What does everyone think about the Nikon line of riflescopes, more specifically the Nikon Monarchs? I am in the process of getting a new 6-24X50 Monarch, because I can't afford Bushnell anymore. I am going to put this on top of a .300 WIN MAG. Thanks guys
Rifle Scopes NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
- Thread starter 10thMTN155
- Start date
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
Great glass...good light transmission. That's where the "good news" ends and the REALLY BAD news follows.
These scopes have NO internal adjustment range whatsoever making them nearly useless for long-range work (i.e. - the 6-24x lineup only have around 30MOA total internal adjustment or 15MOA up from mechanical center).
Great glass...good light transmission. That's where the "good news" ends and the REALLY BAD news follows.
These scopes have NO internal adjustment range whatsoever making them nearly useless for long-range work (i.e. - the 6-24x lineup only have around 30MOA total internal adjustment or 15MOA up from mechanical center).
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
Nikon's elevation adjustment goes down as the magnification goes up. I have a Buckmaster that has 80 moa of adjustment. Find one with at least 40 moa of elevation and put it on a 20 moa base and you will be ok. Get a mil dot reticle if you can.
Great glass. Reticles are a little thick. Good for the money.
Nikon's elevation adjustment goes down as the magnification goes up. I have a Buckmaster that has 80 moa of adjustment. Find one with at least 40 moa of elevation and put it on a 20 moa base and you will be ok. Get a mil dot reticle if you can.
Great glass. Reticles are a little thick. Good for the money.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
If you want a ~300 dollar varmint scope the 6-18/6-24 etc nikon monarch and buckmasters are great. Their hunting scopes are good too.
If you are looking for a "tactical" scope for ~300 I would get something like a super sniper.
If you want a ~300 dollar varmint scope the 6-18/6-24 etc nikon monarch and buckmasters are great. Their hunting scopes are good too.
If you are looking for a "tactical" scope for ~300 I would get something like a super sniper.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
I have that exact same scope it doesn't track very well either In addition to needing a 20 moa mount for long range. It ticks me off that after 4 clicks windage bullet impact doesn't change put on 3 more clicks and then it moves 7 all at once I hate it. It's a range specific scope now. The first scope I got that was dead nuts reliable was a Nightforce benchrest. I started out trying make that nikon work moved to Burris fullfield, XTR works pretty good and so does the Burris black diamond. But the Nightforce is worth the money to avoid the frustration of gear that dont work.
I have that exact same scope it doesn't track very well either In addition to needing a 20 moa mount for long range. It ticks me off that after 4 clicks windage bullet impact doesn't change put on 3 more clicks and then it moves 7 all at once I hate it. It's a range specific scope now. The first scope I got that was dead nuts reliable was a Nightforce benchrest. I started out trying make that nikon work moved to Burris fullfield, XTR works pretty good and so does the Burris black diamond. But the Nightforce is worth the money to avoid the frustration of gear that dont work.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
The monarch gold's are a real gem but I don’t think I’ve seen them with a top end above 10x, the glass is better than anything I’ve seen under 1k and you can find them used for around 3 to 4 hundred. Adjustments are repeatable and reliable.
Another oldie but goodie is the UCC and they have a higher top end power.
The monarch gold's are a real gem but I don’t think I’ve seen them with a top end above 10x, the glass is better than anything I’ve seen under 1k and you can find them used for around 3 to 4 hundred. Adjustments are repeatable and reliable.
Another oldie but goodie is the UCC and they have a higher top end power.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
Also, all the Nikons that have mil reticles have moa turrets. Nikon hasn't gotten on the mil turret bandwagon....yet.
The Nikons I have are dead on reliable and track perfectly.
I like my 2 Nikon 80moa Buckmasters as backup/hunting scopes. I have hit my 10" steel plate out to 1100 yard with them. Not bad.
Also, all the Nikons that have mil reticles have moa turrets. Nikon hasn't gotten on the mil turret bandwagon....yet.
The Nikons I have are dead on reliable and track perfectly.
I like my 2 Nikon 80moa Buckmasters as backup/hunting scopes. I have hit my 10" steel plate out to 1100 yard with them. Not bad.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
I just sold a 2-8x32 Nikon Monarch scope that was, in my opinion, no better and no different than the Busckmasters scope in anything but additional cost. I will not buy another Monarch scope. Also, contrast and resolution were poor for the all the hype put out on these scopes.
I have been hunting and shooting often for 50+ years and will not buy another Nikon. Considering that I have 3 Nikon cameras and 6-7 lenses, this is real disappointment with this scope.
I also was an engineer in both the satelite optics lens grinding equipment and in opthamic lens manufacturing industries in real life.
I just sold a 2-8x32 Nikon Monarch scope that was, in my opinion, no better and no different than the Busckmasters scope in anything but additional cost. I will not buy another Monarch scope. Also, contrast and resolution were poor for the all the hype put out on these scopes.
I have been hunting and shooting often for 50+ years and will not buy another Nikon. Considering that I have 3 Nikon cameras and 6-7 lenses, this is real disappointment with this scope.
I also was an engineer in both the satelite optics lens grinding equipment and in opthamic lens manufacturing industries in real life.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
Wow, I have Monarch 2.5-10 x42 and 2.5-10x50 scopes. Both are excellent for money. Track very well and are a bargin.
I have used Nikon Tacticals since late 1990's in 2.5-10 and 4-16 and they are fantastic scopes.
This whole you have to have Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA is frankly pure marketing. Certainly its easier but not an absolute or deal breaker. After I dial for major elevation I use the reticule for hold offs anyway, so its not a must have in either case. Its the cool thing but when it all hits fan not as big a deal as many demand.
Wow, I have Monarch 2.5-10 x42 and 2.5-10x50 scopes. Both are excellent for money. Track very well and are a bargin.
I have used Nikon Tacticals since late 1990's in 2.5-10 and 4-16 and they are fantastic scopes.
This whole you have to have Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA is frankly pure marketing. Certainly its easier but not an absolute or deal breaker. After I dial for major elevation I use the reticule for hold offs anyway, so its not a must have in either case. Its the cool thing but when it all hits fan not as big a deal as many demand.
Re: NIKON......TRUE OR FALSE?
The higher power Monarchs are bulky and long. Not enough travel for me. I really like the Buckmasters series for hunting, but I don't care for the big Monarchs.
The higher power Monarchs are bulky and long. Not enough travel for me. I really like the Buckmasters series for hunting, but I don't care for the big Monarchs.
Similar threads
