In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Nikon Scopes

Horse Plains DrifterHorse Plains Drifter Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 40,245 ***** Forums Admin
edited February 2008 in Ask the Experts
Wondering just what the difference is between the Nikon prostaff scopes and the Nikon Monarch. Is there enough difference to warrant the cost?
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Horse Plains DrifterHorse Plains Drifter Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 40,245 ***** Forums Admin
    edited November -1
    What do you guys think of the Nikon Monarch? Nikon Monarch Gold? Nikon Buckmaster? How do they compare to Leupold's VXII or VXIII? Thanks in advance for any help.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ChetStaffordChetStafford Member Posts: 2,794
    edited November -1
    I have two Nikon Monarch's and absolutely love them

    I have compared new Monarch's to the Leupold VX-3's and in my opinion they are better they are very clear and provide a very clear and crisp image definition and most of the new Monarch's are side focus.

    IMHO Leupold is overpriced they are no better than Nikon or Burris but that is one opinion
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • MikeinMikein Member Posts: 106 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I agree with CSJS. The performance differences between the Nikons and the Leupys are too small for me to discern and I've got 3 Nikons and a pair of Leupys. I like 'em both, but if I were in the market to buy a new one, I'd go for the Nikon Monarch. In my opinion, the price difference just isn't justified.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • the jiggerthe jigger Member Posts: 12 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have six rifles and all are scoped with Nikons. i have 2 monarchs 5.5x16.5 that are fantastic at 400+ yds. i have a buckmaster 4.5X14 mil=dot that also gets the job done at distance. IMHO you can't beat Nikon for the money.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dfletcherdfletcher Member Posts: 8,179 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It may be a bit contrary, but I have a few Nikon shotgun scopes on harder recoiling rifles - 375s, 416s and 458s mainly. The parallax is set at 75 yards, which is fine, they have thin crosshairs just like a rifle scope and eye relief in the 4.5" to 5" area.

    I also have a 4 to 14X Nikon on an HS Precision take down in 300 & 375 Ultra. Very happy with it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Mk 19Mk 19 Member Posts: 8,170
    edited November -1
    The Nikon Monarch is the best value for your money today. I would take a Monarch over any Leupold that cost twice as much, yes, they are that good.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • savage170savage170 Member Posts: 37,572 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mk 19
    The Nikon Monarch is the best value for your money today. I would take a Monarch over any Leupold that cost twice as much, yes, they are that good.


    +1 also very impressed with sightron so far
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tsr1965tsr1965 Member Posts: 8,682 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have all three, and all three compare favorably against the Leupolds in their respective class, except for one thing. That one thing I have not had to deal with is the warranty, of which I have heard horror stories from others that is only covered if you send in the card, and are the original owner. Leupold, and Burris(my other choice), both have a no questions asked, unless like you destroy the main body tube malaciously.

    The best scope on the market if price is not a factor IMHO, is Nightforce
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • garanchgaranch Member Posts: 3,681 ✭
    edited November -1
    Nikon and Leupold are of the same quality and dependability level. The Nikon is priced less but is no less scope. Good choice until you want to take the next step up (Zeiss, Trijicon, Swarovski,and Schmidt & Bender). But you also take a big step up in price.

    I have many models of all of the above mentioned companies. The Nikons are dollar for dollar one of the best. A Nikon 4-12 can be had for around 325.00 while a Swarovski 3-12 will run you around 1400.00, then you have the 3-12 Schmidt & Bender at 2000.00. You can tell a difference but only you can decide if there is 1000.00 to 2000.00 difference.

    You will not be dissapointed with a Nikon.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • He DogHe Dog Member Posts: 51,593 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Having them all, I rank them Burris, Leupold, Nikon. IOR Valdada is in there somewhere, but IOR is heavier than the others.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • lpaalplpaalp Member Posts: 951 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have Nikons (Buckmaster and Monarch) and Leupolds (VXII and VXIII). I do not have a Nikon and Leupold which are exactly equivalent - but frankly can't see any difference among those I have.

    Nothing new in this, but, IMO, Leupolds cost more because of the lifetime warranty... when you buy one today, part of the price goes to repair a scope someone bought 20 years ago. If you shoot in adverse conditions (weather, terrain) and are likely to damage a scope, go with the Leupold. If a fair weather shooter, the Nikon will do the job.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.