Nikon Monarch

T

trg42wraglefragle

New member
Hi all,
I have finally decided I need a better scope for my 223 and have the money for it.

I was originally set on a Vortex Viper PST, but they were just out of my price range. I then decided on the Viper 6.5-20x44, but after looking around the net the Nikon Monarch 4-16x42 mildot came to my attention.

I would be set on the Nikon but I have read a few points that I was a bit weary of.
The things i like about it are:
-1" tube
-42mm objective (I can keep my current rings)
-Side parallax (I really dislike AO scopes)
-Less weight than the Viper and smaller
-And the 4x minimum zoom would be handy for close range shots (I shot some goats at around 30m not long ago and would be worried 6x would've meen to much)

The bad things I've heard about them are that they don't track well, which would not be good for me.
And that the turrets it comes standard with aren't very good for range work.
And that the Viper has better glass.

So does anyone have this scope or a similar one that they can comment on Nikon Monarchs?
I'm mainly concerned that it wont track properly,
and that as far as I can tell the turrets are your typical low height target turrets that you slip to zero after sighting not just normal set once and that's it ones.

Hope someone can help me, I have searched the net but haven't found many answers.

Oh and is the reticle very thin or is it quite obtrusive.

Sorry about the long post.
(I'm also open to alternative suggestions for around the $450 mark)
Cheers Sam
 
The $400-500 dollar Vortex Viper PA and HS series are superior to the Nikon Monarch series of scopes. The Vortex has great optic quality, tracking, side focus and 30mm tubes, plus better turrets.
 
I have 3 Monarchs and 2 Buckmasters (among some other brands)-not sure there's a better scope available for the $ than a Monarch

Very clear and I don't recall reading of others having difficulty in tracking, but know I certainly haven't

Really can't imagine anyone being less than happy with a Monarch scope-they're that good
 
I do not know anything about the Vortex. I have heard good things about them.

I do have two Nikon Monarchs and have had no issues with them at all. Both are 4.5-16X50 I think. I have a couple more Nikons. I like them.

Geetarman:D
 
Nikon scopes are crap. I've never had more trouble with an optic than I had with a series of Nikon scopes a couple of years ago. I don't trust them and will not purchase one again. If you gave me one brand new in a box, I'd either sell it or put it in a closet stored in the box where hopefully it wouldn't spontaineously fall apart.

Lots of better scopes in the price ranges the Monarch and Buckmaster's are in that are vastly superior to either of them. My suggestion is to take a look at the Weaver Super Slam and Euro Slam, Natchez is running great prices on them right now too.
 
My last two Monarch's had a tunnel vision affect giving me tired eyes after a few rounds they did track well but I consider the glass on the poor side other people seem to love them but honestly I believe older models were better.
 
If I recall, there was a major re-work of the Monarch line about 4 or 5 years ago where they kept the same name but totally redesgned the scope.
 
Nikon scopes are crap.
Blanket condemnations are really not helpful. While you may have had some issues with yours, many thousands of users have not.

I have Nikons made in the Philippines as well as China and a 45 year old pair of Nikon 7X50 binoculars made in Japan that have given me no trouble at all.

I know there were some counterfeit Nikons as well as Leupolds that were sold in this country and they looked like the real deal until the users had problems and tried to get them fixed.

Could you have gotten one or more of those?

Did you try to have yours repaired or replaced?

Geetarman:D
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I have several Nikon Monarch scopes and I think they are all excellent scopes. I have a 4-16X42mm Mildot that sits on top of my 308 long range rifle and it has performed very well out to 800 yards. It is not a "tactial" scope where you have to deal with constantly changing range but for paper shooting or varmint type shooting where you know the range it is a great scope.

I used to think Leupold scopes were great but most of those were replaced with Nikon Monarch and Bushnell 4200 series scopes in last 2-3 years.
 
I own a new monarch (2.5-10x42mm) with the BDC on my .25-06 rem. I also own a Leupold 3-9x40 on my .338 win mag. I am satisfied with my Nikon and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anybody. With the BDC it is a very good deal pricewise considering its another $100 or so for the same reticle on a Leupold. With that said my Leupold's glass is slightly better IMO. If your finding yourself with tunnel vision (eye relief) you may need to adjust the it further forwards or back to find the correct mounting position.
 
Last edited:
I have a Nikon Monarch 4-16x BDC reticle. It's OK, it tracks fine for what it does but there is not much movement. I think the 4-16x Monarch has like 40 MOA adjustment, which should be enough if the rifles zero sits somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately for me, a 200 yard zero leaves me about 4 MOA adjustment up, which isn't much so I had to use the BDC for anything past like 350 yards, which works. My Zeiss 4-14x has like 68 MOA to work with.

