Nikon Monarch 3-9X40 vs. Bushnell Sharpshooter Scope
 

I recently purchased a Nikon Team Primos Scope 3-9X40 for my Remington 700. It replaced my Bushnell Trophy 6-18X40 because it had not enough eye relief.

I thought the Team Primos is originally a Nikon Monarch with the BDC reticle, which consider many to be a great scope w/ up to 95% light transmission.
After reading lots of good comments about the Monarch series I decided to give it a chance.

I do also have a Remington 710 with a Bushnell Sharpshooter 3-9X40 scope, which is a $30 scope, working flawless.

After comparing these 2 scopes under low light condition and at daylight trying to read license plates I was expecting to see at least a difference in optical performance between these 2 scopes. I mean its pretty unfair comparing a $30 scope to a $250 scope.

But I was shocked i could not see ANY difference! The Bushnell has even a bigger FOV!
I checked the lenses if there is something wrong with them but found nothing butI discoveredsome fatty fluid on the lenses with my LED flashlight, I tried to remove it but that is pretty tough, not sure if Nikon uses that in the manufacturing process. Also the lenses collect dust so easiliy like a magnet.Used the lenspen for cleaning, butI mean the scope is brand new a few days old.

My question:
Is the Bushnell so good or did I get a defective Nikon Primos/ Monarch Scope?

Thanks.
Matt.

link on Nikon's website:
http://www.nikondownload.com/models/...TeamPrimos.doc[/align]

RE: Nikon Monarch 3-9X40 vs. Bushnell Sharpshooter Scope
 

It sounds like something is wrong to me. I have a nikon monarch 40mm in 4-12x and it is very clear and useable until after legal shooting light.