Nikon Monarch 3-9X40 vs. Bushnell Sharpshooter Scope
I recently purchased a Nikon Team Primos Scope 3-9X40 for my Remington 700. It replaced my Bushnell Trophy 6-18X40 because it had not enough eye relief.
I thought the Team Primos is originally a Nikon Monarch with the BDC reticle, which consider many to be a great scope w/ up to 95% light transmission.
After reading lots of good comments about the Monarch series I decided to give it a chance.
I do also have a Remington 710 with a Bushnell Sharpshooter 3-9X40 scope, which is a $30 scope, working flawless.
After comparing these 2 scopes under low light condition and at daylight trying to read license plates I was expecting to see at least a difference in optical performance between these 2 scopes. I mean its pretty unfair comparing a $30 scope to a $250 scope.
But I was shocked i could not see ANY difference! The Bushnell has even a bigger FOV!
I checked the lenses if there is something wrong with them but found nothing.
Is the Bushnell so good or did I get a defective Nikon Primos/ Monarch Scope?
link on Nikon's website: