cedarcreekcooner
New member
Which is the better scope the Monarch or the 4200?
Nikon Monarch or Bushnell Elite 4200
- Thread starter cedarcreekcooner
- Start date
specializedcc
New member
Cant go wrong with that 4200
One shot Paul
New member
I've been shooting with Monarchs for years and absolutely love them.
claimbuster
New member
Got both. A tough call, but I lean slightly towards the 4200.
Evil_Lurker
New member
Quote:I'll just stay on the fence.
Yeah, me too. I've never owned a 4200, but my Monarch is very nice glass. I doubt either one would disappoint you.
Yeah, me too. I've never owned a 4200, but my Monarch is very nice glass. I doubt either one would disappoint you.
stanimals2
New member
There is an article in this months Outdoor life about scopes with the ballistics calculator. The Monarch was picked over the elite 6500, Burris, Zeiss, nightforce several leupolds and vortex, it rated best in price , accuracey ease of use low light conditions it even rated better than the 1600.00 swarovski. Cant get much better review than that, I have 4 nikons now and love them all, no monarchs tough but I can see one in my future.
cedarcreekcooner
New member
I have some prostaff's and buckmaster's and like them just thought about upgrading.
Ron MacIntosh
New member
I have a 4200 in a 4-16-50 it is one of the best scopes I have ever owned, I will put it side by side with any of my leupolds
deerhunterjj
New member
Iv had them both and the Nikon will out perform the 4200 as for clarity and transmitting light. I don't think there is a scope made dollar for dollar that will out preform a monarch. The 4200 is a nice scope but the monarch is the better scope.
Juanjo
Member
just to clear the fog before it hits, I really am impressed with the Monarchs they are very well made glass, but when I had been in foul weather in KCMO in a hunt in knee deep snow my monarch got the front lens wet and the picture was not as clear as my 4200. It depends what you want it for.. if there was no foul weather or if I simply didn't like to shoot (hunt) in foul weather I would without question take a monarch over the 4200.
-Juan
-Juan
Last edited:
Evil_Lurker
New member
Quote:...my monarch got the front lens wet and the picture was not as clear as my 4200.
That's certainly a valid point. I can use all the "foul weather" advantages I can get here. My Leupold sure isn't cutting it in the rain (which is about 50% of elk season)
That's certainly a valid point. I can use all the "foul weather" advantages I can get here. My Leupold sure isn't cutting it in the rain (which is about 50% of elk season)
MRhinefield
New member
Originally Posted By: stanimals2There is an article in this months Outdoor life about scopes with the ballistics calculator. The Monarch was picked over the elite 6500, Burris, Zeiss, nightforce several leupolds and vortex, it rated best in price , accuracey ease of use low light conditions it even rated better than the 1600.00 swarovski. Cant get much better review than that, I have 4 nikons now and love them all, no monarchs tough but I can see one in my future.
Not to many optics experts at Outdoor life that I'm aware of. I've read a few reviews that rate the BDC reticle MUCH lower than other ballistics reticles from other manufacturers. In the comparrison tests I've read Zeiss's Z1000 was rated the most accurate scoring a 10 out of 10. Leupold's B&C was next highest with a rating of 8 out of 10. The others were all below them ranging from 3-6.
Not to many optics experts at Outdoor life that I'm aware of. I've read a few reviews that rate the BDC reticle MUCH lower than other ballistics reticles from other manufacturers. In the comparrison tests I've read Zeiss's Z1000 was rated the most accurate scoring a 10 out of 10. Leupold's B&C was next highest with a rating of 8 out of 10. The others were all below them ranging from 3-6.