March-FX 5-42X56 HM Gen 2 with writable turrets at PRS Expo

Denys

Denys

Turbulent Optics Student
Full Member
Minuteman
    • Mar 26, 2012
    1,297
    686
    Texas
    #1
    Next month at the PRS Expo, March will have some pre-production models of the March-FX 5-42X56 HM Gen 2 with turrets on which you can write your come-ups. This is intended for PRS shooters who can record their come-ups for the next stage right on the turret using a dry-erase marker, and not worry about remembering the numbers for each stage. Makes it much easier to set up. The riflescopes will also have the new PRS reticle, the FML-WBR.

    You can view the riflescope here:
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Happiness Is A Warm Gun, Cody S, carbonbased and 1 other person
    #3
    I'm considering this scope so hard for a Christmas present. the wbr reticle or whatever really does it for me.
    the specs are exactly what I think I want. the only thing that has me concerned is how forgiving this scope will be, both in eye box and parallax and such.
    it seems like they got so much right, if they made it forgiving so it'll work good with crappy positional shooting I'll have to buy one.
     
    #4
    I like my gen1 a lot, but the FML-TR1 reticle is definitely something I would improve upon. The .1 Mil floating dot of the FML-MT is NOT a step in the right direction for me...and since I prefer a Christmas tree of some kind...I don't think I'll be jumping to the new Gen2..but I can see it working out great for lots of folks.
     
    #5
    The Gen 2 comes in three flavors: regular shuriken turrets MIL, regular shuriken turrets MOA, or writable shuriken turrets MIL. If you want one with the writable shuriken turrets, you can have it with the current reticles (FML-TR1, FML-3, FML-MT) and illumination, or with the new FML-WBR reticle, non-illuminated.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #6
    There were five demonstrator Gen 2 scopes at PR-Expo, three with the writable turrets. They will also be at the K&W Pro-Am event this coming weekend.
     
    #7
    the FML-WBR reticle has my attention. I like the design and it seems useful, yet minimalist.
    I'm mainly worried about glass quality for that price and ease of use. it will be a prs/benchrest scope so I'd like forgiving at 25x and just nice and clear at 40x.
     
    Last edited:
    #8
    Denys said:
    DEON is sending a representative from Japan to the PRS Expo and the ProAm to introduce this new version of the 5-42X56 Gen II. She will be in the Bullet Central area at PRS Expo. If you are there, stop by and visit with her.

    Click to expand...
    Anything like the race girls?
    1727814688867.png
     
    • Like
    • Haha
    Reactions: Denys, carbonbased and Cody S
    #9
    Cody S said:
    the FML-WBR reticle has my attention. I like the design and it seems useful, yet minimalist.
    I'm mainly worried about glass quality for that price and ease of use. it will be a prs/benchrest scope so I'd like forgiving at 25x and just nice and clear at 40x.
    Click to expand...
    I hear you. I don't think you will be disappointed in the glass quality. There were plenty of folks who looked through the demonstrators at the PR Expo and they were all impressed. I realise this is just hearsay and me saying it, but that's what I saw. Next up is the Pro-Am this coming weekend and there will be plenty more people looking through them. The Gen 2 is awesome.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #11
    fdkay said:
    Anything like the race girls?
    Click to expand...
    Actually, these are pictures from just 2 days ago at Twisted Barrel, where Mari Morita from DEON in Japan shot with the March-FX 5-42X56 HM Gen 2 with writable turrets and sporting the FML-WBR reticle. Some will recognize the 800 yard KYL berm. 5 shots, 5 hits. Then below that is the 1-mile shot.
    Mari-KYL-800yds.jpg



