Author Topic: Nikon Titanium vs Monarch (Read 537 times)

redawg · « **on:** February 21, 2004, 07:11:03 AM »

What are the differences between these to lines? Is it just the difference in the materials used in the tube construction, or are better lenses used also? I noticed the titanium scopes are also about 4 ozs heavier. I'm just wondering how they can justify the price difference. Thanks!

MarkJ_Thompson · « **Reply #1 on:** February 21, 2004, 09:02:15 PM »

Solid titanium objective and ocular bell for unmatched strength and ruggedness...(Mark adds) "And a pretty finish too!"

I always go for a Matte Black finish...The Nikon I own is a 5.5-16.5X44 Monarch UCC. Nice scope...sits on my T/C Encore .308WIN barrel.

MJT

TheOpticZone · « **Reply #2 on:** February 22, 2004, 02:38:19 AM »

The only difference is the material of the housing. The price difference is the added cost of the material. Titanium is more expensive than Aluminum.

redawg · « **Reply #3 on:** February 22, 2004, 01:28:39 PM »

Mark, I gotta agree with you on the "pretty finish" part. I've got a couple a stainless steel guns with pepper laminate stocks that I think these would look awesome on.

Jon, now I've read that the Elite's use titanium in their tubes also, but aren't nearly this expensive. Do they use some type of an alloy that includes both aluminum and titanium, whereas the Nikon's tube is 100% titanium?

Thanks!

TheOpticZone · « **Reply #4 on:** February 23, 2004, 12:46:36 AM »

The Bushnell Elites use a combination of titanium and aluminum, where the Nikon Titanium is milled from solid titanium.

redawg · « **Reply #5 on:** February 23, 2004, 11:52:41 AM »

Thanks for clarifying that for me Jon, I appreciate it!