Kirch

what does a nikon buckmaster and monarch compare to in the Leupold world. VX I & VXII?

A buddy is considering the following scopes for a .300 WSM.

Buckmaster 3x9-40 $199
Monarch Primos 3x9x40 $299.

Is the Monarch worth the extra $100? Also, what Leupold models compare to these Nikons??

Tuco

I can tell you I have a Buckmaster Nikon 3x9 on a Ruger .270 and it is my favorite scope I have. Not the most expensive, but for some reason when I look thru it I feel it is my best one. Has held its zero for over a 100 shots in all kind of weather. I am thinking of a H&R Handi-Rifle in S&W .500 one of these days for Indiana deer hunting and it will have a Nikon on it.

bigcountry

I have a few monarchs, and will say they have clarity equal or better than conqeust or my loopys Vari-XIII. Only thing I don't like is you lose site picture so easy with all nikon products. I think its where they place thier erector lenses. I never was a fan of the buckmasters. I put them little better than VX1's

Tuco

You know, one of the best scopes I ever had was an old fixed power 4x weaver from the 1970's. My grandpa gave it to me for Christmas one year. I put that thing on every gun I had. I had it stole out of my truck in the mid 80's it was on a 10/22 at the time. You mention losing the sight pic with the Nikons, something that helped me when I 40 was shooting with both eyes open even with a scope. Took a little time to get used to, but works great in heavy woods.

bigcountry

I would love to shoot both eyes open and can when I shoot left handed, but prefer right handed. But am extreme left eye dominant. It really limits me.

apexpredator

I just replaced an older 3x9x40Vari-X II w/ a Nikon Buckmasters 4.5x14x40 sf from the sample list. Can't believe the difference, the Nikon is much brighter & sharper & the adjustment clicks are solid. Of course the vari-x II is probably a few years behind on the lens coatings due to it's age. Anyway I'm happy

MichaelT.

better than vx II. Overall.


I own several brands of scopes , of all different focal ranges.

I own7 Nikons.3 are Monarchs and4 are buckmasters.

They are a quality scope with great lenses. They have positive click windage and elevation adjustments. The VX I don't and the VX II 's didn't but I am not sure about now.

I have never had a problem with one of my Nikons, and 2 of them are 16 years old.

kdvollmer

I had always grown up a fan of Leupold, based on reputation, that was the scope to have, ut times have changes IMO. I think that the Leupold overall quality as gone down pretty significantly in the last few years.
I used to have Nikon Buckmaster on my Rem 700 PSS .308. I bought Nikon at the time because it was the most I could afford. Crystal clear. I had shot it out to 700+meters on prairie dogs. I won't say I hit them all, but I got a few. Anyhow, that rifle was stolen from my truck a few years back, so I moved up to a .338 Lapua Mag. My first choice was a Nightforce scope, but the one that I wanted was backordered, so I went with a Luepold MK 4. maybe 4 shots with my .338, and a piece of reticle came loose. Not the quality that I would expect from a big bore tactical scope. To be honest, I would rather have the Nikon back instead of the Luepold. it was MUCH CLEARER, and more reliable.
So all that said, I wouldn't spend the money to buy another Leupold...EVER, but that is just me. I am very comfortable to say that you would be very happy with the Nikon product between those 2 choices.

beast44k

I just a Pentax Pioneer,the same scope as a Burris FFII, but with a no fault lifetime warrantee.

Paid $220, but they have a Gameseeker model that runsjust over$100,but I felt itmay not hold up to a .50 cal muzzleloader.