|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
Btw, March glass blows away all NF glass except for maybe the ATACR line, which lacks practicality imo, due to the tube size.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 330
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 330 |
SDHNTR and Starbuck, I'm in 100% agreement with you on the March 3-24x42 and 3-24x52 scopes. I have a few that were custom built with a capped windage turret and the FML-1 reticle. They work well on a hunting rig. I like the capped turret, but the reticle could be about 25% heavier for my tastes. The 3-24x42 model is a nice upgrade to the Bushnell 3-12x42 LRHS. I've noticed the image in the 3-24x42 seems to darken at the higher powers, say above 15x. But to be fair to March, it's been about a year since I looked through the 3-24-42 at the range, so it may be my memory that's a little dim right now. That said, I haven't noticed this with the 3-24x52 version, which I've been using a lot lately. As you mentioned, there's no need for a 10x zoom range so I imagine if March came out with a 3-15x42 or a 4-14x42 with capped turret, forgiving eye box and a smidge heavier reticle they'd do quite well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 32,130 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 32,130 Likes: 1 |
Well put LJB. A massive zoom range, except maybe one that starts at true 1x, is lost on me. For a hunting and/or tactical scope I prioritize an 8x zoom range below probably every other characteristic. This has been March's calling card and I don't get it.
If you put Taco Bell sauce in your ramen noodles it tastes just like poverty
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
SDHNTR and Starbuck, I'm in 100% agreement with you on the March 3-24x42 and 3-24x52 scopes. I have a few that were custom built with a capped windage turret and the FML-1 reticle. They work well on a hunting rig. I like the capped turret, but the reticle could be about 25% heavier for my tastes. The 3-24x42 model is a nice upgrade to the Bushnell 3-12x42 LRHS. I've noticed the image in the 3-24x42 seems to darken at the higher powers, say above 15x. But to be fair to March, it's been about a year since I looked through the 3-24-42 at the range, so it may be my memory that's a little dim right now. That said, I haven't noticed this with the 3-24x52 version, which I've been using a lot lately. As you mentioned, there's no need for a 10x zoom range so I imagine if March came out with a 3-15x42 or a 4-14x42 with capped turret, forgiving eye box and a smidge heavier reticle they'd do quite well. Yes, the 52 mil version has no discernable darkening that I can tell, and I specifically looked for that. I think that optical design just works better in a scope with larger geometry. Personally, I'd take that exact same scope dimensions and reticle choices and just make it a 3-18x. If it proved as durable, or close to it, as a NF, we'd have found the best hunting scope on the market. FWIW, I thought the reticle was just a hair thin at first too, and then I turned the illumination on, problem solved.
Last edited by SDHNTR; 04/11/22.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,222
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,222 |
NF does offer the 4a. But you'd have to know someone in Europe or Australia, etc who can work their way through customs to get you one in USA.
SD:
You mentioned that you had an NX8 and didn't care for it. What aspects of it were you displeased the most with? In what ways was it inferior to the March scope in reference? I spent some time with an NX8 2.5-20. I liked a lot about the scope, but I wasn't as thrilled with the reticle as I am with several other designs.
I actually think the glass in SWFA HD models is surprisingly good. It's not alpha, but I've been very pleased with the level of detail resolution you get with them. Especially considering what they go for. I'd love for them to offer a 2-12 or 3-15 HD with low pro elevation turret and capped windage; even better if they could offer it with a THLR style reticle.
In reality, I wouldn't feel just too slighted if I had to do the majority of my big game hunting with a 6X SWFA. There's certainly better options to fit specific needs, but it's a darn good all around scope, and you can't find a better value.
For my uses, and of the many scopes I've owned and used to this point, it's tough to beat the LRHS/LRTS in 3-12 for all around big game hunting. They're rugged, the glass is good, you get 10 mil per rev, and the reticles are well thought out and usable throughout the X range. I bought a couple of the gen 2 LRHS, but I haven't spent a ton of time with them yet; glass might be a touch better than gen 1, but I wasn't displeased with the gen 1's view. I do wish they still offered the 3-12 version.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
All the functional reasons why I like this March better is why I didn’t like the NX8 2.5-20. It tunneled, it darkened, and the eye box was really finicky. It was not accommodating to field positions that were not ideal. I also don’t like rails and mounting that bugger pretty much requires one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,469 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,469 Likes: 2 |
NF does offer the 4a. But you'd have to know someone in Europe or Australia, etc who can work their way through customs to get you one in USA.
