Lighter high end optic

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • rwh
    Warrior
    • Jun 2014
    • 188

    #31
    +1 for the march 2.5-25x52 if money is no object. I have one on my 6BR. It holds zero and the sight picture is clear across the field of view with very good color. I can find 6mm bullet holes in the black at 200 yards easily, and sometimes at 300 when conditions are perfect.

    The March 1-10x24 is also an option and might be a better match for your rifle. I have a march 1-8x24 FFP on my grendel and like it very much.
    Last edited by rwh; 08-12-2017, 04:34 PM.

    Comment

    • Crews
      Bloodstained
      • Jul 2017
      • 31

      #32
      I have not owned one, so I am strictly asking out of curiosity..... read some comments about March not tracking 100% and having an unforgiving eye box. Those that have them, have you seen any of those type issues? I'm a Nightforce guy. There is definitely better glass and lighter weights out there, but I get the feeling I can always depend on my NF scopes to work no matter what.

      Comment

      • dega37
        Bloodstained
        • Nov 2014
        • 87

        #33
        Originally posted by Crews View Post
        ... read some comments about March not tracking 100% ... I'm a Nightforce guy. ... I get the feeling I can always depend on my NF scopes to work no matter what.
        All scopes have tracking error i.e. there is no 100% accurate. I have not done this testing myself but a very reputable source states that Tangent Theta has less than .03% scope error, and that Nightforce and Hensoldt have about a 1-2% error, S&B about 3%, Vortex ~3-5%. Whether or not those variations matter would depend per a particular shooter, position stability, target size, and distance. I think in the hunting arena with the Grendel, just about any reputable manufacturer including March would meet those requirements, but then again it is just an assumption. I don't think my source has ever tested a March scope, but if anyone has done a tracking test, I would be interested in them posting their results. The one annoying thing about scope tracking inconsistency is that tracking is different throughout the turret travel, so at one point 3% error and at another point 1% or negligible error.

        Comment

        • Crews
          Bloodstained
          • Jul 2017
          • 31

          #34
          the Precision Rifle Blog guy's research results are often quoted. Like I said, I've never done a tracking test on one so I don't want to come across as a keyboard ninja. Just curious if anyone has had results contrary to these:

          March.PNG

          Comment

          • acourvil
            Warrior
            • Dec 2013
            • 112

            #35
            The precision rifle blog gave an old 42mm March scope bad marks on tracking, but overlooked that the particular model used was calibrated in NATO mils instead of true mils, which was what the test was based on. If you adjusted for the scale used, the March scope performed as well as other top scopes. The March scope was also a bit of an outlier for the comparison; most of the scopes that were being compared had 50mm or 56mm objectives.

            The eye box on the 42mm scopes is a little tight due to the high magnification factor. But if the scope is set up properly, it is not a problem for most people (recognizing that there is a lot of "personal preference" factors in how well folks like a scope).

            Comment

            • Klem
              Chieftain
              • Aug 2013
              • 3507

              #36
              This may have been changed in more recent March scopes and I will contact the local retailer to confirm. The US website of March claims their Mils graduations are USMC-compatible (1/6283) which is different to the NATO rounding to 1/6400 for ease of calculations.

              Note the claim of a Mil on the right hand side of the page;


              On speaking with the local March retailer, Stuart Elliot (BRT Supplies) he claims the person who wrote that review (Zak Smith from Demigod LLC and also an employee of Thunderbeast) was annoyed because DEON in Japan would not provide him with a scope to review on request. All the others did. He had to source it from elsewhere which is why it ended up being a smaller objective than the others. Unsurprisingly, the compact 44mm was not favourably reviewed against the 34mm-tubed 50+objectives. Was it a biased review?...To be fair, most reviews are. Deon later released information that you mention which explained away what the reviewer referred to as poor tracking. The March tracked perfectly according to their definition of a Mil.