    Mar-KYL-800yrds-2.jpg


    Mari-One-Mile-Shot.jpg
     
    • Like
    Reactions: NHPiper, Malum Prohibitum, carbonbased and 1 other person
    #12
    I didn't mean to cast shade at marches ability to make a top tier scope, I've never even seen march glass please don't think I'm shit talking your company lol.
    also my mind is basically made up and I'm buying one around Christmas time.
    @Onebadstang16 you did real darn good on that reticle, it really turns me on. 10/10
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Denys
    #13
    Cody S said:
    I didn't mean to cast shade at marches ability to make a top tier scope, I've never even seen march glass please don't think I'm shit talking your company lol.
    also my mind is basically made up and I'm buying one around Christmas time.
    @Onebadstang16 you did real darn good on that reticle, it really turns me on. 10/10
    Click to expand...
    I didn't think you were casting aspersions on March. You clearly stated that you were worried about the quality of the glass (sight unseen, I get it) and I tried to assuage your worries. Also, this is an open forum, so I was writing for general consumption also.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #14
    Cody S said:
    I didn't mean to cast shade at marches ability to make a top tier scope, I've never even seen march glass please don't think I'm shit talking your company lol.
    also my mind is basically made up and I'm buying one around Christmas time.
    @Onebadstang16 you did real darn good on that reticle, it really turns me on. 10/10
    Click to expand...
    Thank you for the input on the reticle I appreciate that! I didn’t take your comments as throwing shade on March we understand in the prs market March isn’t as widely known as in benchrest and fclass. With that being said I will say March is actually known for have world class glass and I think this offering falls right in line with that expectation. This glass is a top tier glass offering in a prs specific model.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #17
    Denys said:
    The week following the PR Expo, the team attended the GAP Grind Pro/Am match at K&M Shooting Complex in Finger, TN.

    A write up was posted this morning at the Marchscopes.com website.
    Click to expand...
    That’s a fun story you wrote there! I’m quite sure Ms. Morita would kick my butt in any shooting comp. Thanks man!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Denys and Fret
    #20
    • Like
    Reactions: Fret, Cody S and carbonbased
    #21
    Denys said:
    I'm sure you will like it, the Gen II is awesome. And the thing is built like an Abrams tank, I'm here to tell you.
    Click to expand...
    What’s the eyebox, DOF, flare resistance, mirage performance etc like? For comparison, I own a Razor g2 4.5-27 and S&B 5-25.

    I think glassaholic has a review on the G1 somewhere, but it’d be good to hear your thoughts and the March G2. Maybe you’ve already written it somewhere.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Cody S
    #22
    I can't wait to own one or read a good review of one especially compared to the known gold standards like the razors or thetas in a few certain metrics. not that it will change my mind, I want to try one anyways.
     
    #23
    Wow, so many questions.

    The optical upgrade from the original 5-42X56 to the Gen II has to do with improving the IQ when the scope is near the limits of adjustments. From the official website "The image quality has also been further refined especially near the maximum elevation amount."

    The Gen II has the shuriken turrets with the locks, except for the model with the writable turrets. The writable turrets are no lockable.

    As I have said many times before, I am an F-class shooter and far too old to shoot PRS properly. I have very little experience with the 5-42X56 (the original), but I did shoot the Gen II with the FML-WBR reticle and the writable turrets. I had zero problems getting behind the Gen II, at any magnification, even though it was not my rifle. I thought the reticle was elegant and conducive to high precision as far as an FFP design can be precise (boo, hiss, get outta here you bum.) My current F-class riflescope is the incomparable March Majesta, which I have set at 80X using the MTR-WFD reticle. (To give you a frame of reference.) The field of view of the Gen II was, in a word, AWESOME. I shot mainly at 100 yards to get the zero, but I did scan the rest of the range to get an impression of the DOF and FOV. I was running it at around 30X and didn't need to mess with the side focus. I did crank up to 42X for the zero at 100, and did have to touch up the side focus. Easy peasy. I then put it back to where it was set, using the writing on the turret as a guide.

    The March riflescope are legendary in how they do not flare when tracking close to the Sun. I can tell you stories of late afternoon/early evening matches in Lodi, which faces west. I had to cover my head with a towel, but I could see through my March just fine.

    I did not get to verify the mirage performance with the Gen 2, but I am very familiar with that performance with the March-X 10-60X56 HM (which I used for years in F-Class, always set at 50X regardless of mirage), and for the last 18 months with my Majesta always set at 80X for the 1000-yard F-class game.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stanley_white, Happiness Is A Warm Gun and carbonbased
    #24
    Denys said:
    Wow, so many questions.

    The optical upgrade from the original 5-42X56 to the Gen II has to do with improving the IQ when the scope is near the limits of adjustments. From the official website "The image quality has also been further refined especially near the maximum elevation amount."

    The Gen II has the shuriken turrets with the locks, except for the model with the writable turrets. The writable turrets are no lockable.

