SmallCaliberCentral

has anyone used the Nikon range finder? If so what do u think? that or a regular scope?

nikon Laser IRT ranger finding scope

I have not used a Nikon Rangefinder, but one of my good friends has. I have the Leopold RX 1000 TBR and love it!! My friend took his Nikon back and bought one identical to mine. I think it all depends on what exactly you want to use it for. I needed one with the TBR and a bow function as I do a lot of bow hunting. The leopold has served me well from long range rifle in the mountains to short range bow shots. I would definitely buy another. I dont know anything about the scope you mentioned.

i have a nikon Monarch 5.5x16.5x44 i was going to put on my 204 an I saw this in the store an i was if it cut all my guess work out that be easy -- but i am building a 22-250 an looking for a nice scope-- i was going to spend 1000$ for a scope---- just not sure what one-- i like to see my prey i am killing--

it is a scope it has the range finder built in it-it takes the guess work out-- it is not a hand held one this one goes on your gun---

my204custom wrote:i was going to spend 1000$ for a scope---- just not sure what one--

IMHO; If you are willing to spend $1000.00 on a scope, get a Leupold in a VX-3. Lots of good choices, and the optics are wonderful.

i just spent 3k on the gun-- had the stock made then pac nor did the barrel an got a Remington short action an built a 204 i got a nikon Monarch 5.5 x 16.5 x 40 just like something lil more-- i will look at them-- my dad has ziess on his guns but lil out of my range---

i work in a retail store and have played with many rangefinders. i dont like the read-out on the nikons, to me it is hard to see. i really like the leuopold rx-1000/ 1000tbr also. in the 300-400 dollar price range i would choose the 1000tbr. if you wanna spend a little more leica's new 1600 is the nicest rangefinder ive seen yet. awsome read-outs, easy to read, great range capability, and small and compact, but its in the 900 dollar range.

Nikon Laser IRT Matte 4-12 X 42mm BDC Riflescope cut in copy that--- that is what i was looking at-- not just a regular range finder-- so what do u think of that one?

One thing I learned about Nikon scopes is that they just don't compare favorably to just about any other similarly priced product. I purchased two Nikon's, the last of which was a 6-24x 50 SF Monarch purchased last year. It lost its ability to hold zero, and was so blurry that I sent it back for service. When it returned it will hold zero, but the picture quality is really sub-par. Low contrast and poor sharpness is the rule of both Monarchs I own. This week at a range session I struggled to see the target with the Monarch. When I switched to a second rifle with a Bushnell Elite 4200 6-24x I was startled by the clarity, contrast and sharpness. Same with the Clearidge scope, Leupolds and Burris scopes. I will not purchase another Nikon. I also avoid side focus scopes with 1" tubes, they seem to reduce the amount of available light through the erector tube, but the 30mm tubes are much better.

that is what i hear also--- thank you-- so what u saying dont get one--- i just like the BDC how that is-- but i guess i will go to what i had in mind in the first place-- was a Leopold scope-- u cant go wrong there-- my brother also said the Bushnell Elite is a good one to get also--there just so many options out there--I just want all my guns to look the same but different calibers --- I have a nice Volquartsen 22 then i have the Savage 17hmr an had a nice custom stock made for it then i haev the 204 an just bought an action last week from Darrel holland to build a 22-250--

I just bought a Nikon Monarch 4-16x50 and Leupold QRW rings for swapping in less power when critter splattin. For paper poking I have an older Vari-X III 6.5-20x40AO which has too often been too much for the closer live candidates. Many of the customer reviews I read had the Monarch optics right there with the mid-range Leupold but I ain’t seeing that from mine with just a hand held look out the window. It may do well enough on the gun but as usual every time I’ve gone cheap I’ve wished I had saved the money for another Leupold.

i have a 5.5 x 15.5 x 44 nikon monarch i bought off here long time ago for few hundred dollars--i dont have no high end scopes my dad has a millet just sitting at the house is big scope it is a 6x25x56 it is big I think that may be good enough for a 22-250---

Wrangler John wrote:One thing I learned about Nikon scopes is that they just don't compare favorably to just about any other similarly priced product. I purchased two Nikon's, the last of which was a 6-24x 50 SF Monarch purchased last year. It lost its ability to hold zero, and was so blurry that I sent it back for service. When it returned it will hold zero, but the picture quality is really sub-par. Low contrast and poor sharpness is the rule of both Monarchs I own. This week at a range session I struggled to see the target with the Monarch. When I switched to a second rifle with a Bushnell Elite 4200 6-24x I was startled by the clarity, contrast and sharpness. Same with the Clearidge scope, Leupolds and Burris scopes. I will not purchase another Nikon. I also avoid side focus scopes with 1" tubes, they seem to reduce the amount of available light through the erector tube, but the 30mm tubes are much better.

Your experience is similar to mine. I had the old style Monarch (6.5-20x44 w/AO) and I feel it was a better scope optically than the it's replacement 6-24x50 w/SF. As I've said many times, the 6-24 pars just as good with my 8-25 Leupold VX-3 until about 18x which is where it starts to get fuzzy/hazy etc... In daylight, under 18x, it's as good as my Leupold, Zeiss and Swarvoski on my varmint guns. Maybe it's something to do with the side focus because there is an extra piece of glass that goes along with S/F vice A/O. I'll admit though, the new Monarchs have nice looking aesthetics, IMO. Just wish I could use the full range of the optics.

On one of my 17 HMR's I have the older style 4.5-14x40 w/AO Buckmaster. I like it much better than it's replacement w/side focus. It's not as bright in low light conditions as the S/F model but it does have a better FOV and for rats, I shoot those in broad daylight anyway.

true that is all i shoot in the day away ways-- my dad has Zeiss an schmit in bender on his guns-- i just need to step up an get a nice scope-- i have 3k into my 204 an to put a junk scope on it i dont think it would do it justice--- Right---

you might be suprised by the quality of the Busnell Elite