              There are a few posters who doubt the precision of March but in the same breath also acknowledge they have no experience with them. I have three March scopes and access to more for trial - they work fine, as do my Nightforce NSX scopes. March has the clearest glass I have ever looked through. By contrast, Vortex has almost a monopoly of credibility on this forum. They are referred to constantly in almost every optic thread. Good luck to you all using them but I have never mounted a Vortex on any rifle that matters to me. I have never seen Vortex used in the Military or at any F-Class or Bench rest titles... But I have seen March.

              Comment

              • keystone183
                Warrior
                • Mar 2013
                • 590

                #37
                Originally posted by Klem View Post
                This may have been changed in more recent March scopes and I will contact the local retailer to confirm. The US website of March claims their Mils graduations are USMC-compatible (1/6283) which is different to the NATO rounding to 1/6400 for ease of calculations.

                Note the claim of a Mil on the right hand side of the page;


                On speaking with the local March retailer, Stuart Elliot (BRT Supplies) he claims the person who wrote that review (Zak Smith from Demigod LLC and also an employee of Thunderbeast) was annoyed because DEON in Japan would not provide him with a scope to review on request. All the others did. He had to source it from elsewhere which is why it ended up being a smaller objective than the others. Unsurprisingly, the compact 44mm was not favourably reviewed against the 34mm-tubed 50+objectives. Was it a biased review?...To be fair, most reviews are. Deon later released information that you mention which explained away what the reviewer referred to as poor tracking. The March tracked perfectly according to their definition of a Mil.

                There are a few posters who doubt the precision of March but in the same breath also acknowledge they have no experience with them. I have three March scopes and access to more for trial - they work fine, as do my Nightforce NSX scopes. March has the clearest glass I have ever looked through. By contrast, Vortex has almost a monopoly of credibility on this forum. They are referred to constantly in almost every optic thread. Good luck to you all using them but I have never mounted a Vortex on any rifle that matters to me. I have never seen Vortex used in the Military or at any F-Class or Bench rest titles... But I have seen March.
                How many vortex scopes have you owned?

                Comment

                • Klem
                  Chieftain
                  • Aug 2013
                  • 3507

                  #38
                  Thanks for making my point. The Forum is replete with Vortex fans, some who believe in the brand like a religion. And woe betide anyone who points out they are only one brand, and also not a high-end reputational brand.

                  What about other scope manufacturers like Leupold, Nikon, Schmitt and Bender, Swarovski, Khales, Nightforce, Zeiss, Valdada, Weaver, Bushnell, Steiner, Hensoldt and US Optics? Do you have enough experience to be able to talk across all scopes with authority?

                  In answer to your question, I have a PST which sits on my little 22L. How many March scopes have you owned? How about dialing back your brand loyalty and looking beyond the narrow view that is one brand of scope. I understand that for many people they look for savings on what is a relatively cheap gun in the first place, meaning price is an important criterion. I would also argue that in an AR15 platform the true precision of a March might not be as obvious as on an 8kg F-Class bolt gun with Stolle Panda action. But this OP is asking about the highest quality scope that is mutually exclusive of price. Unfortunately Vortex, while being good value for money is not even in the race.
                  Last edited by Klem; 08-15-2017, 05:19 AM.

                  Comment

                  • Crews
                    Bloodstained
                    • Jul 2017
                    • 31

                    #39
                    Very interesting! Those March scopes definitely seem attractive based on weight and magnification range. Good to hear they're capable of dependable tracking. Might just have to try one out!