    As I have said many times before, I am an F-class shooter and far too old to shoot PRS properly. I have very little experience with the 5-42X56 (the original), but I did shoot the Gen II with the FML-WBR reticle and the writable turrets. I had zero problems getting behind the Gen II, at any magnification, even though it was not my rifle. I thought the reticle was elegant and conducive to high precision as far as an FFP design can be precise (boo, hiss, get outta here you bum.) My current F-class riflescope is the incomparable March Majesta, which I have set at 80X using the MTR-WFD reticle. (To give you a frame of reference.) The field of view of the Gen II was, in a word, AWESOME. I shot mainly at 100 yards to get the zero, but I did scan the rest of the range to get an impression of the DOF and FOV. I was running it at around 30X and didn't need to mess with the side focus. I did crank up to 42X for the zero at 100, and did have to touch up the side focus. Easy peasy. I then put it back to where it was set, using the writing on the turret as a guide.

    The March riflescope are legendary in how they do not flare when tracking close to the Sun. I can tell you stories of late afternoon/early evening matches in Lodi, which faces west. I had to cover my head with a towel, but I could see through my March just fine.

    I did not get to verify the mirage performance with the Gen 2, but I am very familiar with that performance with the March-X 10-60X56 HM (which I used for years in F-Class, always set at 50X regardless of mirage), and for the last 18 months with my Majesta always set at 80X for the 1000-yard F-class game.
    Click to expand...
    I forget, is there an exit pupil limiter in this scope like there is with the 4.5-28? I remember in that scope it helped flare control at the cost of low-light performance.

    Here is where that is discussed by @koshkin
    www.snipershide.com

    Rifle Scopes - March 4.5-28x52 High Master Review and Comparison to Tangent Theta 5-25x56

    Who wants german made when Austria and Canada are the top dogs?
    www.snipershide.com www.snipershide.com

    @Glassaholic also mentioned the 4.5-28’s slightly limited low light performance in that thread’s first post.
     
    #25
    carbonbased said:
    I forget, is there an exit pupil limiter in this scope like there is with the 4.5-28? I remember in that scope it helped flare control at the cost of low-light performance.

    Here is where that is discussed by @koshkin
    www.snipershide.com

    Rifle Scopes - March 4.5-28x52 High Master Review and Comparison to Tangent Theta 5-25x56

    Who wants german made when Austria and Canada are the top dogs?
    www.snipershide.com www.snipershide.com

    @Glassaholic also mentioned the 4.5-28’s slightly limited low light performance in that thread’s first post.
    Click to expand...
    March has some of the best designs at handling flare but they do come with some tradeoffs
     
    #26
    Onebadstang16 said:
    My name is Brandon Rudge, I am the designer behind the FML-WBR and wanted to come in and offer my assistance with any questions. I also have been directly advising March on the PRS market which resulted in the writable turret version of the 5-42 Gen II. Please don’t hesitate to ask questions I am here to assist.
    Click to expand...
    Looks like you've done a good job with the reticle. Kept it simple but has the features you need.

    Not aimed at you but feel free to chime in.

    It's funny how different everyone's concept of a perfect PRS scope is, and how impossible it is to please everyone its a single model.
    I like the writable turrets and the non locking elevation, but I'd have wanted to keep the locking windage or even capped.
    I like this new reticle but I'm still in Christmas tree camp, so would like this reticle with a tree added.
     
    #28
    Denys said:
    Such as? What trade-offs are involved with reducing/eliminating flare?
    Click to expand...
    I think he might be referencing my post about the exit pupil limiter in the 4.5-28 that has a side effect of reducing its low light performance. @koshkin had mentioned it was there for flare reduction (see my post a ways up).

    Never did get an answer about if the same setup applies to this 5-42. 😞

    Maybe March uses different flare-reduction strategies in other scopes 🤷‍♂️
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Glassaholic and Cody S
    #30
    TheOE800 said:
    Man I wish March had non-translating turrets and their scopes tend to be pickier about parallax. Address those and maybe I don’t get another TT?
    Click to expand...
    many claim they already have addressed the picky parralax feature in the 5-42 and the 4.5-28
    I can't wait to try one and find out.
    as for the flare thing, for a target scope I'm glad they did what they did, I never shoot at dusk or dawn for prs anyways.
     
    #33
    beetroot said:
    Looks like you've done a good job with the reticle. Kept it simple but has the features you need.

    Not aimed at you but feel free to chime in.

    It's funny how different everyone's concept of a perfect PRS scope is, and how impossible it is to please everyone its a single model.
    I like the writable turrets and the non locking elevation, but I'd have wanted to keep the locking windage or even capped.
    I like this new reticle but I'm still in Christmas tree camp, so would like this reticle with a tree added.
    Click to expand...
    Man if you aren’t telling the truth here… no matter what you do in a design there will always be some debate about what it should have had or could have had. The FML-WBR (Rudge Reticle) was intended to be very simple while bringing some feature changes and additions to the market. I always liked a .2Mil reticle but never really loved counting all the marks in one side of the horizontal and those that did allow some distinguishing linework didn’t really have a .5Mil which I have always found to be very quick to reference which is why the open mark at .5 and alternating lines came from.

