.243 Win Scope??

The Nikon Monarch is hard to beat. People can say the Leupold is better all they want but since they use Nikon glass, I don't see that as being possible. The only thing Leupold makes is the tubes and turrets. The optical glass for both Nikon, Leupold and Redfield (who is owned by Leupold) are ground in Japan at Nikkor, the optical glass division of Nikon. Same place that grinds glass for their camera lenses.
 
Last edited:
Slappy, my problem with Monarch is that it doesn't live that long on big magnums with aggressive gas port angles on the brake.
 
Slappy, my problem with Monarch is that it doesn't live that long on big magnums with aggressive gas port angles on the brake.
Click to expand...
Two things. They have a lifetime warranty, same as the others and I though we were talking about a scope for a .243?
 
You made the point that Nikon is as good as Leupold. Nikon's glass is as good as Leupold's glass, but their scopes (comparable product lines being compared) are not as good as Leupold. Leupold's mid range stuff will stand some brutal punishment.
 
Nikon's glass is as good as Leupold's glass, but their scopes (comparable product lines being compared) are not as good as Leupold. Leupold's mid range stuff will stand some brutal punishment.
Click to expand...
That may be your experience. I have never heard that complaint from anyone else. You state it as a fact like the whole world knows this to be the case. Maybe you just got a bad one, I don't know. "Big magnums with aggressive gas port angles on the brake"? What are we talking elephant hunting? If you are using a brake then recoil shouldn't be the problem so it begs the question, what is destroying the scope if not recoil? Gas being blown back into the scope at high pressure because of the brake? I think that would be considered abuse on anything but some specialized equipment. At any rate, again we are talking about a .243 not a heavy magnum with aggressive angles on the brake. You believe Leupold is better than Nikon, I don't. No point arguing about it.
 
Slappy, might want to re-check the dynamics of motion that a muzzle brake causes a rifle to go through. Actually your elephant rifles do not offer the type recoil that destroys a scope. Elephant rifle have hard by somewhat slower developing recoil. A .458 Lott is not that hard on a scope. A 7Rum with an aggressive brake is he.. on a scope. A .30-378 WBY is super he.. on a scope.
 
Slappy, might want to re-check the dynamics of motion that a muzzle brake causes a rifle to go through. Actually your elephant rifles do not offer the type recoil that destroys a scope. Elephant rifle have hard by somewhat slower developing recoil. A .458 Lott is not that hard on a scope. A 7Rum with an aggressive brake is he.. on a scope. A .30-378 WBY is super he.. on a scope.
Click to expand...
And what does any of that have to do with the subject at hand? You are the one that brought up "Big magnums with aggressive gas port angles on the brake." Now you're telling me that a .458 Lott isn't a "big magnum"? Again, we were discussing a scope for a .243 Winchester. think you just want someone to argue with.
 
Last edited:
I have no desire to argue Slappy, but you made the blanket statement that Nikons were as good as Leupolds. On a .243 Winchester, they indeed are. On a heavy recoiling rifle, they are not.
 
I've been a Leupold fan for years, but last year bought a Nikon Monarch 4-16x42 Side-Focus BDC for a custom Savage .243 varmint rifle...

Wow, what an excellent scope!

I'm not kidding, it's a pleasure to use at any magnification.

Having said that, when I needed a glossy, compact scope for my new BLR '81, I naturally sent off for a Leupold VX1 2-7 x33 ( gloss of course ) and am waiting for Conetrol "Custum" mounts and rings to go with that beauty. Nobody slams them down low like Conetrol.

I have bought and used three of the Nikon Pro-Staff 3-9x40 BDC scopes so far, and consider it to be the best bang for the buck on the market.

Here's a picture of the Savage with the Nikon Monarch 4-16x42 side-focus BDC on Leupold SS mounts and rings:

IMG_2804_zps32e8c404.jpg


Can't miss with that rig. The Nikon "Spot-On" ballistic program is astounding ( assuming that you know your load's velocity ).
 
I have no desire to argue Slappy, but you made the blanket statement that Nikons were as good as Leupolds. On a .243 Winchester, they indeed are. On a heavy recoiling rifle, they are not.
Click to expand...
Again, that may be your experience and is, without some sort of research or a scientific poll or something concrete to go on, just your opinion. Opinions differ. Yours is no better than mine. I have owned and used both, the Nikon is just as good a scope in my opinion.
Here is what I said:
The Nikon Monarch is hard to beat. People can say the Leupold is better all they want but since they use Nikon glass, I don't see that as being possible. The only thing Leupold makes is the tubes and turrets. The optical glass for both Nikon, Leupold and Redfield (who is owned by Leupold) are ground in Japan at Nikkor, the optical glass division of Nikon. Same place that grinds glass for their camera lenses.
Click to expand...
Where do you see any blanket statements in there? I said since they both use the same glass I don't see how it is possible. That is not a blanket statment about anything except my opinion on the subject.
 