A few weeks back I couldn’t find one in Europe... And it adds unnecessary costs. If they can build them for Europe they should be able to offer it here in the states.
Decades of voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us just that.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
NF does offer the 4a. But you'd have to know someone in Europe or Australia, etc who can work their way through customs to get you one in USA.
A few weeks back I couldn’t find one in Europe... And it adds unnecessary costs. If they can build them for Europe they should be able to offer it here in the states. While you're at it, find me a diesel Toyota Hi Lux too!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,469 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,469 Likes: 2 |
When I bought my dodge (the second year they came out with the Cummins) diesel was cheaper than gas and it paid to get a Diesel engine.....
Decades of voting for the lesser of two evils has gotten us just that.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196 |
SDHNTR and Starbuck, I'm in 100% agreement with you on the March 3-24x42 and 3-24x52 scopes. I have a few that were custom built with a capped windage turret and the FML-1 reticle. They work well on a hunting rig. I like the capped turret, but the reticle could be about 25% heavier for my tastes. The 3-24x42 model is a nice upgrade to the Bushnell 3-12x42 LRHS. I've noticed the image in the 3-24x42 seems to darken at the higher powers, say above 15x. But to be fair to March, it's been about a year since I looked through the 3-24-42 at the range, so it may be my memory that's a little dim right now. That said, I haven't noticed this with the 3-24x52 version, which I've been using a lot lately. As you mentioned, there's no need for a 10x zoom range so I imagine if March came out with a 3-15x42 or a 4-14x42 with capped turret, forgiving eye box and a smidge heavier reticle they'd do quite well. As I understand it, March scopes mission in life is to push back on the optical envelope, so to speak, by stretching the capabilities of the optics. They have very few 6X zoom scopes, the vast majority are 8X, and 10X. That is what sets them apart from all the other manufacturers. If they built 4X and 5X zoom scopes, they would be like everyone else and I don't think that's their style. If you look at their offerings, you will see that they like to lead and innovate. For example, they were the very first riflescope manufacturers to incorporate ED glass elements in their riflescopes 14 years ago. All the March scopes are manufactured incorporating ED glass except for the 24mm LPVOs and the X/FX and Genesis categories, which use Super ED glass, again, a world's first. They offer a dual reticle in their 1-10X24 LPVO (SFP and FFP both). They have the Genesis models with incredible amounts of adjustments, a world's first. They have the highest magnification riflescope on the planet; the March-X 8-80X56. The list goes on. The March 2.5-25X42/52 SFP and the 3-24X42/52 are little marvels of optical engineering. If you think that 10X and 8X zooms are too much, just don't crank it past what you need. The new 1.5-15X42 is another optical marvel and if you think 15X is too high, stop at 10X. Easy peasy. I'm not understanding why people complain about having too much magnification. The March scopes are incredibly strong, as strong as anything out there and stronger than most because of the way the tubes are made. Their 34mm tubes are veritable Abrams tanks. Yet, they are light because of the engineering of the scopes. I would not hold my breath waiting for a mundane 3-15X42 when they have a 1.5-15X42 and a 2.5-25X42/52 already. They offer several reticles so you can choose the one you want.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 330
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 330 |
