How do the falcon scopes compare to a Nikon monarch? I really like my Nikon's and i have never owned a falcon. I am in the market for a new scope and was thinking about trying the falcon. Is the glass as good as the Nikon? Anything else I should know? thanks Lee
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
No one knows?? Lee
No one knows?? Lee
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
I cant tell you about the Nikon but the glass on the Falcon is damn clear. Clear is clear I seriously doubt one would be able to tell if the Nikon would be more clear if at all.
Here is the thing if you want a mil style ret. and mil adjustments in the FFP you got no shot with the Nikon. If all those things don't matter to you, it's a 50/50 toss up on personal preference.
KT
I cant tell you about the Nikon but the glass on the Falcon is damn clear. Clear is clear I seriously doubt one would be able to tell if the Nikon would be more clear if at all.
Here is the thing if you want a mil style ret. and mil adjustments in the FFP you got no shot with the Nikon. If all those things don't matter to you, it's a 50/50 toss up on personal preference.
KT
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
I have been a Falcon fan ever since I bought my first one and yes I have high dollar optics but never again, I have had good luck with the falcons and they are a good value for the buck.
I have been a Falcon fan ever since I bought my first one and yes I have high dollar optics but never again, I have had good luck with the falcons and they are a good value for the buck.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
I recently bought the falcon 4.5x14 FFP for the mil reticle with mil adjustments. The clarity has been suprisingly good, pretty much on line with the leupold VxIII. The adjustments are a bit stiff out of the box but they were right on the money and appear to be very repeatable. I figure I will run a box test and full runs on elevation each time I go to the range for the next couple months and see how repeatable it is after some use.
I recently bought the falcon 4.5x14 FFP for the mil reticle with mil adjustments. The clarity has been suprisingly good, pretty much on line with the leupold VxIII. The adjustments are a bit stiff out of the box but they were right on the money and appear to be very repeatable. I figure I will run a box test and full runs on elevation each time I go to the range for the next couple months and see how repeatable it is after some use.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
I also have a vx-3 and to me the nikon beats it hands down. I do not know how to read mil-dots so i dont know if i would like this kind of retical or not? Is it hard to learn to read the mil dots accurately? Lee
I also have a vx-3 and to me the nikon beats it hands down. I do not know how to read mil-dots so i dont know if i would like this kind of retical or not? Is it hard to learn to read the mil dots accurately? Lee
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
Well one option on the Menace is mil lines, as opposed to the dots, which is what I have. easy to read and definite. Your intended purpose will also help in your decision, its not rocket science.
Well one option on the Menace is mil lines, as opposed to the dots, which is what I have. easy to read and definite. Your intended purpose will also help in your decision, its not rocket science.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
Here is a quick little comparison I did
Nikon 40mm on power 12
falcon 56mm on power level 14
These were taken inside looking through a dual pane window so they arnt as clear as they should be and there is a little light refraction in the pictures. There really is little difference besides the FOV. I will get a couple more pictures when we go shooting this weekend.
Here is a quick little comparison I did
Nikon 40mm on power 12
falcon 56mm on power level 14
These were taken inside looking through a dual pane window so they arnt as clear as they should be and there is a little light refraction in the pictures. There really is little difference besides the FOV. I will get a couple more pictures when we go shooting this weekend.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
Love how ur nikon pic is in the sun, and falcon is in the shade! Making the nikon appear much brighter. Nikon is in my opinion the best sub $1200 scope to transmit light, and is very clear. Compared monarchs and vIII and even the "mighty"mk4? Nikon is always the better one, although the mk4 is insanely close...but for that price it should be... I am not for or against either both are quality scopes bottom line. Nikons you could add $100-200 per scope, luepolds you could subtract $150-400. One is a steal, the other is very over priced. Mk4 $1500 is not on same level as SS5-20HD(personally it beats a night force hands down for much cheaper, Vortex Razor HD up with SS. Mk4 is a tier below these but costs more??? All u die hard Luepold guys haha well im sure ur comments are to come. Bottom line you dont always get what you pay for, hence the 1,000's of threads! SS are sold direct from makers wholesale... Luepolds are leeched by multiple middle men, nikons are very reasnoble and there monarch x scopes are up there with SWfa SS. Maybe between mk4 and SS. Vortex Razor HD( made in Wisconsin!!(USA!!) Great scope, on same level as SS. Weaver tactical is $750 but is insanely similar to SS and is by far one of best tac scopes for $.
