Nikon Monarch 3 4 - 16 BDC

[Rol_P]

I have been using a Zeiss 2-10 HD on my Rem 700 CDL in 30-06 for a hunting outfit for elk and Mule Deer in Montana. Last week my guides and I hiked up a mountain and were glassing several Mule Deer across some ridges and my guides, using 8x and 11x binoculars could make out antlers on the bucks if the sun reflected just right. I could not depict antlers with my Steiner Predator Extreme 10x42 binoculars.

On the way home I stopped at Sportsman's Warehouse in Bozeman where I found the Nikon Monarch 3 4-16 x 42 BDC scope on sale. It followed me home and I hope to use it on my '06 for load development and if it proves reliable, may use t for elk and Mulie hunting in the future for instances where my 10x binoculars prove to be less than perfect for inspecting antlers. I would not use for glassing broad areas, only to look at detail after confirming the object in question was indeed a game animal that I would consider taking.

What is the general consensus on Nikon Monarch 3 scopes? I realize for the money they are not a Leupold, Zeiss or other higher priced (better quality?) scope. Thanks in advance. Rol

 

[Oldtrader3]

They are/were junk, compared to Zeiss HD.

 

[Idahotrophyhunter]

I would take it back for your money...Zeiss HD is far superior...If you want more power get a 3-15 zeiss

 

[baltz526]

The Nikon Gets great reviews and I am Looking at them for my 300 Ackley project. I am Not a Glass snob though. I use multiple brands. Some are perfectly adequate, Some have died. Some cost somebody a lot of money but I got them second hand. Give a review after you test it. I am very interested.

 

[buckfever]

Nothing wrong with Nikon scopes that's about all I buy. If you want a better scope your going to need to shell out a lot more money.

 

[DrMike]

Nikon makes a fine product that will serve the hunter/shooter well.

 

[sask boy]

My cousin has a couple of them and for the money there is absolutely nothing wrong with them. He has been using them for a couple of years now and has never had a failure.

Blessings,
Dan

 

[Rol_P]

Thanks for the additional comments fellas.. I intend to give the Nikon a good work out over the next few months as I continue to play with load development for my '06..

At the least I can put it on my TC Contender .223 with a bull barrel hoping to use it on a coyote or other varmint..

 

[Oldtrader3]

Maybe I just got a bad Nikon Monarrch?

 

[Darkhorse]

I've never had a Nikon scope. But I do have an old Nikon SLR camera and several Nikon lens. Back then Nikon optics were considered to be excellent.
I was in need of new Binoculars for an elk hunt back in '96 and I bought a set of 8X40 Nikon ATB's for about $279. Turns out they are excellent. The outfitter had a set of Zeiss 10X50's and he, several guides and clients, and me, compared binos on a hilltop at hunts end. To my surprise "All" involved said my Nikons gave up nothing to any of the brands tested. I still use them and the optical clarity remains excellent.
I wouldn't hesitate to seriously consider a new Monarch 3 riflescope. 4X16X42 Side Focus for me. But I don't like their reticles. I looked at several scopes some years back and the Nikon reticle was so thin I'm sure it would vanish in low light.
I chose a Zeiss Conquest instead.
I'm looking at a new scope now and it will be European of some brand. I just think the optics are that much better on the good ones.