SDHNTR and Starbuck, I'm in 100% agreement with you on the March 3-24x42 and 3-24x52 scopes. I have a few that were custom built with a capped windage turret and the FML-1 reticle. They work well on a hunting rig. I like the capped turret, but the reticle could be about 25% heavier for my tastes. The 3-24x42 model is a nice upgrade to the Bushnell 3-12x42 LRHS. I've noticed the image in the 3-24x42 seems to darken at the higher powers, say above 15x. But to be fair to March, it's been about a year since I looked through the 3-24-42 at the range, so it may be my memory that's a little dim right now. That said, I haven't noticed this with the 3-24x52 version, which I've been using a lot lately. As you mentioned, there's no need for a 10x zoom range so I imagine if March came out with a 3-15x42 or a 4-14x42 with capped turret, forgiving eye box and a smidge heavier reticle they'd do quite well. As I understand it, March scopes mission in life is to push back on the optical envelope, so to speak, by stretching the capabilities of the optics. They have very few 6X zoom scopes, the vast majority are 8X, and 10X. That is what sets them apart from all the other manufacturers. If they built 4X and 5X zoom scopes, they would be like everyone else and I don't think that's their style. If you look at their offerings, you will see that they like to lead and innovate. For example, they were the very first riflescope manufacturers to incorporate ED glass elements in their riflescopes 14 years ago. All the March scopes are manufactured incorporating ED glass except for the 24mm LPVOs and the X/FX and Genesis categories, which use Super ED glass, again, a world's first. They offer a dual reticle in their 1-10X24 LPVO (SFP and FFP both). They have the Genesis models with incredible amounts of adjustments, a world's first. They have the highest magnification riflescope on the planet; the March-X 8-80X56. The list goes on. The March 2.5-25X42/52 SFP and the 3-24X42/52 are little marvels of optical engineering. If you think that 10X and 8X zooms are too much, just don't crank it past what you need. The new 1.5-15X42 is another optical marvel and if you think 15X is too high, stop at 10X. Easy peasy. I'm not understanding why people complain about having too much magnification. The March scopes are incredibly strong, as strong as anything out there and stronger than most because of the way the tubes are made. Their 34mm tubes are veritable Abrams tanks. Yet, they are light because of the engineering of the scopes. I would not hold my breath waiting for a mundane 3-15X42 when they have a 1.5-15X42 and a 2.5-25X42/52 already. They offer several reticles so you can choose the one you want. Not holding my breath for any optics manufacturer to market a "mundane" FFP scope to suit shooting most of the world's non-dangerous big game from 10 - 600 yards in just about any condition imaginable. The Bushnell 3-12x42 LRHS is very good because it was designed by serious hunters, but is now discontinued. The Tangent Theta 3-15x50 has a great reticle but is too heavy (mass) and the 50 mm objective too large The 3-12x42 S&B PH only has about 3 MILs elevation travel. And like I said, the March 3-24x42 is very good but dims past 15x (the reason the 10x zoom range is wrong for the package) and the reticle is a touch too thin without illumination. At this stage in the game, it's not about innovation, it's about hitting the "mundane" sweet spot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196 |
Not holding my breath for any optics manufacturer to market a "mundane" FFP scope to suit shooting most of the world's non-dangerous big game from 10 - 600 yards in just about any condition imaginable. The Bushnell 3-12x42 LRHS is very good because it was designed by serious hunters, but is now discontinued. The Tangent Theta 3-15x50 has a great reticle but is too heavy (mass) and the 50 mm objective too large The 3-12x42 S&B PH only has about 3 MILs elevation travel. And like I said, the March 3-24x42 is very good but dims past 15x (the reason the 10x zoom range is wrong for the package) and the reticle is a touch too thin without illumination. At this stage in the game, it's not about innovation, it's about hitting the "mundane" sweet spot.
I hear what you are saying and I love the way you present your arguments; very cogent and logical. I only stated what my impression is from what I have observed with March. I do not speak for them in any way shape or form. This thread is actually a testament to the fact Deon (makers of March scopes) listen to customers and provide outstanding customer support. That said, I would urge you to go to the March website, go to contact me and put in your thoughts as you have expressed them here. As we know, Deon is extremely responsive. Give it a day or two for them to respond and go from there. https://marchscopes.com/about-us/ Scroll to the bottom of the page.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
[quote=FTR_Shooter][quote=LJB] And like I said, the March 3-24x42 is very good but dims past 15x (the reason the 10x zoom range is wrong for the package) and the reticle is a touch too thin without illumination.
