Varmint Hunters Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I just purchased a Remington VSSF II in .204 ruger. I am now looking for reccomendations on what scope to put on this gun. I am thinking of going with either a Nikon Monarch UCC 5.5 - 16.5 x 44mm (AO), or a Leupold VXII 6-18 x 40mm (AO).

I would like to hear everyones thoughts on both of these scopes, pro and cons, as well as what are your thoughts on going with the target model or standard W/E adjustment knobs?

All comments are sincerely appreciated, I am new to the board.

-Flyfisher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,401 Posts
Nothing wrong with either one IMHO

First of all, welcome to THE best board on the net. Glad you felt comfortable enough to post. Great bunch of folks on this board if you haven't noticed already.

I'm partial to the Nikons, and especially the one you are looking at... the 5.5-16.5. It is the best scope that I own for optics. Very clear, holds zero perfectly, and can handle some rough treatment too. Where the Nikons are best in my opinion is in low light (early morning and late evening) situations. The Niko-plex (?) cross hairs are my pick over the fine cross hairs too. All this and they are less expensive than the Leo's usually.

If you can get a good deal on it, don't back off of a 6.5-20x Nikon either.... Sweeeeeet scope they are. WD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
935 Posts
WD nailed it

Next scope will be a 4th Nikon 5.5-16.5. GREAT scope and I hunt a lot in low light conditions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
210 Posts
Midway has Nikon's on sale

Midway has a good buy on some Monarch's now. Check them out. Nikon makes a very good product at darn near 1/2 the price of Leupold.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
Both offer high quality....

The Nikon Monarch scopes I bought because the image seemed less 'compressed'..... or more true than the new Leupold VX3's. Maybe jut my eyes. The dollars saved is just icing on the cake.

Both were crystal clear, edge to edge, and good in low light, but the Nikon a tad better in the low-light dept. They also hold their zero, and the adjustments work like they should.

In fact, I liked the scopes enough to buy a Nikon Monarch binocular too. (8X40) and for $210.00 am real happy with the low-light ability of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Don't want to take away from your post, but

What about Burris Signatures. How would you guys rate it compared to the others? I kind of like mine. They do seem a little heavier though. Darrel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
I have shot almost nothing but Leupold my whole life with the exception of several Nikon 6.5-20 Monarchs and several Nightforces..After my experience with the last VX3 I owned in a 6.5-20 30mm LR side focus model I'm done with Leupold.I had huge problems with parallax and the scope would not repeat or track properly through windage and elevation adjustments.I thought I just had a faulty scope untill I spoke with several other guys shooting at longer ranges and they had the same complaint about the new VX3's.I had a Nikon Buckmaster 6-18 with target knobs walk all over the Leupold VX3 LR for tracking and repeatability..Do the math 279.00 to your door for the Nikon versus 850.00 for the Leupold......I would take a Nightforce any day over a Leupold.....As far as I see it Leupolds dropped the ball.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
I have a Nikon Monarch with the Mil-dot reticle and a couple of Leupold VX3 AO with standard fine reticles. I cannot fault the Nikon in any way, as the image quality seems be be at least equal to the Leupold.

I am interested in the VX3 Leupold long range scope with the varmint hunter reticle, but the comment of SMACK, "I had huge problems with parallax and the scope would not repeat or track properly through windage and elevation adjustments.I thought I just had a faulty scope untill I spoke with several other guys shooting at longer ranges and they had the same complaint about the new VX3's."

If this is the case, I won't drop the $850 on a Leupold. I'll need to check this out further.

Also, I've used Nikon 35 mm photo equipment for the past 35 years. Their lenses are consistently excellent, pricey perhaps, but excellent.

Best Regards, John Ciccone
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
517 Posts
Nikon

I have a 6.5x20 Monarch, great scope, in my opinion and I intend to buy more of them. Look at the Optic Zone, sponser on this board. Best prices I have found.


Molon Labe

Kim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Another option would be the Weaver Grand Slam. I cannot say enough good things about these scopes. Like Smack, my last Leupold really turned me off after being a loyal customer for years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Next scope will be a 4th Nikon 5.5-16.5. GREAT scope and I hunt a lot in low light conditions.
But what is the *next* riffle your putting this scope on going to be???? :)

FWIW I have no problems with the VIIIs that I owned but been a Nikon fan for quite some time now. My eyes likes em better (and so does my wallet)...

Next scope for me will be the Grand Slam... Just have to try one out!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
Nikon is a great scope

I haven't tried the Monarch, but, do have a Nikon Buckmaster in 4.5x14x40 and love it! It replaced a Leupold VX II that you are considering and the NikonBuckmaster is definately clearer and sharper. I would buy another anytime. By the way, for varmints, the most you will need will be a 16X. Anything more is overkill and of course, more $$$$$.:)
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top