                    Comment

                    • mdram
                      Warrior
                      • Sep 2016
                      • 941

                      #40
                      Originally posted by Klem View Post
                      TBy contrast, Vortex has almost a monopoly of credibility on this forum. They are referred to constantly in almost every optic thread. Good luck to you all using them but I have never mounted a Vortex on any rifle that matters to me. I have never seen Vortex used in the Military or at any F-Class or Bench rest titles... But I have seen March.
                      just sayin
                      I recently surveyed the top 100+ shooters in the Precision Rifle Series (PRS), and this post reviews the scopes those guys are running this year. For those of you who may not be familiar with the PRS, it’s an organization that tracks how top competitors place in major rifle matches across the country. PRS matches ...
                      just some targets for printing
                      https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...xQ?usp=sharing

                      Comment

                      • keystone183
                        Warrior
                        • Mar 2013
                        • 590

                        #41
                        Originally posted by Klem View Post
                        Thanks for making my point. The Forum is replete with Vortex fans, some who believe in the brand like a religion. And woe betide anyone who points out they are only one brand, and also not a high-end reputational brand.

                        What about other scope manufacturers like Leupold, Nikon, Schmitt and Bender, Swarovski, Khales, Nightforce, Zeiss, Valdada, Weaver, Bushnell, Steiner, Hensoldt and US Optics? Do you have enough experience to be able to talk across all scopes with authority?

                        In answer to your question, I have a PST which sits on my little 22L. How many March scopes have you owned? How about dialing back your brand loyalty and looking beyond the narrow view that is one brand of scope. I understand that for many people they look for savings on what is a relatively cheap gun in the first place, meaning price is an important criterion. I would also argue that in an AR15 platform the true precision of a March might not be as obvious as on an 8kg F-Class bolt gun with Stolle Panda action. But this OP is asking about the highest quality scope that is mutually exclusive of price. Unfortunately Vortex, while being good value for money is not even in the race.
                        Thou doth protest too much.....

                        My brand loyalty? I own scopes from 5 of the companies you listed. Authority? I'd suggest I have none. But, as you seem to present as one, i was simply asking the question. What kind of experience do you have with vortex's newer high end lines? How much time have you put in behind them, in order to pass judgement? What is your relationship with March, as you seem to have special access that the general public would not?

                        I think you suffer from the same biases you suggest.....

                        Comment

                        • Klem
                          Chieftain
                          • Aug 2013
                          • 3507

                          #42
                          Good luck turning up to a long range match with your 27x Vortex, shooting alongside shooters with higher magnifications. Including 60x and 80x March. That review is either biased or steeped in ignorance. 'Lies, damned lies, and statistics' (Mark Twain).

                          Comment

                          • Klem
                            Chieftain
                            • Aug 2013
                            • 3507

                            #43
                            Originally posted by keystone183 View Post
                            Thou doth protest too much.....

                            My brand loyalty? I own scopes from 5 of the companies you listed. Authority? I'd suggest I have none. But, as you seem to present as one, i was simply asking the question. What kind of experience do you have with vortex's newer high end lines? How much time have you put in behind them, in order to pass judgement? What is your relationship with March, as you seem to have special access that the general public would not?

                            I think you suffer from the same biases you suggest.....

                            Way too many questions my friend, especially when you didn't answer mine. As for my access to equipment...You will never know.

                            Comment

                            • m796rider
                              Warrior
                              • Jul 2011
                              • 398

                              #44
                              Originally posted by Klem View Post
                              Good luck turning up to a long range match with your 27x Vortex, shooting alongside shooters with higher magnifications. Including 60x and 80x March. That review is either biased or steeped in ignorance. 'Lies, damned lies, and statistics' (Mark Twain).
                              Wut.

                              The article is talking about PRS, not benchrest or other types of long range shooting done off stable rests or built up positions. Shooting off a barricade thru mirage and wind at a partially obscured UKD target against the clock is not done at 60x.

                              Comment

                              • Klem
                                Chieftain
                                • Aug 2013
                                • 3507

                                #45
                                Originally posted by m796rider View Post
                                Wut.

                                The article is talking about PRS, not benchrest or other types of long range shooting done off stable rests or built up positions. Shooting off a barricade thru mirage and wind at a partially obscured UKD target against the clock is not done at 60x.
                                Correct, my mistake, I read the article with more detail this time. I note March is not even mentioned, even in the other 12% (bottom of page).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X