The 52 mil version solved the dimming issue with a scope that's just a bit bigger and a couple ounces heavier. A fair tradeoff, IMO. Yes, I'd still like to see a more standard 5 or 6X zoom scope. To me the draw is lightweight AND durability. No one else does both, there's a compromise with all other manufacturers I'm aware of. With a lesser zoom range, they could probably make it more lightweight. Or pack it into the current 3-24x42 mil scope body and not have the darkening issue. There's a huge desire to have light and rugged in a hunting scope. Some have tried. Swaro, Zeiss, Vortex, etc and they have all failed in the durability department. I understand March's niche with high zoom, and I've communicated this desire to them also. They don't want to enter a crowded market and want to do innovative stuff no one else is doing. I get that, but my counterpoint is that is still precisely what I'm asking for! Light AND durable IS a niche of it's own that no one else has mastered. Figuring that out without a compromise on one element or the other IS innovative! For now, the 2.5-25x52 is the best compromise in a hunting scope I can come up with, even though it's giving me stuff I don't want or need and am "paying" for in one way or another ($, size, weight). I wasn't personally willing to accept the usability compromise with the 42mm version.
Last edited by SDHNTR; 04/12/22.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,782 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,782 Likes: 6 |
I'm very interested in light and durable.
How durable are they? Has anyone truly beaten on one and verified it's held zero, tracks correctly, and returns to zero correctly?
In my experience, simple things are more durable than complicated things. Even if build to the same standards, there's just more places to fail if something is more complicated. March is doing a lot with their scopes. I don't know if they will take a beating or not. If I was confident they would, I'd love to try one.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
As a side question, as I'm a hunter and I don't shoot competitively and don't even know (or care) what Benchrest vs PRS vs F class all means. What is the purpose of an ultra high mag riflescope? 80X? What's that for? Or even half that! Why is there a market for such scopes? Hell, even off a bench at 20X my heartbeat alone throws crosshairs off target. What are people using these super high zoom ranges and ultra high magnification for?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
I'm very interested in light and durable.
How durable are they? Has anyone truly beaten on one and verified it's held zero, tracks correctly, and returns to zero correctly?
In my experience, simple things are more durable than complicated things. Even if build to the same standards, there's just more places to fail if something is more complicated. March is doing a lot with their scopes. I don't know if they will take a beating or not. If I was confident they would, I'd love to try one. They have a video briefly showing impact testing and beating on the scope somewhat, but you blink, you'll miss it. They apparently do impact test all scopes and verify on a collimator before they go out the door, like NF does, but I don't know if they are going to extremes like shooting them with shotguns and pounding big spikes into stumps with them. I did mention to March that they have an opportunity here to differentiate themselves as being strong AND lightweight, as nobody else is currently, but they'd need to market and demonstrate that durability better. Lightweight shows itself on paper and in specs. Durability is harder to quantify and needs to be demonstrated visually. They seemed to grasp and agree. Hopefully will see more obvious and visible durability testing from them.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,222
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,222 |
NF does offer the 4a. But you'd have to know someone in Europe or Australia, etc who can work their way through customs to get you one in USA.
A few weeks back I couldn’t find one in Europe... And it adds unnecessary costs. If they can build them for Europe they should be able to offer it here in the states. While you're at it, find me a diesel Toyota Hi Lux too! +1 on the Hi lux. I have had several retailers who I deal with ask NF if they had any intentions to offer the 4a in USA. The answer they recieved in every instance was a solid no. I agree with Jeff in that it shouldn't be that hard to offer a special edition in the USA every now and then when they are already making the scope.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196 |
