Leupold VX-III vs. Nikon Monarch UCC

JCan

JCan

New member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
I've got one of each but i can only see the holes in the target paper at 100 meters through one, each at 8X. guess which one. $337 vs. $725.

the vx-III is a 2.5X to 8X by 36mm and the nikon is a 3X-9X by 40mm. both at 8X, the image through the Nikon is significantly clearer. sure warranty, blah blah, fit and finish, blah blah, but the Nikon is significantly clearer. more to come!
 
the Leupold is only $559 at wholesalesports.com, but since it is inferior to the $337 Nikon, I will give you $325 for it LOL
 
JCan said:
I've got one of each but i can only see the holes in the target paper at 100 meters through one, each at 8X. guess which one. $337 vs. $725.

the vx-III is a 2.5X to 8X by 36mm and the nikon is a 3X-9X by 40mm. both at 8X, the image through the Nikon is significantly clearer. sure warranty, blah blah, fit and finish, blah blah, but the Nikon is significantly clearer. more to come!
Click to expand...
I like Leupold scopes and have owned several including a 2.5x-8x VXIII. But the Canadian distributor is ass pounding us on the prices when compared to the U.S. and in relation to other scope brands.

I'd like to know more about the Nikons. They aren't common around here and the only ones I can recall seeing were in the U.S.
 
JCan said:
I've got one of each but i can only see the holes in the target paper at 100 meters through one, each at 8X. guess which one. $337 vs. $725.

the vx-III is a 2.5X to 8X by 36mm and the nikon is a 3X-9X by 40mm. both at 8X, the image through the Nikon is significantly clearer. sure warranty, blah blah, fit and finish, blah blah, but the Nikon is significantly clearer. more to come!
Click to expand...
I have a bushnell 4200 Elite 1.5-6x36m. I can see all holes clearly at 6x.@100m. I seriously doubt the Nikon is a better scope than the Leupold.
 
I have been wondering too about the Nikon scopes...why wouldnt they be just as good as Leupold or better. If Nikon can make great cameras/lenses then they should be able to make a high quality scope. I have been thinking about trying one on my gun.
 
Win/64 said:
I have a bushnell 4200 Elite 1.5-6x36m. I can see all holes clearly at 6x.@100m. I seriously doubt the Nikon is a better scope than the Leupold.
Click to expand...

I question that too??

I too can clearly spot holes at that distance at 6x with my B & L 1.5-6x!
 
senior said:
I too can clearly spot holes at that distance at 6x with my B & L 1.5-6x!
Click to expand...
I have the same scope and I can too. Even the .22 holes.:)

But the Bushell, formerly branded B&L, products are among the best values in mid-range optics, much better value for money then Leopold.

The Nikon scopes interest me but I'd want to see one and compare features to price before offering an opinion on one.
 
I have Nikon BuckMasters 4.5-14x40 side focus on my 10/22 and it is a pretty clear scope. I don't have a Leupold to compare it to, but it is clearer than my Bushnell Legend 5-15x40 scope. The side focus is pretty tight though.
 
Nikon

Maybe NiKon has come along in the last few years, but my Nikon binoculars have been back for repairs three times, never had to see how good Leupold warranty is. Have a Leupold 1xto4 for over 40 years, never touched adjustments, shoots the same place every year.
 
This might be a silly question, but have you focused the Leupold? Sometimes scopes need to be focused to your particular eyesight to work best. If you can't seem to get it to focus properly at 100m, I would recommend returning it to Leupold for an inspection. I don't consider Leupold to have the most precise glass in the industry, but they are not bad and you should get reasonable resolution at the distances you are using it.
 
I've got a Monarch UCC in 2-7x and its capable of holding its zero after a pounding ride and after being brought indoors from a cold winter hunt. I'd merrily buy a second.

Actually I was going to get a Leupold with the same magnification but I got a better deal on the rifle/rings/etc and went with the Nikon. As for picking off the freckles on a gnat at 100 yards....works very well for the money I paid. I believe the Leupold was something like $80 more at the time for those two models.
 
I have two Monarch's, a 6x42 and a 4x12x40aO and I prefer them to leupold scopes. Both are very clear and bright, mostly I hate the leupold duplex, it's two fine for me, the nikoplex is a hair thicker, I say they are every bit as good a scope as a vx111 leupold. The varying eye relief on leupold scopes drive me nuts, I've had several different ones and I can't like any of them.
 
I've got a couple of Monarch UCC's, a 3-9x40, and a 3.5-10x50, and think they are great scopes. I'd take them over the VXII's for sure, and are every bit comparable in clarity to the VXIII's, which I own....for a lot less money.
 
I have Nikon and Leupold scopes, and I find the Nikon (4.5 x 14) has very good contrast and brightness at 100 yds, even at max magnification. No problem seeing .30 cal holes at that distance. I like it very much!

My Leupolds are 30mm tubes (vs 1" Nikon) so maybe it's not a completely fair comparison, as I think the larger tube distibutes light more efficiently.
 
For the record, we carry Leupold and Nikon scopes (along with most of the other optics brands). Leupold is by far the best distributed and warrantied optics line in Canada. There are several excellent Nikon scopes and in a few cases I believe, for the money, may be a better deal so compare carefully in not only price and performance but in reliability and warranty. To the best of my knowledge most of the Nikon rifle scope line is built under contract in various counties in the orient with the higher end products coming out of Japan (much like Bushnell does't build their own product). Phil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom