Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
conquest or monarch?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gillettehunter" data-source="post: 807015" data-attributes="member: 25760"><p>I'd go with the Conquest and I'll illustrate why. 10 or so years ago we were packed in by Yellowstone. Opening day of the elk hunt I killed a 5X6 bull. Next day I got up and decided to go check the gut pile and see if there might be a black bear on it. I got out of camp a little late. When I got to where I had shot from the day before one of the other hunters from camp was already there. He told me a nice 6X6 had just walked across the meadow. I asked why he hadn't shot. It was perhaps 300-350 yards. His reply was that he couldn't see it through his scope because of the glare. I had a Conquest on my rifle. I looked through it and had almost NO glare. I asked him to check his scope again. He said still too much glare to shoot. I handed him my rifle. He took one look through my scope and demanded to know what it was. He was ****ed when I told him a Conquest. He had a Monarch and thought it was the best he could afford. Moral of this story is that the coatings on the lens are important. Both scopes are going to be relatively clear. Likely close in low light abilities. I'd bet that the Conquest still has better coatings to fight glare. Find a store with both and compare them at last light. See what your eyes like. Bruce</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gillettehunter, post: 807015, member: 25760"] I'd go with the Conquest and I'll illustrate why. 10 or so years ago we were packed in by Yellowstone. Opening day of the elk hunt I killed a 5X6 bull. Next day I got up and decided to go check the gut pile and see if there might be a black bear on it. I got out of camp a little late. When I got to where I had shot from the day before one of the other hunters from camp was already there. He told me a nice 6X6 had just walked across the meadow. I asked why he hadn't shot. It was perhaps 300-350 yards. His reply was that he couldn't see it through his scope because of the glare. I had a Conquest on my rifle. I looked through it and had almost NO glare. I asked him to check his scope again. He said still too much glare to shoot. I handed him my rifle. He took one look through my scope and demanded to know what it was. He was ****ed when I told him a Conquest. He had a Monarch and thought it was the best he could afford. Moral of this story is that the coatings on the lens are important. Both scopes are going to be relatively clear. Likely close in low light abilities. I'd bet that the Conquest still has better coatings to fight glare. Find a store with both and compare them at last light. See what your eyes like. Bruce [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
conquest or monarch?
Top