    I actually was quite adamant early on in the design I didn’t want a tree on the reticle in my personal experience and many other top prs shooters we have always found it gets in the way more than it is helpful. In fact the entire way the tree is designed currently in optics really does a poor job at best for precision shooting in my opinion. Let’s take an example 2.0mil dialed in first target and wind of .5Mil dialed… the next target let’s say requires a hold over of 1.6mils (3.6mil total) and a wind of .2mils more the reality is your tree wasn’t needed to take that shot and the line work in it likely didn’t actually align with what you needed. The March prs team has discussed this with several shooters and have found that after that exact discussion folks tend to realize they don’t really need the tree as much as they thought they did.

    But all that said we are always looking for more feedback and perhaps in the future they may be a tree design who knows.
     
    #34
    TheOE800 said:
    Man I wish March had non-translating turrets and their scopes tend to be pickier about parallax. Address those and maybe I don’t get another TT?
    Click to expand...
    There’s a reason March has stuck with translating turrets, I believe Denys will elaborate on this further.

    As for parallax the 5-42 gen II with my reticle has been on my rifles for prs for some time in both train up and actual matches and I can comfortably say the parallax is very forgiving. I basically set my parallax and don’t touch it unless I push into higher magnification for some reason. I’ve found I have no issues using the scope from 400-1100 with no adjustment.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: TheOE800
    #35
    Onebadstang16 said:
    Man if you aren’t telling the truth here… no matter what you do in a design there will always be some debate about what it should have had or could have had. The FML-WBR (Rudge Reticle) was intended to be very simple while bringing some feature changes and additions to the market. I always liked a .2Mil reticle but never really loved counting all the marks in one side of the horizontal and those that did allow some distinguishing linework didn’t really have a .5Mil which I have always found to be very quick to reference which is why the open mark at .5 and alternating lines came from.

    I actually was quite adamant early on in the design I didn’t want a tree on the reticle in my personal experience and many other top prs shooters we have always found it gets in the way more than it is helpful. In fact the entire way the tree is designed currently in optics really does a poor job at best for precision shooting in my opinion. Let’s take an example 2.0mil dialed in first target and wind of .5Mil dialed… the next target let’s say requires a hold over of 1.6mils (3.6mil total) and a wind of .2mils more the reality is your tree wasn’t needed to take that shot and the line work in it likely didn’t actually align with what you needed. The March prs team has discussed this with several shooters and have found that after that exact discussion folks tend to realize they don’t really need the tree as much as they thought they did.

    But all that said we are always looking for more feedback and perhaps in the future they may be a tree design who knows.
    Click to expand...
    I can imagine that a tree gets in the way in PRS.

    But I would only be imagining because I’m not a competitor. I’m a small varmint shooter. So I’ll give you some feedback in that area. Who knows, maybe it translates to other types of hunting.

    I think where a tree comes into its own is when you have a whole bunch of targets that pop up/down randomly. They appear at different ranges (70-500yds) and at different angles , so the wind holds vary a lot.

    And you don’t have much time to shoot.

    I’m not talking about the varmint shooters who shoot like it’s benchrest btw. That’s fine if that’s their thing, but I’m talking about trying to kill as many as possible. You don’t spray and pray, but there will be misses.

    It’s more like I imagine a defensive DMR scenario might be like? But I really don’t know. I feel dumb even bringing it up, but there you have it. In my little hobby the stakes could hardly be lower.

    Anyway, here a tree is very advantageous. Knocking out the dialing saves lots of time, and dialing for wind is probably a fools errand as you are typically pivoting 90° to 120° (rotating bench or tripod).

    For me, the trees on the market all go down way too far, obscuring the prairie dogs. All I need are three mils of elevation and three mils of wind holds, and no vertical stadia above the horizontal. I shoot 204.

    The best tree I’ve used is the EBR-2C in a Razor 4.5-27 GII. Uncluttered and thin.
     
