New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Nikon Monarch v. Weaver Grand Slam?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Nikon Monarch v. Weaver Grand Slam?

 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: August/02/2010 at 00:12
lewwetzel View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: June/25/2009
Location: Central OH
Status: Offline
Points: 143
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?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/02/2010 at 22:33
VYD View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: August/02/2010
Location: TX
Status: Offline
Points: 96
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.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/09/2010 at 21:35
JLud View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/30/2010
Location: Bettendorf, Iow
Status: Offline
Points: 544
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.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/10/2010 at 15:10
Longarm View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/12/2010
Location: Gilmer, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 21
i was disappointed in my Monarch. I will never by nikon again.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/10/2010 at 15:17
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20471
Originally posted by Longarm Longarm wrote:

i was disappointed in my Monarch. I will never by nikon again.
 
Why may I ask, were you disappointed?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/10/2010 at 15:20
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20471
Originally posted by Jud Jud wrote:

Price I paid for the Monarch isn't worth the difference I see in the Pro staff.
 
 
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
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/10/2010 at 22:49
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
Prostaff is a good little scope, but my Monarch (I do own both) takes the prize, by a large margin.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2010 at 00:26
lewwetzel View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: June/25/2009
Location: Central OH
Status: Offline
Points: 143
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?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/12/2010 at 14:56
Longarm View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: July/12/2010
Location: Gilmer, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 21
Originally posted by cheaptrick cheaptrick wrote:

Originally posted by Longarm Longarm wrote:

i was disappointed in my Monarch. I will never by nikon again.
 
Why may I ask, were you disappointed?
After comparing the Monarch to some bushnell elite 4200's. My cheapskate hunting buddy has a cheap banner that was just as bright and clear as my monarch. I was expecting more from nikon's flagship scope. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/13/2010 at 08:31
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
Originally posted by Longarm Longarm wrote:

After comparing the Monarch to some bushnell elite 4200's. My cheapskate hunting buddy has a cheap banner that was just as bright and clear as my monarch. I was expecting more from nikon's flagship scope. 
While the Banner is for the money a very bright and clear scope, it isn't as bright or clear as my Monarch. I own both, and have done several comparisons in many different situations. Resolution with the Monarch is much better than with the Banner.
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.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2010 at 00:32
lewwetzel View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: June/25/2009
Location: Central OH
Status: Offline
Points: 143
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.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2010 at 00:53
lewwetzel View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: June/25/2009
Location: Central OH
Status: Offline
Points: 143
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?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/14/2010 at 12:42
cheaptrick View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: September/27/2004
Location: South Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 20471
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.....
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2010 at 17:54
Poodleshooter1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: August/15/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 116
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.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/15/2010 at 22:37
lewwetzel View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: June/25/2009
Location: Central OH
Status: Offline
Points: 143
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.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2010 at 10:07
Poodleshooter1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: August/15/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 116
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.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2010 at 10:45
cyborg View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
God of Wind

Joined: August/24/2007
Location: North Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 12082
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?)
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/17/2010 at 18:23
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7180
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.
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "Nikon Monarch v. Weaver Grand Slam?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon monarch vs Weaver grand slam 308 encore Rifle Scopes 4 10/4/2004 9:13:44 PM
Monarch vs Grand Slam? R7 Shooter Rifle Scopes 4 10/4/2006 2:00:18 AM
Weaver Super Slam vs Grand Slam Dupree Rifle Scopes 9
Weaver Grand Slam vs. Bushnell Elite 3200 CZJedi Rimfire / Airgun 7
Weaver Grand Slams arrived today. boliodogs Rifle Scopes 3
weaver grand slam SBLNCHRD Rifle Scopes 2
Elite 4200 or Weaver Grand Slam TxRzrBk Rifle Scopes 28
Weaver Grand Slam k-oss Rifle Scopes 0
Weaver Grand Slam biggreen747 Rifle Scopes 11
Weaver Grand Slam Reticle SDnailbender Varmint Scopes 5


This page was generated in 0.344 seconds.