Scope Recommendation - Nikon Monarch vs. Super Sniper

[enichols]

Hello All,
I am in the market for a new scope for my Savage 10FP .308, and I've narrowed my choices down to either a Nikon 3.3-10x44 Monarch UCC, or the SWFA Super Sniper. If I decided on the Nikon, I would get the model with a Mil-Dot reticle, as I've been wanting to learn to use a Mil-Dot for some time. Which would you recommend in terms of clarity, durability, the ability to maintain zero, etc? Fixed power vs. Variable power is not such a big deal, but I was also wondering if the changing magnification would have some sort of impact on a Mil-Dot reticle's usefulness, or whether the Mil-Dot is only usable at a certain magnification. The Super Sniper is $299 (10x42 rear focus), while the Nikon is $289 at SWFA. Would the 30mm tube of the SS give any advantages over the Nikon's 1" tube?

Thanks for any input you can give me.
-Nic

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

I have a Nikon Monarch, so I might be biased.


I would say that the Nikon has the better optical quality. The Monarch is a high end Nikon. Very bright, very clear.

The Nikon is a variable, while the SS is a fixed. Fixed is nice in a way - as whatever your mils work out to vs. what the mechanical magnification really is (scopes can vary, say a 10x can be from 9.5 to 10.5 ..few are perfect and they cost huge $$$$) is going to make for simple measurements. The Nikon's mildot will only work on 10x. Some say that being fixed power is more robust. Maybe, then again maybe not in this day and age.

The SS will have the more heavy-duty feeling turrets.

SWFA will probably treat you a whole lot better than Nikon if warranty work is needed. Don't know this from personal experience, only from 2nd hand internet testimony.

Some complain about the SS's reticle, saying it is too thick for a mildot. Nikon will have a thinner one. However, mildots were made for a specific purpose, and they are good enough to hit a man with at 1,000m. I'm not a reticle freak. I can make use of them.

I think SS is a bit more hyped up than it should be. They have quite an internet campaign cheerleading for them. SS's are nice and a value indeed, but they're not the equal of scopes costing 3x more like some websites that reviewed them have claimed. Just look at the scopes running from $900-$1200 ...That is an exaggeration, yet is one of the main things said about them all over the web.

Nikon is 1" while SS is 30mm. What does that mean? Finding good rings for the Nikon will be cheaper. Finding good rings for the SS is going to be expensive. On the other hand, the SS has a greater range (more elevation and windage) in its clicks. With a .308 and the SS, you should be able to get out to 1,000 without the need for a elevation mount. Depending on bullet and load of course...

The SS is also going to have fixed eye relief. The Nikon's eye relief will get longer or shorter as you change magnification. That is true of most fixed vs. variable.

Another note on fixed vs. variable. If you plan on always shooting 200 yards and more...the fixed is ok. However, the variable gives you great flexibility. Being able to crank down to 3-6x allows for a greater field of view or you can use it at closer range with more ease. It can also allow you to do quicker shooting up close. Figure, a 10x at 100 yards makes the target look 10 yards away. The variable makes it more useful as a general purpose scope too, say if you wanted to take it off and use it on another rifle. 10x isn't going to be useful on a variety of rifles.


Tough choice. Correct me if I am wrong, but that model you are looking at may be at a reduced price since they are phasing out the Monarch line? Under $300 for a 3-10x Monarch with mildot, AO and turrets is a LOW price for so much scope. I believe they used to go for $369-$389.....

 

[enichols]

Hi Don't Tread on Me-
First off, thanks so much for the very thoughtful post. I heard the same thing about the Monarch I'm looking at... that they are phasing them out in favor of a revamped line, which is why it's $289 as opposed to $300+
I was all set on the Super Sniper for awhile, then I kept hearing such fantastic things about Nikon, and I saw this particular Monarch for such a great price. Oy, decisions, decisions.
-Nic

 

[cheaptrick]

I have a 10x SS and a 6.5-20 Monarch with a lit Mil Dot.
Both scopes will serve you well.

For strictly range shooting, I'd take the SS about every time. I like the simplicity of a fixed 10 power scope.

The Monarch would be a better hunting rifle scope.

The glass on the Monarch is better, the W/E adjustments on the SS are better.

My reticle on my SS is thinner than my Monarch.

Rings are the same price for 30mm's or 1".

http://supersniper.com/
http://www.opticstalk.com/default.asp

Check out Optics Talk. SWFA's own website. Lots of good info there.

 

[CB900F]

Nic;

I liked my Nikon Monarch 3.3-10X A/O mil-dot so much, I bought a second one on the closeout deal at Natchez. That being said, stop wasting time, the Nikons on sale window is closing rapidly. Three months ago, no problem finding what you wanted in the closeout bins at several companies, not now.

I paid less at Natchez for my second scope than I did at wholesale for the first one about a year and a half ago.

900F

 

[Hot brass]

I have a Savage 10 .308, SS 10x42, Warne mount and rings, B&C Medalist stock that is bedded. This setup works very well for me.