Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Nikko Stirling Panamax / Mountmaster Difference

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    St Helens

    Nikko Stirling Panamax / Mountmaster Difference

    Hi All,
    Im pretty new to the shooting scene - only been the owls hoot (in warrington) with my 12 year old a few times but getting into it. I was recommended a Nikko Stirling scope for the range (4 - 14 x 50) - just wondering of anyone can tell me what the difference is (apart from cost) between the Stirling panamax 4.5-14x50 and the mountmaster 4-16x50 - would the mountmaster perform well enough for a novice at a shooting range (~60) as opposed to a 4.5-14x50 @ ~140?
    What are the big differences?
    Hope someone can help
    Many thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    From my very limited experience, I can say from using a similar 6-18x50 Panamax and 4-12x50 mountmaster that there are marked differences in quality, the sharpness, FoV, etched glass retical on the Panamax far surpasses the mountmaster. However despite the obvious quality differences between the mountmaster and the panamax range, it dosnt make the mountmaster a bad scope, I mean seriously I dont have a huge amount of experience but i can quite easily put a very reliable pellet upon pellet with the mountmaster, although a low end scope, at ~50 the mountmaster more than sufficiently accurate and reliable for me as a "beginner".

    TL/DR version
    You can quite easily see where the money goes into the more expensive scope, but dont let that take away from what is a good value sight in the mountmaster. But then I guess you could say the same for a lot of expensive sights.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts