Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Nikon Monarch v. Weaver Grand Slam? |
Post Reply |
Author | ||
lewwetzel
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Location: Central OH Status: Offline Points: 143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: August/02/2010 at 00:12 |
|
5-20 X 44, 6-20 X 40, resectively. Wondering which would be best scope for a Cooper 21 Varminter. Am now partial to side focus (Nikon) and the larger objective might be a plus; little lighter weight and lower price and same quality glass puts the Weaver in contention. As near as can tell, the fat Monarch eyepiece is about the same dia. as the big black power ring on the GS, (and possibly just as ugly to some; I don't mind with aesthetics of either, in fact, the GS in silver if still available, might add a little "pizazz" to that rifle - or it might just look weird.) Am sure the Weaver focuses down to lower yardage of the two. Anybody own either one?
|
||
VYD
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/02/2010 Location: TX Status: Offline Points: 96 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I'll just state my opinion so take it as it is, an opinion. Nikon wins because it's a side focus model and lifetime warranty no questions asked. Weaver has a limited lifetime, if I am not mistaken.
Both are great glass. Good luck.
|
||
JLud
Optics Journeyman Joined: January/30/2010 Location: Bettendorf, Iow Status: Offline Points: 670 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I have a Monarch 4x16 with the UCC and have to say a bit dissapointed with it. I own a Buckmaster 6-18 and a Prostaff 3-9 as well. To be honest, I like the 3-9 the best out of the bunch. Price I paid for the Monarch isnt worth the difference I see in the Prostaff.
Side focus is great though, cant go wrong with that.
|
||
That thing on the left....my old ride, some days I miss her.
|
||
Longarm
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/12/2010 Location: Gilmer, Tx Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
i was disappointed in my Monarch. I will never by nikon again.
|
||
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Why may I ask, were you disappointed?
|
||
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Really? Thats bizarre! I have had both a Prostaff and a NEW 4-16X Monarch and the differences favored the Monarch by a good margin.
Not disputing your findings, but just saying. Edited by cheaptrick - August/14/2010 at 12:39 |
||
cyborg
Optics God Gaseous Clay Joined: August/24/2007 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 12288 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Prostaff is a good little scope, but my Monarch (I do own both) takes the prize, by a large margin.
|
||
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other
An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects. OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause. Cyborg |
||
lewwetzel
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Location: Central OH Status: Offline Points: 143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Looked at a Nikon today, intending to buy. But was taken aback by the rather "plasticcy" look/feel of it; didn't seem to have the quality feel of my lower-end SF Buckmasters. I'm sure it'll get the job done, though. Also, the large-dia. eyepeice and fairly thick reticle were neg's. Why can't Nikon put a simple ballistic reticle with hash marks (instead of the controversial BDC) as another option on their scopes?
|
||
Longarm
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/12/2010 Location: Gilmer, Tx Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
cyborg
Optics God Gaseous Clay Joined: August/24/2007 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 12288 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Yes the Banner wins against the Prostaff, but not by leaps and bounds.
The Buckmaster is better than the Banner as well.
The Bushnell Trophy is about on the same playing field as the Buckmaster.
|
||
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other
An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects. OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause. Cyborg |
||
lewwetzel
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Location: Central OH Status: Offline Points: 143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
With all due respect, I'd rank my Trophy a couple clicks lower than the Buckmaster. Also, see SWFA Ratings Scale, which puts the 3200 Elite equal with that Nikon. I have a 3200 7-21 40mm and, frankly am not that impressed...figure in the lack of SF, 1/4" adjustments vs 1/8 on my 6-18X BM, etc. and, even if the glass is equal - which is arguable, the Nikon looks better to my eyes - and the Bushnell lags behind. You'd have to go to at least a B-nell Legend to get fully multi-coated lenses. However, those Trophys are good scopes, especially at what appears to be a lowered price for 4-12 AO, including with DOA reticle.
|
||
lewwetzel
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Location: Central OH Status: Offline Points: 143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Duh...just realized that Bushnell must've dropped the Legend line. Shame. Can't seem to get straight answer regarding lense coatings on the newer Trophys, are they fully multi, ot not?
|
||
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The only real knock I have on the new Monarch is the really large 4x ocular housing, which can be a pain in the arse if not mounted on a suitable rifle. Rifles with a high bolt throw, much like my CZ, would not fair well with a new Monarch.
