New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Nikon Monarch or What?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

Nikon Monarch or What?

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2005 at 19:39
tarboroheel1 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper

Joined: November/19/2005
Status: Offline
Points: 45
I had a Buckmasters 4-12x50 and it's just too big for my A-Bolt .270WSM. I am looking at the Nikon Monarch or another Buckmasters, smaller. Will I miss the 12x if I go with a 3-9x instead? Do the free binoculars come in the box with the Burris Fullfield II or do you have to send in a coupon? I know, a lot of questions.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: December/11/2005 at 22:00
Acenturian View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman

Joined: September/07/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 543



I agree that a 50mm objective is just too big atleast for a hunting rifle.  As to you question if you will miss the 12X when going to 3-9X, that would depend on your eyesight, what your shooting at and at what range??  Personally, I hunt out west where we have some very steep canyons and high mountain medows and I never hunt with any of my 3-9 turned up to 9x.  In fact I seldomly turn it past 6x most of the time it stays at 4x.  I usually hunt deer, pig or bear and I never shoot much past 300 yards and I got good vision so 9x at least for me is overkill. 


I dont know if the binoculars come in the box with the FullField Scope.  I know when they offered the spotting scope deal and my buddy ordered a FullField it all came together.  I dont know about the binoculars but the spotter that came with the Fullfield was pretty much usless. 


The FullField is a great scope for the money in the same ball park as the Buckmaster in my opionon.  The Monarch is definitly a step up from those, but so is the cost.


Some suggestions:

Check out the Pentax line.  The Pentax scopes are made by Burris same rugged scopes and it might save you a little cash.


I feel I should be paid by Weaver because I always reccomend their Grand Slam series, but they truely are AWSOME.  I would put the Grand Slam in the same catagory as the Monarch but I like the optics better and it is a little cheaper in price.  Do a search on this forum for the Grand Slam, many people agree with me in that their optics are great for the cash.  Some dont like the looks of the scope,I do but that is cosmetic and the optics more then make up for the large power adjust ring.  Also they have shorter eye releif then some other brands but that only becomes and issue if you have a hard kicking rifle that likes to come back and kiss ya.  A .270 WSM should not be a problem.  Some dont trust the Weaver name because the were known as crap scopes.  Different company and very different scope just the same name and optics that are very very very good.


I know Koshkin will chim in with the Sightron SII, I personally have not looked through one but they do come highly recommended here on the forums so definitly worth a look. Bushnell 3200 is in your price range but I would put it under the New Buckmasters similar in optics to the old Buckmaster scopes and below the Burris Fullfield.  The Bushnell 4200 is a great scope but a step up from the Monarch and its also about $100 more money.


Again if it was me, no doubt about it the Weaver Grand Slam is the answer.

Good Luck



Edited by Acenturian
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Nikon Monarch or What?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
There are no similar posts.
Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.191 seconds.