As a side question, as I'm a hunter and I don't shoot competitively and don't even know (or care) what Benchrest vs PRS vs F class all means. What is the purpose of an ultra high mag riflescope? 80X? What's that for? Or even half that! Why is there a market for such scopes? Hell, even off a bench at 20X my heartbeat alone throws crosshairs off target. What are people using these super high zoom ranges and ultra high magnification for? I can answer that side question. My favorite riflescope right now is a March-X 10-60X56 HM that sits on top of my F-TR match rifle. I have been shooting rifles competitively for 40 years and F-Class (F-TR) for 17 years. (Hence my screen name here.) This March scope has been on my rifle for 3 years now; I shoot 1000-yard competitions year-round, at least once a month. A match will be at least 66 rounds for the day. These are heavy bullets out of a .308 Winchester case loaded to a little beyond book maximum. I shoot at 50X on the scope all the time, regardless of conditions. The Super ED glass in the scope is not as affected by mirage as ED glass and especially non-ED glass. The target at 1000 yards is an X-ring that is 5 inches and a 10-ring at 10 inches in diameter. I have been doing this a LONG time and I can hold precisely on the target for minutes on end. You develop that skill over time. I have some friends who shoot with the March-X 8-80X56 and they go all the way to 80X. I have found that 50X was perfect for me as I could see the entire target and part of the target on either side along with the target number, and not crossfire on the wrong target. The 8-80X56 is also quite popular with the field target folks and their airguns for highly precise shooting. I've not ever done any of that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,169 Likes: 2 |
As a side question, as I'm a hunter and I don't shoot competitively and don't even know (or care) what Benchrest vs PRS vs F class all means. What is the purpose of an ultra high mag riflescope? 80X? What's that for? Or even half that! Why is there a market for such scopes? Hell, even off a bench at 20X my heartbeat alone throws crosshairs off target. What are people using these super high zoom ranges and ultra high magnification for? I can answer that side question. My favorite riflescope right now is a March-X 10-60X56 HM that sits on top of my F-TR match rifle. I have been shooting rifles competitively for 40 years and F-Class (F-TR) for 17 years. (Hence my screen name here.) This March scope has been on my rifle for 3 years now; I shoot 1000-yard competitions year-round, at least once a month. A match will be at least 66 rounds for the day. These are heavy bullets out of a .308 Winchester case loaded to a little beyond book maximum. I shoot at 50X on the scope all the time, regardless of conditions. The Super ED glass in the scope is not as affected by mirage as ED glass and especially non-ED glass. The target at 1000 yards is an X-ring that is 5 inches and a 10-ring at 10 inches in diameter. I have been doing this a LONG time and I can hold precisely on the target for minutes on end. You develop that skill over time. I have some friends who shoot with the March-X 8-80X56 and they go all the way to 80X. I have found that 50X was perfect for me as I could see the entire target and part of the target on either side along with the target number, and not crossfire on the wrong target. The 8-80X56 is also quite popular with the field target folks and their airguns for highly precise shooting. I've not ever done any of that. Interesting. Thanks. That stuff is all so foreign to me. So I guess it's not important to see your hits in that application? Or do you have spotters? That's really important in hunting and that extra high mag shrinks FOV so much that even the slightest recoil makes it impossible to see hits.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,196 |
Interesting. Thanks. That stuff is all so foreign to me. So I guess it's not important to see your hits in that application? Or do you have spotters? That's really important in hunting and that extra high mag shrinks FOV so much that even the slightest recoil makes it impossible to see hits.
I don't know about Benchrest. I've shot some PRS and for that I use a scope that tops out at 28X. Seeing your hits and misses is important, trace is critical but all the PRS rifles wear brakes and stuff so it's easier to control. In F-class, no, I do not see my impact or my trace. Well, that's not quite true, more on that in a second. In F-class, no brakes are allowed. The F-open guys have big front rests that will keep the rifle steady, and they can see the trace. My bipod dances on the flat surface and it moves left a little the same way every time. The recoil is a little fierce with the heavy .308 bullets used. When I was shooting a .223 at 1000 yards, the recoil was a lot tamer and I could actually see the trace sometimes and one I even say the spotter fly off the target when I hit it. Thankfully it was in the 10 ring. The shots are all score and marked individually, either by a target puller in the pits or on the screen with etargets. The way I do it is when I take the shot, I let the rifle recoil, do a good follow-through by counting 1001, 1002 and then I start moving. The precision required demands the best gun handling I can muster and follow-through is critical. I'm not much of a hunter; I am much more of a shooter and there's just not enough shooting in hunting. Also, there's a discipline that evolves when all your shots are scored and recorded. My F-TR rifle has over 30,000 rounds through it and is on its 6th barrel. My first March, the March-X 5-50X56 was on there for 7 years and about 22,000 rounds. Never an issue and maintained tracking perfectly.
|
|
|
|
|
572 members (1beaver_shooter, 12344mag, 06hunter59, 10gaugemag, 10gaugeman, 1234, 68 invisible),
2,514
guests, and
1,186
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,467
Posts18,529,234
Members74,033
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
