Nikon rifle scopes

[Lazydays]

Never owned one, and use mostly Leupold scopes. The otherday I was shopping for a new scope to put on a .223 Lo-Wall (really neat little rifle). I figure that the rifle is good for about 250 yards accurately, so I just don't need a 20X scope. I looked at a couple Leupolds and the guy asked me to look thru a 16X Nikon that had the bullet drop rectile in it. I kinda liked it, but then looked thru a 12X, and liked it even better. Then I tried the 8X version and liked it even more (seemed clearer and brighter). Now like I said I've never owned a Nikon rifle scope, and have never used the bullet drop rectile feature. Anybody on here use this scope and the feature? I rarely shoot .223's over 350 yards anyway (coyotes), and I may just change over my 700 Remington if the feature works well.
gary

 

[hogpatrol]

Here's my .02. Nikons made in China are of questionable quality. I had two I had to send back for fogging. The contrast wasn't that good either. After that, done with Nikons. For my budget, on my rifles, I stick to Leupolds, Sightrons and Weavers that are made in the USA or Japan.

 

[Heavy barrel]

When comparing scope you need to compare them on the same power. Set the 16x & 12x on 8x & then comare them again. You loose a little clarity when you use a higher power.

 

[Bangs OH]

Agree with hog patrol, though I'm sure the (Buckmaster and Monarchs) are made in the Philippines; I've had two of each and will never do Nikon again. They and Bushnell are a bit behind today's curve. I've bought Leopold, Minox (assembled in US, Schott glass) and Sightron (SII Big Sky and SIII) the past two years. All have good glass and so-far perfect, reliable controls. If you look through Leupold's new, improved VX-2 in 4-12 or 6-18x I 'll bet you'll forget about that Nikon. Add a LRV reticle or CDS and you and that sweet rifle will be ready for any 'yote within killing range.

 

[BobLeeSwagger223]

I have had 2 Buckmasters and a Monarch and for the money I think they are a great buy! I never have had a problem.

For reticles I think the BDC circles are way too big for precision work. On the higher power scopes the target fits inside the circle with room to spare which I find to be a downside. I owned one of the Buckmaster 4-14x40 scopes with the mildot reticle amd really liked it. Lastly consider those BDC reticles are set for a specific power so with all of the Nikon scopes changing the power setting will change the distance between each circle/mildot. Not a major downfall just wanted to make sure you were aware of it. Hope that helps

 

[bhoges]

Currently I use Nightforce, Zeiss, Swarovski, Leupold, Steiner and Nikon. I guess Ive had Nikon's for 15yrs at least. I never never had an issue and think for their price the optics are very high quality. With the Spot On program and the BDC reticle long range shooting is easily accomplished. Im such a fan of the BDC I just installed one on my new Browning X Bolt. I compete with my M4 and just love the M223 line. I constantly crank the turrets and never have any issues with zero. Nor have they ever fogged.

 

[NateHaler]

Never owned one, and use mostly Leupold scopes. the guy asked me to look thru a 16X Nikon that had the bullet drop rectile in it. I kinda liked it, but then looked thru a 12X, and liked it even better. Then I tried the 8X version and liked it even more (seemed clearer and brighter).

I have a Nikon Monarch -- made in Japan -- from the late 90s. New in the original box. 2-7x32, black matte finish. Plex reticle. I've been meaning to use it on a hunting rifle, but I haven't hunted since '96, and doubt I ever will again. I'd sell it for $249 shipped in the lower 48.

In case you're interested... 8)

 

[bman940]

At the end of the day it's whatever scope fits your needs the best. As bhoges said, longrange shooting is easier utilizing Nikon's Spot On Ballistic Program to really dial in all your shooting data to enhance your accuracy. I have used Spot On and Nikon's BDC reticle to shoot past 600 yards on numerous occasion's with excellent accuracy. I have even watched guy's use my stock rifle's and blow up 4 inch jars of tannerite at 623 yards. Believe me, that day we made a lot of converts!
I don't try to talk people into a NIkon scope, I do my best to pass on the pro's and then you have to look down the tube and see if it fit's your requirements. I know not every scope fit's every application, but for a hunting reticle I think it is darn hard to beat a BDC scope for it's ability to fill the freezer.
As for the M-223, I'm a big fan I was even before I started doing some work for Nikon. They work, plain and simple. I shoot at a number of event's bot PR and competitive and I have never had an issue. I have noticed a few guy's using Nikon's P-223 3X Carbine scope at recent 3-gun events. Guy's like this scope because it's clear and allows guy's to shoot with their eyes open.

Something that might be a benefit for anyone looking to scope their AR, Nikon has a Mount 'Em Up promo going on right now, buy a scope and get a free M-223 or P-223 AR Mount, pretty good deal.


As always, any question's please drop me a note.

Bart

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd363/bman940/p-2233-9.jpg

 

[BigDMT]

I've owned 2 Nikon Monarch 4-16X50mm scopes and still have one with the BDC reticle. The other one I sold with a rifle as a package. I really like them for the price. They are right on par with Leupold VXII-VXIII for clarity.

Big difference between Nikon Monarch and Leupold you will clearly notice in low light. The Nikon gathers a LOT more light than a Leupold. You have to get up to the Leupold Mark 4 before you can match the low light performance of the Nikon Monarch. And yes, I have owned a 4.5-14X50 Leupold Mark 4 so I know this as a fact. The Mark 4 was a little clearer, but did not gather any more light than the Monarch which cost half as much.

