ists job. At the 1st of may, when the roe deer season was opened my combo 336 SS, Leupold 2-7x33 VXII, Hornady LE and me got the first roe buck at 130 yard (07:30 pm).
I will tell you now what I will change in this combo - NOTHING!

 

Forget the Leupold. Get a Bushnell Elite 3200 in 2-7X32. I think it's much better than the VX-I.

And as Tomray says, please don't be glassing with your rifle. I have a nice pair of Leupold (see I have nothing against Leupold) 8X30 binoculars that are light and super clear that I use for all my glassing.

I agree on both points. I mounted one on my .45-70 Guide Gun, and I will be getting others for other Marlins. I used to prefer 1.5 - 4.5X scopes, but 2X is not much different from 1.5X at the low end, and 7X can come in real handy over the 4.5X when working up loads or if the occasional long shot opportunity occurs. As for rings, I like the Weaver Quad-Locks so much that I put up with the fact that they don't come lower than medium, and I still get a good cheek weld. If you must get low rings, the Burris Zee Rings are probably your best choice.

And, please don't ever use a mounted scope for looking for game. I've had this done to me, and it's one heck of a sphincter tightener, let me tell you. I use a pair of Nikon binoculars, and, though they are not very expensive, I like them just fine. I wish I could afford Leicas or Zeiss, but they are very expensive, too high for my budget. And Swarovski prices are stratospheric. Those are probably the ones I'd buy if I ever win the lottery though.

By the way, I wish you and your son lots of luck on your hunt next season.

 

Leupold VXIII 1.75-6 heavy duplex on mine. Excellent clarity and field of view. Great scope for 30-30, .35 Rem. ranges. Had to go withVXIII because only one offered with heavy duplex reticle. (eyes getting older).

 

Good advice here; the Leupold in low rings is an excellent scope. Here's one mounted low on a .308. The Bushnell 3200 2-7X is also a superior scope, with a good price.
Bob

 

If you look at the web site under Spec's you would notice that the 2x7 would have the larger field of view . I just took my bushnel 4x12x 40 off the 338F and installed a Legend 2x7 x33 . Should be able to pick up a running deer a lot faster with this set up.

I too have a Bushnell Legend 2x7 x33 on my 336 in .35 Rem and a Redfield 2x7 x33 on a Glenfield Model 30 in 30-30. Both offer great fields of view, good eye relief and seem to fit the 336 well. I would recommend them, and save the 3 x 9 and larger scopes for the long ranging bolt guns.

CJ