Nikon Monarch vs Buckmaster

[A bolt fan]

Hey folks,

I would like to get some opinions here. I am getting ready to put a new scope on an extra rifle of mine. I have a Nikon Monarch 3.5-10x50 on on of my rifles and it is an excellent scope. The only thing i am not crazy about is that the field of view is not as wide as I would like. I am debating between a Monarch 3-9X40 and a Buckmasters 3x9-50. I know the monarch is a better scope because of the quality of the glass and the lens coatings, but am wondering about light transmission in low light. If anyone has experience with both scopes do you think the larger objective of the Buckmasters will transmit more light than the Monarch with the smaller objective lens? The buckmasters does have a slightly larger exit pupil, will thatoffset the higher quality lens and coatings of the Monarch.

Thanks

[RedAllison]

Abolt, first ALL Nikon scopes have exactly the same number of lenses in them, 10! Be it a 4x40 ProStaff or a 5.5x15x50 Monarch Gold. The difference is in the lense coating and the seals used. The Buckmasters series is rated at 92-93% light transmission. The Monarch is rated at 95% (the theoretical max %age available to be had, the other 5% is claimed to be loss through refraction, bending and moving through the scope itself). I have both Monarch and Buckmasters scopes, they are great scopes ESPECIALLY for the price. IMHO the 3x9x40 BM is THE greatest scope on the market for under $200.

From my personal experience of being in and working around the sportings goods industry, at the retail level, in 15+ years of working for a Nikon dealer we had the most returns with ProStaffs, probably between 6-12 annually. We would get about half a dozen returns a year with BuckMasters and in that time period (15+ years) I can't recall over half a dozen returns of Monarch products. That's from a store selling over 100 pieces of Nikon each season. So you can see the return/problem rate on the Monarch series was CONSIDERABLY better than the other two.

That extra 2% doesn't sound like much, and really it probably isn't when you consider that the Buckmasters will get you past legal shooting time in most conditions. I just like the Monarch for the extra toughness and typically small price difference ($100-$150 between most equal Monarchs vs Buckmasters). As for your question about the 3x9x50 BM, I think a bell that large on a 9x scope is a waste of money and requires you to go too taller rings. It has been my experience that the only scopes that merit a 50mm bell are those of 12x or larger power. They need the extra pupil size for lowlight performance. A 9x 40mm scope will yield a 5mm pupil. In lowlight conditions your own eyes pupils won't be that large!

I would recommend the Monarch or the 3x9x40 BM for your purposes,
RA

[Western MA Hunter]

I do not own a Monarch, only a Buckmaster & Prostaff. I have been overly satisfied w/ both.