The one Monarch I still have has been on a 358 Norma Magnum custom rifle for about 7 years and has been getting hammered by the recoil of that rifle launching 225gr Nosler Partitions at 3050 fps the entire time. It has never crept one bit from zero or ever failed to perform flawlessly. So even though the Monarchs are made in the Phillipines, I have to give it to them because they make a very reliable scope.

I have no experience with any of the less expensive Nikon model scopes so I cannot comment on them. I have heard a lot of bad things about the Prostaff line having quality issues and failures under recoil so I would probably stay away from that line.

 

[K22]

My older 16x Nikon Monarch made in Japan is an excellent scope - good resolution, clear optic, repeatable turrets, and holds zero. Been using for many many years and I like it a lot.

I purchased a 16x Monarch two years ago. Had no idea that they are now made in the Phillipines. Would not hold zero - determined this after an exhausive process of elimination. Also had resolution issues with it at 16x. Send the scope back - twice - on the second try they fixed the hold zero issue but the resolution is still very poor so I use the scope set at 12x on a practice rifle - don't trust it for hunting.

I have several Leupold VXIII's and VXII's and never had an issue with any of them. I got a deal on the last Nikon which turned out to be no deal at all. Less learned - next time I need a scope it will be a Leupold for me.

 

[tjtjwdad]

I’ve owned the following Nikons;

1. 6.5-20x44 (AO) Monarch. Loved it but the reticle broke and Nikon replaced it with a;

2. 6-24x50 (SF) Monarch. Great scope up until 18x. Above that the contrast just wasn’t as sharp as it is on the lower settings, regardless of the lighting conditions.

3. 4.5-14x40 (AO) Buckmaster. I like it for what I use it for (17 HMR) better than the newer SF models.

When my original Nikon Monarch broke the reticle Nikon replaced it free of charge so in my experience they do stand behind their product.

 

[WyleWD]

I have 4 Nikon scopes. All are Monarchs. Three of them are 6.5-20x, the other one is a 5.5-16.5x. Have had them for quite a while now and never had a bit of trouble with any of them. All of them are exceptional in low light situations. WD

 

[firearmdoc1]

I have owned and used numerous Nikon scopes and have never had any problems with any of them. I feel they are a great deal for the money, just my experience with them.

 

[Lazydays]

At the end of the day it's whatever scope fits your needs the best. As bhoges said, longrange shooting is easier utilizing Nikon's Spot On Ballistic Program to really dial in all your shooting data to enhance your accuracy. I have used Spot On and Nikon's BDC reticle to shoot past 600 yards on numerous occasion's with excellent accuracy. I have even watched guy's use my stock rifle's and blow up 4 inch jars of tannerite at 623 yards. Believe me, that day we made a lot of converts!
I don't try to talk people into a NIkon scope, I do my best to pass on the pro's and then you have to look down the tube and see if it fit's your requirements. I know not every scope fit's every application, but for a hunting reticle I think it is darn hard to beat a BDC scope for it's ability to fill the freezer.
As for the M-223, I'm a big fan I was even before I started doing some work for Nikon. They work, plain and simple. I shoot at a number of event's bot PR and competitive and I have never had an issue. I have noticed a few guy's using Nikon's P-223 3X Carbine scope at recent 3-gun events. Guy's like this scope because it's clear and allows guy's to shoot with their eyes open.

Something that might be a benefit for anyone looking to scope their AR, Nikon has a Mount 'Em Up promo going on right now, buy a scope and get a free M-223 or P-223 AR Mount, pretty good deal.


As always, any question's please drop me a note.

Bart

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd363/bman940/p-2233-9.jpg

Thanks for all the replies fellas!

You have to remember that the Lo-Wall will never be able to shoot with a Mod. 700 or a Savage bolt gun from the start, so yardage will be a little shorter. Looks like it has a 14 twist barrel, but it maybe a 12 twist. I have not made a serious measurment. I kinda figure 250 yards will be about it, but then again it might go out to 300 yards. The rifle dosn't lend itself to shooting off a rest very well, and just will never be a target quality rifle. With that aside, I think 12X is about the max I could ever need, and 10X would be perfect. But with an 8X scope and a 32mm lense it should be very bright. The next issue is eye reliefe, and my old age. The Leupolds and the Nikons seemed to have plenty. Have not looked thru any of the newer Burris scopes in awhile, so I can't say much about them. I do have a couple 40mm lense Leupold 3x-9x scopes in the safe, and could probably do just fine with one of them (no they are not for sale!). I also have a Burris 6.5x-20x scope in the gloss finish that I have considered (look good on the high gloss LO-Wall), but would be the last one I'd use.

As for scopes for sale, I have a new in the box Weaver T36 with the dot that I'd be more than willing to part with
gary

 

[fr3db3ar]

I have several 4.5-14 Buckmasters, both BDC and Mildot. I'm a fan of side focus so these were a good choice.

I have had zero problems with them. Tracking seems to be good for the shooting I do. ( max 400) so far

 

[boltgunluvr]

Well.......I do have a Leupold Mark 4 3.5-10x40mm for sale!

 

[digger11]

I have 4 nikons all with the BDC.In my opinion they work great.
The next scope I buy will be another BDC Nikon.

 

[Cold Bore]

I've been using a couple/few Monarch 6.5-20X's on groundhog rifles for years.

I always used Leupolds (and still do a lot). I bought the first Nikon because it was a deal too good to pass up, and figured it was worth a try at that price. After using it, I now happily buy them when I can find a fair deal on one.