As far as the scope goes, I love the Monarch and the BDC reticle.....
|
||
Poodleshooter1
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 116 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I've also been thinking about getting one of the 5-20x Monarchs to replace an older taiwanese 6-24xAO Tasco on my AR varmint build (prairie dog and groundhog rifle). I finally got my hands on the Monarch 4-16x and 5-20x yesterday while in a high priced sporting goods store,and was able to compare it with some 4.5-14x buckmasters (I have one,and am very happy with it). Oddly,I was a bit disappointed with the 3 or 4 Monarchs I looked through when I compared them with the Buckmasters. I spent a good bit of time adjusting the side parallax and fast focus to get all of the scopes as tuned in as I could for a good comparison. At 14x, the Monarchs seemed to darken appreciably,whereas I saw no such distortion on the Buckmaster tested right next to it. Very odd since the Monarchs were 42 and 44mm respectively, while the Buckmaster was only 40mm. I did note that the Monarch seemed to render colors a bit more brilliantly at lower powers (that's probably the difference in the coatings), but I was unable to determine a difference in resolution when reading printed material at a distance through the scopes. They seemed about equal for those purposes.
All in all,I was a bit disappointed,as I had really gotten pumped for getting the 5-20x Monarch. My test wasn't exactly scientific, but I expected more of a difference for $150 extra beyond the price of a SF Buckmaster. I will note that I think my Buckmaster 4.5-14x has been a fantastic deal. It tracks repeatedly,even when dialing for distance between 100 and 300yds. I'm now considering just going with the Buckmaster 6-18x to fill the niche. |
||
lewwetzel
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Location: Central OH Status: Offline Points: 143 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I see your point, PS'er. I'm holding off on that Monarch for now and am re-evaluating my 6-18X Buckmaster. The only real gripe I have with the 2 (other is 4.5-14) Buckmasters I have is that sometimes-irritating "tunnel vision"/small f.o.v. Might be more willing now to trade off some of that for the excellent tracking and side-focus mechanics, and decent glass they posess - plus, they mount easily on about any rifle and with low or medium rings. I did a comparison test with my 6-18 and a Bushnell 4200 6-24X 40mm SF this evening by dragging 2 rifles out in a field and comparing the two scopes mounted on them. Results left me wondering why the Elite is reputed to be the better scope. Other than the more compact size/weight of the B-nell, nothing I could discern - detail, light-gathering (the 4200 wasn't even close in that area,) ease of focusing, etc. - made the Bushnell worth the extra money.
|
||
Poodleshooter1
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 116 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
A small field of view is the "opportunity cost" for having huge,consistent eye relief. Go check out a Nikon Omega. They have a huge 5" eye relief, but they also have bad tunnel vision.
It makes sense. Look through a piece of pipe,then back your eye away from it. What happens to the FOV through the pipe? However, from shooting my Buckmasters against other scopes with shorter eye relief, I've noticed that having a large eye box, with corrected parallax, seems to really minimize my group sizes at distance. Along with good focus and parallax correction,that design feature compensates for an inconsistent cheek weld, I think. |
||
cyborg
Optics God Gaseous Clay Joined: August/24/2007 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 12288 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Hmmmm.... (Note to self..... Time to invest in a very expensive camera set up, and take photos through the scopes for a comparison, and show and tell exercise. I wonder if the screen resolution for most computers would allow for such a venture to be fully appreciated?)
|
||
With Freedom comes great responsibility, you cannot have one without the other
An armed public are citizens. A disarmed public are subjects. OATH KEEPER #8233 Support us, and join our cause. Cyborg |
||
3_tens
Optics Jedi Master Joined: January/08/2007 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 7853 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
How can anyone compare the Monarch alongside the Buckmaster. The Monarch is much brighter. The field of view is much better in the Monarch than the Buckmaster. Mainly because you can see fully side to side with the Monarch where the Buckmaster has a small sweet spot. Plus you see as much or more of the inside of the scope than what is out front. I fully agree the BCD Circles are very annoying in which ever Nikon you get.
|
||
Folks ain't got a sense of humor no more. They don't laugh they just get sore.
Need to follow the rules. Just hard to determine which set of rules to follow Now the rules have changed again. |
||
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |