Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Monarch 4-16 |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Muddy Buck
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/22/2009 Status: Offline Points: 39 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: February/15/2009 at 14:28 |
Where would the Monarch 4-16 with bdc stack up with other scopes of the same price range?
|
|
glockman55
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/03/2009 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 35 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Don't feel too bad that nobody replies, I get that all the time..When we get 1000 post it will get better..LOL
I like the Nikon Monarch, I just bought a 3X9X40 BDC and thinking about getting another, maybe the 4-16 not sure yet. What you gonna use it on and for?
|
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I already sent Muddy Buck a link to my review of the scope in question.
Your 3-9x40mm is not the same scope as the 4-16x "new" Monarch.
Glass looks the same, but almost everything else changed when Nikon revamped the Monarch.
Yours Glockman, is most likely the older version. Good scope though, none the less.
|
|
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.
|
|
rifle looney
Optics Master Joined: November/21/2008 Status: Offline Points: 2553 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If you look back to page4 ,11th thread you will find a chart look there! |
|
glockman55
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/03/2009 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 35 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was looking on the Sample list and they are selling for, 4-16X42, $349.95, that's reconditioned, new for $570.00..The 4-16X50 Monarch X is $799.95 new for $1200.
I like the Monarch 3.5-10X50 UCC, BDC for $329.95
|
|
sholling
Optics Professional Joined: May/24/2008 Location: Hemet CA Status: Offline Points: 944 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just don't think a lot of people here use a 4-16x scope. Most of the hunters use something in the 1-5x or 2-10x range. You might check with the varmint shooters. A 4-16 is really more of a varmint range.
In general a Monarch is an excellent scope. One of the best in its price range and the equal of a Bushnell 4200. I think you'll find people more helpful once they know what you plan to use it for. |
|
NRA, SAF, & CRPA life member
Member Madison Society & Revolutionary War Veteran Association (Project Appleseed) Old age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill. ;) |
|
Horsemany
Optics Journeyman Joined: February/28/2008 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 643 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
For the $450 asking price I'd rather have a few other scopes first. Nothing wrong with Monarch's. I like mine. But for $450 I'd rather have a scope that says 4200 on it in any magnification. Some of the now discontinued Leupold VX III's in 4.5-14 can be had for $450 as well. I consider them a little better scope than the Monarch too. Not trying to talk you out of the Monarch. THey're good scopes, just wouldn't make the top of my list. Now if you really like that BDC reticle it may change your POV.
|
|
Muddy Buck
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/22/2009 Status: Offline Points: 39 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sorry for not filling you guys with more info, its going on a 204 ruger. I wasnt thinking much about a ballistic recticle till I saw the bdc. Its nice to be able to see through the marks, it doesnt seem to block out much of the target.
|
|
Horsemany
Optics Journeyman Joined: February/28/2008 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 643 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The BDC does not appear to be a good reticle for precision bench work. So I've avoided it. It does however seem to be a great practical shooting reticle. Everyone who's tried it says it works. I just wish it had a thinner mid-section for load development and the occasional BR match. I see no reason why the same thing couldn't have been accomplished with a thinner reticle. I believe it was originally developed for the muzzleloader crowd and that may have something to do with it.
|
|
cyborg
Optics God Gaseous Clay Joined: August/24/2007 Location: North Georgia Status: Offline Points: 12288 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There are a number here that I have great respect for that are on both sides of the fence concerning the BDC reticle. For hunting applications I believe it to be great. For the Target applications I can see where some may find that it may have short falls. I would caution against that judgement. Cheaptrick has posted some impressive groups with the BDC reticle.
|
|
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 |
|
tjtjwdad
Optics Journeyman Joined: December/11/2007 Status: Offline Points: 365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The only thing about the BDC I'm not sure I'd like is the thickness of the reticles because they're so close to the center (those @ 12:00, 3:00 and 9:00). Othersise, I think it would be OK. For your 204, if its going to be used on a bench or rest for far away shots, I'd probably look at more power. If its on a carry rig or one for both then the 4-16 is a good choice.
I have a Nikon 6.5x20 but one draw back to Nikons is limited reticle choices.
HTH
|
|
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 |