Bushnell 4200, Nikon Monarch, Sightron SII 3-9x40

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version

   I need one more scope. I use them for magnified target shooting at about 20 yards, and some pest elimination at 40 yards or so. 

Dealwise the three in the Subject are about the same cost (the Nikon and Bushnell actually $25 more). I'm sort-a drawn to the Sightron more because of how people seem to react to them here than that it is $25 less. The only drawback I think is that the Sightron doesn't have AO. 

I have a Monarch 4-16x42 which seems very nice to me, and have some Bushnell scopes, but the Bushnell scopes I have are cheaper lines that I am replacing (Dawn and Dusk). So I don't have experience with the better Bushnell scopes or Sightron.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version
thebookdoc Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/16/2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 46	Quote Reply Topic: Bushnell 4200, Nikon Monarch, Sightron SII 3-9x40 Posted: September/02/2009 at 20:00
	I need one more scope. I use them for magnified target shooting at about 20 yards, and some pest elimination at 40 yards or so. Dealwise the three in the Subject are about the same cost (the Nikon and Bushnell actually $25 more). I'm sort-a drawn to the Sightron more because of how people seem to react to them here than that it is $25 less. The only drawback I think is that the Sightron doesn't have AO. I have a Monarch 4-16x42 which seems very nice to me, and have some Bushnell scopes, but the Bushnell scopes I have are cheaper lines that I am replacing (Dawn and Dusk). So I don't have experience with the better Bushnell scopes or Sightron.

danjojoUSMC Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Journeyman Joined: August/20/2009 Location: San Diego, CA Online Status: Offline Posts: 315	Quote Reply Posted: September/02/2009 at 20:40
	The general feeling on here is the Bushnell 4200 is better than those other two....tougher, brighter, affordable, and has RainguardHD. Sightron BigSky would compare more to Monarch and Bushnell 4200.

hunterco Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Apprentice Joined: March/31/2007 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 72	Quote Reply Posted: September/02/2009 at 21:59
	I think you need to go Sightron SIII if you want to compare glass. Nikon Monarch glass is VERY nice, but the Bushnell 4200 is suppose to have the same 95% light transmission. I own both Monarchs and 4200's but I would lean toward the monarch except the 4200 illuminated was better for me than the (1.5-4x24 vs Monarch african) at the price point. I think you could couldn't go wrong with either. 4200 waterproof coatings are cool, but the Nikon glass is MINT. I would take a hard look at the Turrents and what you plan to do with it because the Nikon turrets are really cool for the line-up. 4200 turrets sort of dissapoint. IMHO

thebookdoc Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/16/2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 46	Quote Reply Posted: September/03/2009 at 09:31
	The Sightron SII Big Sky and Sightron III are a lot more -- really about twice the price of the SII [not Big Sky]. True the III has the side-focus which would make it more comparable to the Monarch, but it is the Bushnell 6500 that has side focus, and that jumps in price a lot as well. I'm pretty curious as to side-by-side comparison, and might have to get a Bushnell just to see, and compare to the Sightron SII 3-12x42, Millett 4-16x56 (arrived today -- can't wait to try it), and Nikon Monarch 4-16x42. So far the Monarch is my favorite -- love the reticle that is bright even with the cap on and closed. Perhaps my palette needs some education, but the Millett seems to be a pretty good buy seeking on the lower $$ end. Beats my TASCO Silver Antler with the backward turrets hands down ;-).

fireroad Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Apprentice Joined: February/04/2009 Location: New Mexico Online Status: Offline Posts: 71	Quote Reply Posted: September/22/2009 at 00:04
	I've compared the 4200, monarch and Sightron Big Sky and the Sightron is well worth the money. The clarity is stunning and cheaper than the 6500. I needed two scopes so I bought both and will post a review shortly. http://swfa.com/Sightron-45-14x44-SII-Big-Sky-Riflescope-P11096.aspx

fireroad Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Apprentice Joined: February/04/2009 Location: New Mexico Online Status: Offline Posts: 71	Quote Reply Posted: September/22/2009 at 00:09
	Sorry, you said 3.5-9ish ... http://swfa.com/Sightron-3-9x42-SII-Big-Sky-Riflescope-P9158.aspx

thebookdoc Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/16/2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 46	Quote Reply Posted: September/22/2009 at 06:59
	Just got another Sightron 4-16x42 AO for $300 new. Not the Big Sky, but it will work better for me than the non AO model. Having looked down the tube of many scopes at this point, I like the way the Sightron fills your view. It is my favorite of the lot (which now includes Leupold, Bushnell, Nikon, Swift, Hawke, Millett). I don't think those last three get enough kudos.

fireroad Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Apprentice Joined: February/04/2009 Location: New Mexico Online Status: Offline Posts: 71	Quote Reply Posted: September/22/2009 at 13:03
	I agree, the SII BS has an amazing FOV. From what I hear the SIII is even better, would love to get my hands on one of the SIII 3.5x10-44mm tacticals.

257WM_CDL-SF Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Apprentice Joined: March/18/2009 Location: NC Online Status: Offline Posts: 180	Quote Reply Posted: September/23/2009 at 19:29
	I have to say Sightron also I have the Big sky and it amazing clarity Ive never saw a s11 though next id vote 4200

koshkin Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Optics Jedi Knight Dark Lord of Optics Joined: June/15/2004 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 5249	Quote Reply Posted: September/23/2009 at 19:40
	For shooting that close you probably need an AO or side focus. Sightron S2 and S2 Big Sky 3-9x42 do not have that feature. You would probably be better serves going with a 3-12x42AO version of either, or with a 3-9x36AO version of S2 Big Sky. ILya
	www.kitchentabletopics.com Those who are merciful to the cruel, are cruel to the merciful. Talmud

thebookdoc Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/16/2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 46	Quote Reply Posted: September/23/2009 at 20:44
	got the 4-16x42, which is AO: http://sightron.com/index.php?action=view_document&did=1201816362&cat_id=7&id=49

Randall45 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 151	Quote Reply Posted: September/24/2009 at 07:29
	The S2 is a step below the S2 Big Sky.My honest opinion is the Big Sky is a notch above the Monarch and has a slight edge over the 4200.For the money the S2 is a great deal,better than any Leupold VXII I own, half the price and a lifetime replacement warranty.