Nikon Monarc or Burris FF II

**woodshed** · 08-29-2007, 03:44 PM

I've been using a cheap bushnell on my Model 70 in 270 WSM. I guess the recoil was too much. The lenses inside came loose and are just banging around in there. You definately get what you pay for with glass!!

Anyhow, I'm in the 250 range for a scope. I'm thinking about the Nikon Monarc for 199.00 or the Burris Fullfield II for 189.00 or in a package at Bass Pro GPS for 239 or with binocs for 199.00. I've got binocs of the same quality as these, but would take the 199 package if the burris scope is a better scope than the Nikon for 199.

I don't own a GPS, is the Garmin ETrex any good?

It's about the scope mosty of course. Do you like the NIkon or Burris or any other in 200 - 250 range??

thanks for you help!!

**257bob** · 08-29-2007, 04:08 PM

Go with the Monarch. I think they are a little higher quality of glass than the Burris. IMO

**woodshed** · 08-29-2007, 05:17 PM

another question if I may,,,

On the Nikon Monarc, has anybody had issues with the circles at ranges being to big. I had a sales man say that at 200 yards the circle covers the whole deer. Is this the case?
thanks

**wtnhunt** · 08-29-2007, 05:20 PM

Yep, would agree, and in a 3-9X40 both can be bought at about the same price right now. Have both scopes, both have been on my deer rifle, the monarch is on it now and is a bit brighter and clearer than the burris fullfield II. The burris is not a bad scope at all for the oney, just not quite as sharp and bright as the monarch. Dont personally think any other scope in that price range outperfroms the monarch.

The binos that come with the burris package are just ok, they are good as a back up pair, my oldest daughter uses them when we go hunting so we each have a pair.

**wtnhunt** · 08-29-2007, 05:26 PM

On the Nikon Monarc, has anybody had issues with the circles at ranges being to big. I had a sales man say that at 200 yards the circle covers the whole deer. Is this the case?

Think you are talking about the omega with the bdc, think the monarch that you are seeing for $199 at natchez is the standard 3-9X40 and does not have the bdc.

ronin · 08-29-2007, 07:05 PM

I agree with 257...the Nikon is great glass pure and simple. I have a couple of Monarch's and even a Buckmaster. Both are very clear and bright. I just started working with the ballistic range finder option on the monarch and found the circles were actually quite nice. I ranged my 300 WBY at 300 yards with a 6" circle and the corresponding circle on the scope was slightly larger.

I also like Leupold quite a bit but don't see much of a difference in clarity with my VXIII as compared to the Monarch. For that matter, I have a Simmons Aetec Master that seems just as clear.

**LifeNRA** · 08-29-2007, 10:05 PM

Originally Posted by 257bob

Go with the Monarch. I think they are a little higher quality of glass than the Burris. IMO

Definitely!!! Go with the Nikon!!!

**woodshed** · 08-29-2007, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by wtnhunt

Think you are talking about the omega with the bdc, think the monarch that you are seeing for $199 at natchez is the standard 3-9X40 and does not have the bdc.

wtnhunt,

I spoke with a man at Natchez about the bdc and he didn't mention that it wasn't part of this scope. We specifically discussed this reticle, so I need to confirm this point. From the sounds of this discussion, I should get the Nikon. I'm surely going to check if the bdc reticle is included.

thanks for mentioning that, because I really want this feature. I'll pay extra for it if need be. I just want to make sure for the money the Nikon is the way to go versus the Burris or any other brand.

**wtnhunt** · 08-29-2007, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by woodshed

I spoke with a man at Natchez about the bdc and he didn't mention that it wasn't part of this scope. From the sounds of this discussion, I should get the Nikon. I'm surely going to check if the bdc reticle is included.

thanks for mentioning that, because I really want this feature.

The nikon monarch scopes that are 3-9X40 for $199 have the nikoplex reticle I think, I know neither of the two I have are the models with the bdc, but natchez will not sell to TN residents, the 2 monarch scopes I own came from swfa and cabelas. The burris fullfield II I have has the ballistic plex reticles, similar to the bdc. I took that burris scope off of my.270 and put it on my AR-15, it is a good scope, but just not as bright as the monarchs and honestly here where shots are rarely over 200 yards there is not enough drop to even use compensating reticles. Another good nikon scope mentioned is the buckmaster scope, it is in that price range as well and is every bit as bright and clear as the burris. First nikon scope I bought was a buckmasters scope, it went on my wifes .243. Have been pretty well sold on the nikons since.

**yooperkenny** · 08-30-2007, 09:26 AM

I use a Monarch 3x9x40 on my Tikka T3 and love it - they claim 95% light transmission, but all I know is that it's bright and clear.

I also have the Garmin eTrex Legend GPS and so far it's worked well - I don't have the loss of satellite reception that others claim they get in thick woods. I got it in a package with topo maps included and it's pretty cool!

Good Luck

**woodshed** · 08-30-2007, 11:08 AM

wtnhunt,

you are right. The Nikon is without the bdc reticle for 199.00. The decision now lies on whether that feature is a big deal to me or not. I guess the Nikon is better glass and brighter, but the burris has the bdc reticle.

This will be on a 270 WSM (pretty flat shooting bullet) and I'm not a real long range shooter anyhow. I'm talking myself out of the need/desire to have the bdc I guess.

**wtnhunt** · 08-30-2007, 11:21 AM

This will be on a 270 WSM (pretty flat shooting bullet) and I'm not a real long range shooter anyhow. I'm talking myself out of the need/desire to have the bdc I guess

Unless you are planning on shooting out past 300 yards, I would not hesitate to pass up the burris for the nikon. Like I said, I put the monarch on my .270 which is not quite as flat a shooter as your wsm and put the b-plex burris that was on my .270 on my AR. Later on I may try shooting over longer distances with the AR at targets, but I really dont see me ever taking a shot on a deer past 250 yards with my .270 and there really is not enough drop at that distance with the .270 for me personally to see the need for the bplex reticles.

**woodshed** · 08-30-2007, 12:05 PM

wtnhunt an all,

thanks for your input. Nikon it is!! I'll order it today.

**LifeNRA** · 08-30-2007, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by woodshed

I don't own a GPS, is the Garmin ETrex any good?

Yes, but make sure you get one with the high sensitivity antenna, HCx models.

Originally Posted by woodshed

wtnhunt,

I spoke with a man at Natchez about the bdc and he didn't mention that it wasn't part of this scope. We specifically discussed this reticle, so I need to confirm this point. From the sounds of this discussion, I should get the Nikon. I'm surely going to check if the bdc reticle is included.

thanks for mentioning that, because I really want this feature. I'll pay extra for it if need be. I just want to make sure for the money the Nikon is the way to go versus the Burris or any other brand.

The BDC reticle is for use on muzzle loaders. I don't think it will work on other rifles.

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/prod...0&product=8401

**woodshed** · 09-01-2007, 09:19 AM

I ordered the Nikon a couple days ago. It should be here early next week. With that and my new Lone Wolf climber I'm going to have fun with my new toys!! I'm very excited to get out there on the 15th!!

thanks guys, I can't wait to get my new scope and go to the range to sight it in.