The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 19, 2009, 06:58 PM   #1
silentstorm16
Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 59
Nikon Buckmaster vs Nikon Monarch

I'm looking between the Nikon buckmaster Riflescope, 4.5x-14x, 40mm with nikoplex site for $267 and the Nikon Monarch Riflescope, 4x-16x, 42mm, Mil-Dot for $382 or Nikon Monarch Riflescope, 3x-12x, 42mm, Nikoplex with lustre for $339. Anybody have experience and also does anyone know what the difference between lustre and matte finish I look all over and cannot find any website showing the difference or describing the difference.
silentstorm16 is offline  
Old January 19, 2009, 08:01 PM   #2
tINY
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2005
Location: Orygun
Posts: 2,589

The Buckmaster line is the "good" line and the Monarch is the "high end" line.

The Monach will have a bit better optics, but it's crawling up the dimminishing return curve...




-tINY

tINY is offline  
Old January 19, 2009, 10:45 PM   #3
BeCoole
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 2, 2002
Posts: 170
Glass isn't the only place they cut corners to make cheap scopes.
BeCoole is offline  
Old January 19, 2009, 10:54 PM   #4
Fat White Boy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2005
Posts: 1,276
I have a 3-9X49 BuckMaster on my Model 70 Winchester in .270 Win. It is durable, accurate and has held its zero...A good investment...
Fat White Boy is offline  
Old January 19, 2009, 11:24 PM   #5
Brad Clodfelter
Registration in progress
 
Join Date: January 26, 2007
Posts: 925
Both are great scopes. The Nikon Monarch lenses transmit 95% of available light. The Nikon Buckmasters lenses transmit 92% of available light. I had a Monarch scope. One of the best I have owed for the money.
Brad Clodfelter is offline  
Old January 20, 2009, 01:22 AM   #6
Swampghost
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2008
Location: Florida, east coast
Posts: 2,106
I didn't notice the difference and cheaped out with the Buckmaster for a .243. It's all been good so far.

I worked a total of 32 days in '07 so you can guess where my finances are.:barf:
__________________
NRA Patron Member
Swampghost is offline  
Old January 20, 2009, 07:59 AM   #7
Kreyzhorse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 11,452
The Buckmaster is a good scope and will certainly serve you well for hunting and shooting. The Monarch transmits more light than the Buckmaster and in my opinion, tops any thing that Zeiss or Leupold makes in that same price range.

You can't go wrong with either, but if you have the extra money, you won't be disappointed in the Monarch.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson
Kreyzhorse is offline  
Old January 20, 2009, 11:28 AM   #8
kenjs1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 129
Silentstorm- the Buckmaster matches your needs very well. Paper punching in daylight conditions is not very demanding and I doubt you would gain much from the Monarchs capabilities under those circumstances. Not to sell the Buckmaster short by saying that- it is a good scope. You are on the right track with good choices here- but I would still have you look at the 3-12x42 Sighton I mentioned. It compares favorably to the Monarch as far as glass and coatings. The Sightron has a superior reputation for tracking ability and a lifetime replacement warranty. Sightron may have a little better eye relief and costs roughly what a Buckmaster does. Seems to me to be the perfect fit in so many ways including size\power and extremely capable should low light hunting or darker conditions enter into it. You were interested in side focus and turrets - what about mil-dots of some kind? Seems like the three sort of go hand in hand.
kenjs1 is offline  
Old January 20, 2009, 12:40 PM   #9
thinkingman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 27, 2008
Location: western WA
Posts: 690
I had a BM 6-18 sidefocus and it just wasn't clear at 18X.
Traded it and got a Monarch 6.5-20 and all is good at full power.
There is a big difference.
thinkingman is offline  
Old January 20, 2009, 05:18 PM   #10
tkofoid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2008
Location: N. D.
Posts: 149
I opted for the 6.5X20 monarch simply to get the the fine crosshair. I think the buckmaster is a good scope,too. Depends on intended usage,mostly.
tkofoid is offline  
Old January 20, 2009, 09:49 PM   #11
Antihero47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 2, 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 111
I have not used the Monarchs, but I do have a BM 4.5x14x40 MilDot. Works perfectly for target shooting and would serve me fine for hunting.
Antihero47 is offline  
Old January 21, 2009, 02:56 PM   #12
silentstorm16
Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2009
Posts: 59
Thanks for all your input I opted for the buckmaster 4x-16x 40mm with mildot for $267 + free shipping. I opted to upgrade in the future. Also the $120 I saved I spent on a egw 1 piece picannty mount, burris xtreme tactical 1inch med rings, a caldwell front shooting bag, and butler creek scope cap covers.
silentstorm16 is offline  
Old January 21, 2009, 05:03 PM   #13
kenjs1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 129
congrats - looking forward to hearing how it shoots and how you like it. Go have a blast!
kenjs1 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09480 seconds with 7 queries