I've used Nikon Pro-Staffs, Buckmasters, and a Monarch.

Quality between Leupold Rifleman, VX1,2 and VX3 are comparable to Nikon ProStaff, Buckmaster and Monarch.

You get what you pay for.

If you have a preference, go with that and be happy - but running down other's preference is uncool, unwise.

For my part, I use what seems to go best on the particular gun.

Except for my present situation, where I picked up an Unertal 1" with 10x and 13x eyepieces at an estate sale, and have no gun at this time that is worthy of the scope!
 
" People can say the Leupold is better all they want but since they use Nikon glass, I don't see that as being possible. The only thing Leupold makes is the tubes and turrets."

Quoted above is the blanket statement.
Tubes, turrents, erectors, etc. are different between the manufacturers. It just so happens that those are what is critical in standing up to recoil. For the record, I am not a huge Leupold fan.
 
You are still trying to start an argument. Saying that I don't see something as being possible is givng my opinion, it is not "making a blanket statement". Making a blanket statement is what you did when you said that "Nikon's glass is as good as Leupold's glass, but their scopes (comparable product lines being compared) are not as good as Leupold".
See the difference? I gave an opinion. You made a blanket statement to which you have no proof, only your opinion.
 
I use a Sightron SIII 8-32x56 on my 260 and a Sightron SII 6-24x42 on my .17 rem... both are great scopes for great prices
 
I've been pleased with even the nikon prostaff scopes. Monarks are higher and they have some nice coyote models with BDC redicle. I think for hunting you want something with a good reticle that is clear against all backgrounds and you should have a variable 3 or 4 to maybe 12 or 16 power. I think that when you have really high power scopes they just magnify your shake when hunting. If you were strickly hunting big game a 2-7 or 3-9 would be sufficient.
 
I sometimes use the BDC reticule on one of my Nikon Prostaffs backward from the suggested use...

The scope on my .17 HMR is sighted in to hit dead-on at 100 yards. A lot of the shots at varmints around the farm though are at twenty, maybe thirty feet, and I use the first oval below the crosshairs for those shots.

It works perfectly.

That first oval below the crosshairs is supposed to be for 150 yards with the .17 HMR - but it works also for shots that are so close that the scope height above the bore is a significant factor.

Something to remember if you need to shoot accurately - up close.
 
My dislike for Nikon Monarch is because the field doesn't extend to the edge of the tube like Leupold and most other scopes. I always feel like I'm looking through a tunnel, or don't have my eye at the proper distance from the eyepiece.

The image is clear, but the field of view of my 3-10X Monarch is also not as wide at comparable power as either my Leupold VX2 or II 3-9X scopes.
 
Thanks everyone for the suggestions. After looking at the Vortex Viper, Leupold VX2, and Buckmaster, I chose the 3-9x40 Buckmaster w/BDC. To me it had the clearest sight picture of all three. Thank goodness we live in a country where we all have choices :) Now to get out and get her sighted in.
 
PVL, stating known problems with a product is not "running down someone else's preference." If all things are equal and we are not to point out known product flaws, what is the point of discussing shooting equipment?
I personally like Vortex diamondback scopes as a great all around hunting scope. If I recommended one and someone said "they have visible edge distortion at low power," they would not be running down my preference. They would be stating a fact. Edge distortion at low power does not bother me. It might annoy the pee out of another, and due to that fact he might wish to steer clear of the Diamondback.
 
Nothing wrong with the glass in a Nikon Monarch, but according to a scope savvy gent I shoot with on a very regular basis, he's not had much success finding a Nikon (Monarch or others), that had turret adjustments he trusted. Basically his words, not mine. Guy has money to afford any scope and he's tried a fair number of Nikons. He'd be the first to compliment the optics in them....but has had quite a negative experience concerning the windage/elevation adjustment reliability.

You might want to visit www.natchezss.com and peruse through their inventory/prices of Weaver Grand Slams or Super Slams for that matter. Weaver has redone their line of Grand Slams and Natchez has reduced their prices on their now older design Grand Slams. Some good buys on their Grand Slams, which is a darn nice scope. The gents I shoot with have very nice things to say about their Weavers. Own a couple of Weaver Super Slams myself and it is a very nice scope worthy of consideration
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top