# leupold or nikon



## briguy (Dec 5, 2005)

I'm considering either the Leupold vx2 or the nikon monarch ucc in 3-9 40mm. It will be going on a Tikka t3 in 308. Which one do you guys think is better, or is there much difference at all?


----------



## Camo (Oct 28, 2005)

leupold


----------



## ND_RC (Jan 6, 2005)

I have the VXII Leupold, my buddy has the Nikon Monarch. I like mine and my buddy likes his. So, it is personal preferance.

When your at your sporting goods store, see if they will let you take them outside and look through them.

Good Luck!!


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I have the VXII on my Tika and love it. But both are good scopes.


----------



## Scooter (Nov 4, 2005)

Go with leupold it has better glass and a better warrenty!


----------



## Remington 7400 (Dec 14, 2005)

Forget Leupold and Nikon, buy Burris, you get what you pay for.


----------



## xdeano (Jan 14, 2005)

go with leupold, you can pound nails with it and send it back to factory and get it fixed, warrenty is where it's at. i'd like to see Nikon or Burris hold such high standards. Plus the glass is very crystal clear. 
you'll never go wrong with a Leupold!
xdeano


----------



## DuaneinND (Jan 22, 2005)

The VxII is comparable to the Nikon Buckmaster- the Monarch is a higher quality scope. Leupold has one of the best warranties in the business at the present time, but if you never have trouble with your scope that is not much of a factor. You need to find a place that will allow you to take both scopes outside, adjust the focus on both and look around and decide which one You like the best. You don't buy a car without a test drive why would you buy a scope after looking through it inside a store- I have never shot a deer indoors!


----------



## Slinger70 (Dec 20, 2005)

If I'm not mistaken I'm sure the Nikon has an lifetime guarantee. The VXII looks cheap compared to my Buckmaster Nikon. I like a rubber ring around the eyepiece too.


----------



## Bigdog222 (Dec 20, 2005)

Hi this is my first post on this forum. I am from N. Ireland. I am currently putting a .222 on my FAC. (cant get .223 here for hunting). I have been looking at scopes too. I am thinking of a *Zeiss* :-?

How would you compare the Zeiss to the L and the N??


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Zeiss has come out with an inexpensive model called the conquest. If your looking for a GOOD Zeiss scope stick with the Victory model or the older models. The problem is your looking at $1000 US for one of those scopes. Comparing the Leupold VXII and Nikon to any top quality European scope is Apples to Oranges. Leupold makes the LPS model which is on the level of the European scopes but the cost $900 and up. I hope this helps.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

The major difference between the quality of the glass between the Leupold and Nikon is the quality control that goes into polishing the glass. Of these two scopes most likely the difference is so minute as to not be able to tell the difference. Having said that, Nikon does not make their own scopes but contracts them out to the lowest bidder. At one time the Nikon scopes were being made in the Philippines but not sure about now. Unless things have changed only Leupold and Burris scopes are actually made/assembled in America but almost all scope manufactures/companies buy their glass in Japan. Light transmission and color clarity is strictly a result of quality control. Leupold has a high reputation for quality control and certainly one of the best warranties in the industry which results in the high price you pay. If a good warranty is your desire then Leupold is the way to go but IMHO the Burris, Nikon, and Weaver scopes are on par with lens clarity. Even the new high end Simmons scopes brought out at the end of this year is right up there as a quality scope. I think I may have muddied the water for you but I suspect you will find either choice of the two you mentioned acceptable.


----------



## dieseldog (Aug 9, 2004)

SIGHTRON!


----------

