what is a better scope. nikon monarch 3-9-40 or
bushnell elite 3200 3-9-40 thank you.

Thats hard to say. Best means different things to different people. The 3200 is a good rugged scope that is a very good light gatnering scope. The Monarch ius a great scope too but where I live, it will set you back more money wise than the 3200. I would be happy with either. However I would buy the 3200.

Bushnell Elite 3200, Im a real big fan of Bushnell

Unless your eye can tell a difference by looking through them each...whichever is cheaper. They both have good followings...but I do hear more about the elites (positive things)

mndeer hunter

The Rain Guard on the lenes "works" it is worth every penney unless it doesn't rain or snow whare you hunt... Give me the 3200 all day....

I prefer the 3200.
But to throw another wrinkle in your plans check out the Weaver Grand Slam. I think its a better scope than the two you mentioned.
http://www.brunoshooters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=BSS&Pro duct_Code=WEO800473

Iown a 3200 with Rainguard and Firefly reticle. Can't say that I'm very impressed with it. Wish I owned the Nikon instead.

I've now got three Nikons and they have never failed me. I used to have Leupold but foundNikons to be as good but less expensive. However, I havenoticed that Nikon's prices aresneaking up.

Ican't compare it to the Bushnells, I've never shot one.

I like Nikons. They are about the lowest priced scope I think is worth putting on a rifle. In my opinion, the Buckmaster is hard to beat, especially for the price.