Rifle Scopes Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

[firestorm1284]

Hey guys, quick question for all the wise members on this forum. I have had good luck with Nikon Monarch scopes in the past, and I am looking at buying another for a new rifle build. It will sit on top an LR-308, which will normally shoot under 300 yards, however I would like the ABILITY to go out to 1000.

I am looking at two scopes, the standard Nikon Monarch 4-16x with side focus (model 8421) and the Nikon Tactical 2.5-10x (model 8410). I am looking for advice for which one to get with COST in mind.

I know the obvious advantages of the tactical are the turret adjustment knobs, and more internal adjustment as it has a 30mm tube vs the 1" on the standard monarch. However the standard monarch has more magnification and is significantly cheaper.

How much better IS the tactical in terms of quality? Is it worth the extra cost?

 

[OpticsPlanet]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

I've had the oppurtunity to use both almost side by side. First comment definitley is you need a 30mm tube to have a reacher for those 100 yards shots. Most shooters want the ability to go from 200 yards, to 600 yards, to 1000+ yards and you want the extra internal adjustment in the 30mm tube. If you want a fixed 1000 yard rifle, the 1'' tube will work, but you will need a 20 MOA mount at least. As for what I noticed, probably limited to teh exposed turrets. I have alwasy been happy with Nikon glass, but the turrets were solid for me. I do think the Monarch X would be the best choice for you just from the 30mm tube to the finger adj, turrets. You wont be unhappy with it. Also, check out their Spot On software, works great and you will be amazed at how it puts you on target.

Trevor B
OpticsPlanet

 

[WVChrome]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

I'm going through a very similar decision process right now, although mine is for a 5.56 build. Here are somethings I'm considering. FWIW, I'm looking at a Nikon Monarch Tactical as well.

IMO, marked target turrets are a requirement on any scope shooting at different distances. If you plan to shoot to 1000 yards, do you know what your drop will be? Translate that to clicks. Do you want to count out 150 some clicks on a .25 MOA scope without target turrets?

Don't get caught up in the "more magnification is better" crowd. More is not necessarily better. Clarity is more important. The higher the magnification you go, the more the quality of the glass matters as clarity will begin to suffer. I'm not saying the Nikons aren't clear, just don't go wild over more magnification. How much shooting at 1000 do you plan to do? I would think a 10x would be plenty for the occasional shoot.



What I'm looking for (mind you this is for a 5.56) is a scope with a simple duplex (Nikon calls theirs the Nikoplex or something) and 1/4 MOA adjustments on marked positive click target turrets with a return to zero. Getting into a mil/mil scope is getting to the high end, outside of my budget of ~$500, and not necessary for shooting around 500 yards max.

Later,
Chrome...

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

Thanks for the info guys! I was leaning towards the tactical, but I wanted to make sure it was worth the extra cash. I don't plan on shooting to 1000 often at all, my local ranges only go to 300, but I will be going out west on occasion and would like the ABILITY to shoot at those distances.

I am aware that more magnification is not always better (although it is hard not to fall into that trap), but I was curious if the OPTICS are actually better on the tactical, or whether the price difference was just for the target knobs and the 30mm tube.

WVChrome - did you see that Nikon is running a sale right now on their m223 scopes? If you buy one, they give you a free one piece scope base that looks pretty nice. It's apparently a 100 dollar value.

 

[WVChrome]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

I did see the free mount. In all honesty, it would have been a place holder until a Larue SPR could replace it.

I actually just snagged a great deal on a Leupy Mark AR though. $200 for like new condition, made it hard to pass up.

Later,
Chrome...

 

[njlohmann]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

I actually have a similar build (LR-308 and nikon monarch) It worked well for me but I think I'm going to sell it to finance a Rem 700

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

njlohmann - what do you have? I might be interested in buying your rig.

 

[Niles Coyote]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

I run a 2.5-10x tactical on my 308 Remington Tactical and an X (same power range) on my 223 Rem Tactical. Using a 30 moa EGW rail I'm two turns from the bottom so you could run a 45 moa rail and have a zero stop of sorts. Glass is good, they track well and are made to take a beating. Making hits at 1000 with it set on 10x on the 308 is no problem... well that is when I get the wind right, but that’s all me and no fault of the optic. The only negative I have is the field of view is a little narrower when compared to my Leupold and Nightforce scopes at the same power setting but it’s not enough to make it a deal breaker.

How they compare to the 1" monarch, I can't say, never used/looked through one. I do have a couple monarch gold's (30mm tube) and don't see myself selling those any time soon as they are outstanding for a hunting optic. They compare well to every optic I’ve looked through so far until you get into the 2000 dollar range, image wise… noticeably better than the MK4’s I’ve owned. They have been holding there zeros and tracking dependably as well.

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

Niles - That's what I like to hear! I will definitely be going with the 2.5-10x Tactical. I can't wait to get this rig put this rig together! A 30 MOA base seems kind of steep, do you really need 30 MOA to get to 1000? I was thinking like a 15 or 20 MOA base at most... hopefully I'm not way off there.

 

[Niles Coyote]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

No, there is enough room there you could probably get by with a flat base. I bought the 30 moa because I knew there was no zero stop and wanted to be close to the bottom so I could verify my zero if I lost count of what turn I was on. Just a connivance thing for me.

I'd have to double check but I believe there is 80+ moa of adjustment range in them.

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

Niles - I see what you are saying. I misunderstood your previous post. I like your idea, I just don't like how high the cheek weld gets with those elevated bases, so I like to keep mine as flat as possible. Thanks for the info and advice!

 

[craigp40]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

I have both scopes, except my Tactical is the older version with a 4-16 mag. Get the tactical. Glass between the two is about the same, but the functional operation you are looking for lends itself more to the tactical version. If this was primarily a hunting rig where you wouldn't be cranking knobs a lot, the standard is fine. The tactical is built and designed better to handle the abuse and constant turret adjustments. My tactical is built like a tank and I love it. I've often thought about getting rid of it because it has the standard mildot reticle, but just can't bring myself to do it. I love the knobs even though they are only 10 moa per turn. The adjustments are very clear and distinct.

 

[firestorm1284]

Re: Nikon Monarch vs. Nikon Monarch Tactical

Craig - Sounds like the tactical is definitely the way to go. Thanks for confirming that for me!