Back to original topic you didnt need to play up nikon, it would of won legit, but most shmoes cant tell the difference so you helped lol!
Love how ur nikon pic is in the sun, and falcon is in the shade! Making the nikon appear much brighter. Nikon is in my opinion the best sub $1200 scope to transmit light, and is very clear. Compared monarchs and vIII and even the "mighty"mk4? Nikon is always the better one, although the mk4 is insanely close...but for that price it should be... I am not for or against either both are quality scopes bottom line. Nikons you could add $100-200 per scope, luepolds you could subtract $150-400. One is a steal, the other is very over priced. Mk4 $1500 is not on same level as SS5-20HD(personally it beats a night force hands down for much cheaper, Vortex Razor HD up with SS. Mk4 is a tier below these but costs more??? All u die hard Luepold guys haha well im sure ur comments are to come. Bottom line you dont always get what you pay for, hence the 1,000's of threads! SS are sold direct from makers wholesale... Luepolds are leeched by multiple middle men, nikons are very reasnoble and there monarch x scopes are up there with SWfa SS. Maybe between mk4 and SS. Vortex Razor HD( made in Wisconsin!!(USA!!) Great scope, on same level as SS. Weaver tactical is $750 but is insanely similar to SS and is by far one of best tac scopes for $.
Back to original topic you didnt need to play up nikon, it would of won legit, but most shmoes cant tell the difference so you helped lol!
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tacdriver</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Vortex Razor HD( made in Wisconsin!!(USA!!) Great scope, on same level as SS. </div></div>
Of course, you realize that Vortex does not own a single factory or facility to build scopes. The Razor is made in Japan, as is the SS.
The SS is a fine scope, but the Razor is superior to it. There are several reasons for the 700 dollar difference.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tacdriver</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Vortex Razor HD( made in Wisconsin!!(USA!!) Great scope, on same level as SS. </div></div>
Of course, you realize that Vortex does not own a single factory or facility to build scopes. The Razor is made in Japan, as is the SS.
The SS is a fine scope, but the Razor is superior to it. There are several reasons for the 700 dollar difference.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
Quality of glass goes to the Nikon.
Nikons have a VERY limited adjustment range, plain mil dot, SFP and are mixed (mil/moa)
Falcons have good glass when you consider the price, have lots of adjustment range, several superior reticles, FFP and matched (mil/mil)
Quality of glass goes to the Nikon.
Nikons have a VERY limited adjustment range, plain mil dot, SFP and are mixed (mil/moa)
Falcons have good glass when you consider the price, have lots of adjustment range, several superior reticles, FFP and matched (mil/mil)
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
As for the price dif i was referring to night force. Razor hd and SS Hd are both $1599. U would give edge to razor of SS huh? Personally i considered them equal but always considered the SS a hair better.
As for the price dif i was referring to night force. Razor hd and SS Hd are both $1599. U would give edge to razor of SS huh? Personally i considered them equal but always considered the SS a hair better.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
Razor HD is 1999, Superior reticle choices, execution appears to be slightly better.
Both very fine scopes, SS one of the best dollar for dollar, though the HDMR comes in around the same price.
Either one is a very good choice.
Getting a bit off track. OP was asking about scopes in the 380 to 500 range not the 1300 to 2000 range.
Razor HD is 1999, Superior reticle choices, execution appears to be slightly better.
Both very fine scopes, SS one of the best dollar for dollar, though the HDMR comes in around the same price.
Either one is a very good choice.
Getting a bit off track. OP was asking about scopes in the 380 to 500 range not the 1300 to 2000 range.
Re: Falcon menace vs nikon monarch
I think you guys have gotten off the OP's question. Still great information and opinions, just not necessarily helping with the question anymore.
I think I've decided to try a Falcon now though. I don't plan on having the scope for a real long time, unless its really good.
I think you guys have gotten off the OP's question. Still great information and opinions, just not necessarily helping with the question anymore.
I think I've decided to try a Falcon now though. I don't plan on having the scope for a real long time, unless its really good.