I think the glass is good, the crosshairs are thick which I don't like. Overall I think it's good, though I should have probably bought a used one to save money or looked harder at Leupold/Vortex in the same price range. Or even a 3-9x Zeiss. Clear glass makes up for lower power focus in my opinion.

I'm not necessarily unhappy with it, I just don't love it. It does the job. I need to shoot it more, hopefully I'll get drawn for deer this year and that will force my hand.
 
I've only had one Nikon scope, a 4-16 Monarch, and it failed. That won't keep me from getting another one, but the Burris (4.5-14) I replaced it with is very nice and I'd probably buy another Burris before I got another Nikon. All others I have are Leupold, and that's my overall favorite.
 
Could you have gotten one or more of those?

Did you try to have yours repaired or replaced?
Click to expand...

Nope, it was original Nikon equipment.

They replaced it each time that I sent it in. Never a scratch on them either. Broken springs, detached reticles, fogged glass, that was enough for me. If you've had good luck with them, more power to you. I didn't have anything but trouble, hence the statement they are crap and I will not own another one. When I get a chance ti hunt or spend time at the range, I want equipment that is proven and reliable. I didn't get that with Nikon as that white flag and nice big rack heading through the woods is proof of.

As someone pointed out before, you notice a lot of "Refurbished" Nikons for sale, no thanks, I prefer mine furbished the first time.

Lots of people like Chevrolet trucks, I wouldn't own another one.
 
I prefer mine furbished the first time.
Click to expand...

That is funny! Glad to see you have not lost your sense of humor.

Back to the scope...if you don't trust them, then you are doing the right thing.

You are the one who needs to be happy with your rig. I am glad my experience has been better.

Geetarman:D
 
I've had five different Monarchs for 20 years= two 4x40's, two 3-9x40's, a 4-12x40, and three more Nikons in the Buckmaster and Pro Staff series. They are all top notch for their purpose, and I'm completely done with Leupold and Redfield's price jacking. Vortex??? Never heard of them. Shepherd and Night Force most definitely. The Pentax Lightseeker and Burris Signature are a great alternative.

-7-
 
So no one has had problems with them not tracking very well?
Id like to use it as a varminting scope, so I want to be able to adjust for the longer shots and have it return to zero.

If anyone knows of a better scope that has a 4x zoom range, mildot and target turrets, then I'm open to suggestions.
 
I have a 4-16 Monarch and I just recently bought the custom turret for it that matches my load my tracks fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have a 2.5-10X Monarch and don't like it. The image doesn't go out to the edges, leaving lots of black. The width of field is smaller than my Leupold MKII and image clarity is slightly inferior.

I haven't looked through a newer Leupold MK2, but don't care for the quick focus feature of either.
 
The image doesn't go out to the edges, leaving lots of black.
Click to expand...

Even when you move the scope forward or aft? Could it be the eye relief is just not set right?

I have had scopes have a lot of black around the edges, but it was me and not the scope.

Does it do the same thing at lower power magnification?

If it does, I would send it back.

Geetarman:D
 
Nikon

There werer some modification's to the MONARCH line a few years ago and all for the better. Thank you Doyle for mentioning that.

As for the tracking issue, first I have heard that Nikon Scopes don't track well, and believe me, I would have heard. As our Sr. member has stated, hard to condem and entire company because of one persons bad experience.
I have contacted Saltydog over a year ago trying to help him out and change his mind about Nikon but unfortunately there was nothing I could do. Not everyone is going to like everything Nikon makes, but I can tell you, Nikon goes to great lengths to produce quality products that the people want. That's how the new for 2012 P-223 Series came about. Guy's asked for a more affordable AR scope for their rifles and Nikon did their best to comply. The same with all the Rimfire scopes.
I am always available to help someone with a Nikon scope problem. I'm not a Customer Service Rep., and I don't work directly for Nikon. I do feel that if you have a problem my being associated with them is reason enough for me to help you out.

Now back to the M-223 4-16 question....
Unfortunately they will not be ready for retail sales until later July is what I last heard. I did get a chance to check one out last Jan. at Shot and I was very impressed with the glass and the same great options of either a BDC reticle or the Rapid Action Turret, which lets you dial a .223 55 grain polymer tipped bullet at 3240 fps out to 600 yards. I have had the pleasure/fun of doing this with a number of M-223 2-8's and 3-12's over the last 2 years.

I hope this has helped and dispelled any misinformation about Nikon Scopes being poorly made or not functioning correctly? If you can, look at a few different scopes and choose the one that fits your requirements the best. That is my best advice to anyone who ends up on a fence about an optic's choice. Thanks to so many of you who wrote about your positive Nikon experiences.

Here's one of my AR's with a NIkon M-223 3-12 Rapid Action Turret and Nikon's M-223 AR Mount.

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd363/bman940/3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top