Burris Fullfield II vs. Nikon Maonarch

2muchgun,
Vari-X II from around 1980. I'm sure the newer models are better, but the Vari-X II wasn't a cheap scope when I bought it. I'd even say it was more in today's dollars then a VX-II is. If I remember right, it was around $170 in 1980.

My memory's not that good, though.
crazy.gif


And yeah, the Vari-X II isn't a very bright looking scope when I'm hunting heavy timber in the rain/fog. That's about 75% of elk season here, typically.
grin.gif
 
Last edited:
I think the Nikon Buckmaster is more on a par with the Burris FF and Leupold VXII, the Monarch with the VXIII and the higher Burris. I had an older Burris FF on a 7mm mag and the eye relief was a little close I replaced it with a VXII and gave the Burris to a grandson.
 
Japan=early monarch
Nikon's standard procedure is to get the early production done in Japan (LOW), then shift to other areas. Thailand and Phillipines for most models on the monarch(early-no descriptor) and monarch ucc line.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Blackhawk43I think the Nikon Buckmaster is more on a par with the Burris FF and Leupold VXII, the Monarch with the VXIII and the higher Burris. I had an older Burris FF on a 7mm mag and the eye relief was a little close I replaced it with a VXII and gave the Burris to a grandson.

agree with the comparing makes and models. i had a buckmaster and almost went with the burris as an upgrade. and i know we're not comparing the buckmaster. but i'm also not a fan of the bdc reticle in the nikon- not my cup of tea. how can you be exact with open circles? in contrast, i like the ballistic plex of the burris. if it was my money, i'd choose neither, and i did. Vortex Viper 3.5-10x50mm with dead hold BDC. Absolutely love it. Lifetime transferable warranty. great reticle. 2nd clearest scope i've looked through IMO. I think it's clarity is right with the swarovski and i really like the zeiss reticle and clarity. as for eye relief, i really don't consider it in my scope purchases.
 
Originally Posted By: Blackhawk43Josh, I don't always consider eye relief either unless it is a magnum rifle, those funny little half-moon tatoos in an eye brow hurt.

Agreed. LOL
 
Bear Basin has great prices in general. That's where I purchased my Burris Fullfield II 4.5-14 BDC.

For the past 3 years I've used this scope on my Savage 30-06 last 5 hunts (javalina and deer). My brother has the Nikon Monarch 4-16 BDC on his Remington 300WM. For medium/large game and with distances beyond 400 yards, I would definitely go with the Nikon. Their BDC is better for this application.

For "any" game under 300 yards, either would be great and I will tend to favor the Burris. The BDC is better as it gives a better view of your target for when doing hold-overs.

As for clarity, IMHO, both are about the same. I think the Nikon is slightly better. It seems to gather a little bit more light.

On both scopes, I found windage/elevation adjustments to be accurate and return to zero is consistent (box test). Both rifles grouped sub-MOA @ 100 yards and 200 yards with factory Remington CoreLoct 150gr SP in .308 and 300WM.

If I had to do it all over again, I would choose the Nikon Monarch for my 30-06. But, for predators, I would have to go with the Burris Fullfield II.
 
Back
Top