Author Topic: Would you buy a Nikon Monarch Gold? (Read 1094 times)

JoeBru · « **on:** May 19, 2005, 12:28:21 AM »

I am looking to purchase a low powered variable scope for use on a 375H&H.
The areas I hunt are relatively thick and shots are generally under 50 yards, the odd shot may get out to 200
Most of my hunting is at dawn and dusk, the game is generally on the move.
Light gathering, eye relief and FOV are all critical considerations.
The Nikon Monarch Gold in 1.5-6x42 seems to be the pick at the moment.
I have no experience with this scope and would appreciate some advice.
How does the Monarch Gold stack up against other quality scopes?
Would you buy one?

TheOpticZone · « **Reply #1 on:** May 19, 2005, 12:52:04 AM »

Joe,

I personally think the Nikon Monarch Gold scopes are awesome. They are crystal clear and very bright. When you compare quality to price, I think the Nikon Gold is the best buy out there. Very hard to beat.

Zachary · « **Reply #2 on:** May 19, 2005, 02:39:26 AM »

I agree with Jon - the Nikon Monarchs, of which I have purchased quite a few from him, are just awesome scopes - very bright, clear, and reliable. The Gold series, which have 30mm main tubes, and the particular scope you are looking at, has 4.0" to 4.1" of eye relief - that's just awesome, especially for a .375H&H.

That said, on my .375H&H I mounted an Elite 3200 1.5x-4.5x with firefly reticle. I normally buy more expensive optics, but the Elite 4200s had less eye relief than this 3200, which has (if I remember correctly) a constant 3.6". Why did I not get a scope with better light transmission? Because, to my way of thinking, I will probably use open sights more than the scope - that's why I got detachable rings. How does the scope perform? PERFECT! Tracking is excellent and the optics are good (not awesome, but good). Plus, the firefly illuminated reticle really works, and it works well.

That said, you just can't go wrong with that particular Nikon Monarch Gold.

Zachary

JCM · « **Reply #3 on:** May 20, 2005, 03:51:54 PM »

I have the 1.5-6x42 Gold. It is a great scope. FOV, eye relief, bright, IMHO the perfect power range, lifetime warrenty.....just a great scope. I put it on the rifle I use the most....it's my favorite scope.

I'd consider it the perfect scope if I could get a heavy custom recticle and it was lighter.

I highly recommend it.

JCM

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 22, 2005, 02:20:08 PM »

I would go with the Leupold VXII 1X4X20 or the VXIII 1.5X5X20. I use them on my big bore guns. I have the Leupold VXII 1X4X20 on my Encore 416 Rigby and the VXIII 1.5X5X20 on my Ruger #1 in 45-70. Great scopes in my opinion. Proven in the field.

Graybeard · « **Reply #5 on:** May 22, 2005, 05:11:31 PM »

No, I wouldn't. But Zach seems to buy them. :lol:

DEPUTY · « **Reply #6 on:** May 23, 2005, 10:23:04 AM »

I love the monarch golds i own 3 of then now and ill put them up against anything on the market! the have outstanding eye relife, great amount of adj, and very clear crisp bright optics

sport · « **Reply #7 on:** May 31, 2005, 04:53:11 AM »

I own a 2.5X10 X 56 Monarch Gold, here in South Carolina we can hunt 1 hr after legal sunset and I am very pleased with the performance in low light situations and all around performance

Grubbs · « **Reply #8 on:** June 01, 2005, 05:40:44 AM »

the Monarch's are better scopes than the VXIII. It's just that simple

Jimi · « **Reply #9 on:** June 02, 2005, 01:45:04 PM »

I'm partial to my Kahles 1.1-4.5. It has served me well in the mopane, and the light gathering definitely adds to your hunting time and quality experience.

Something to add about scopes in general... out of the box you will find similar vision quality across a broad range of scopes... but if you plan to keep the scope for 10+ years it is well worth dropping the extra dime on an Austrian scope. They maintain their quality forever.