    #36
    Nik H said:
    I'm sure that they will hop right to that
    Click to expand...
    I actually posed that question to DEON some time back and the answer I was given was that non-translatable turrets are more complicated (more moving parts) and DEON is more interested in robustness and longevity in their riflescopes. This is why they have 4mm thick walls and they are using argon instead of nitrogen in their riflescope, and so on. Everything about their riflescope design is for strength and longevity and they won't veer from that.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Sika64, Nik H and Cody S
    #37
    carbonbased said:
    I can imagine that a tree gets in the way in PRS.

    But I would only be imagining because I’m not a competitor. I’m a small varmint shooter. So I’ll give you some feedback in that area. Who knows, maybe it translates to other types of hunting.

    I think where a tree comes into its own is when you have a whole bunch of targets that pop up/down randomly. They appear at different ranges (70-500yds) and at different angles , so the wind holds vary a lot.

    And you don’t have much time to shoot.

    I’m not talking about the varmint shooters who shoot like it’s benchrest btw. That’s fine if that’s their thing, but I’m talking about trying to kill as many as possible. You don’t spray and pray, but there will be misses.

    It’s more like I imagine a defensive DMR scenario might be like? But I really don’t know. I feel dumb even bringing it up, but there you have it. In my little hobby the stakes could hardly be lower.

    Anyway, here a tree is very advantageous. Knocking out the dialing saves lots of time, and dialing for wind is probably a fools errand as you are typically pivoting 90° to 120° (rotating bench or tripod).

    For me, the trees on the market all go down way too far, obscuring the prairie dogs. All I need are three mils of elevation and three mils of wind holds, and no vertical stadia above the horizontal. I shoot 204.

    The best tree I’ve used is the EBR-2C in a Razor 4.5-27 GII. Uncluttered and thin.
    Click to expand...
    I understand what you are saying. Your first sentence says it all: "a tree gets in the way in PRS." The FML-WBR was designed specifically for PRS, by a PRS competitor, and installed in a riflescope optimized for PRS (writable turrets, proper zoom range, extra wide angle.)

    If you can use the reticle for other purposes, more power to you, but PRS competition was the goal for this reticle.
     
    #38
    Denys said:
    I actually posed that question to DEON some time back and the answer I was given was that translatable turrets are more complicated (more moving parts) and DEON is more interested in robustness and longevity in their riflescopes. This is why they have 4mm thick walls and they are using argon instead of nitrogen in their riflescope, and so on. Everything about their riflescope design is for strength and longevity and they won't veer from that.
    Click to expand...
    Did you mean non translating turrets are more complicated since more complicated might probably decrease reliability?

    I really like the turrets on the Gen 2 and the Gen 1 turrets are also very nice. Going to get another March soon Deciding between another Gen 2 or the 10-60x HM for shooting groups on paper. If the 10-60x HM only had turrets like the 5-42x...........
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Denys
    #39
    Fret said:
    Did you mean non translating turrets are more complicated since more complicated might probably decrease reliability?

    I really like the turrets on the Gen 2 and the Gen 1 turrets are also very nice. Going to get another March soon Deciding between another Gen 2 or the 10-60x HM for shooting groups on paper. If the 10-60x HM only had turrets like the 5-42x...........
    Click to expand...
    Thank you fpr pointing out my mistake. Yes, I did mean non-translatable turrets are more complicated. I fixed my post, thanks to your note.
     
    #40
    Fret said:
    Did you mean non translating turrets are more complicated since more complicated might probably decrease reliability?

    I really like the turrets on the Gen 2 and the Gen 1 turrets are also very nice. Going to get another March soon Deciding between another Gen 2 or the 10-60x HM for shooting groups on paper. If the 10-60x HM only had turrets like the 5-42x...........
    Click to expand...
    As I understand it, the shuriken turrets are not a straight up replacement for the turrets on the March-X 10-60X56 HM. To have the shuriken turrets on this riflescope would require a change in the way the scope body is machined. DEON did this for the 5-40X56 when they produced a Gen II model of that riflescope. They did this for the 5-42X56 Gen II, and for the 1-10X24 Shorty when it went from 33/30mm body to straight 34mm body. The March-X 8-80X56 HM WA Majesta was designed with the shuriken turrets.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Fret and Cody S
    #41
    that other dude should check out the other reticles they have, they make some decent trees but I'm super anal about reticles and nothing until the wbr flipped my switch.
    Hot take, I'd rather have the Shuriken turrets instead of the writable ones, I'm not sure what I'd write on there but who knows, maybe it'll come to me when I've got it in front of me.
    Are the shuriken turrets non-translating?
    Not that I care all that much about the turrets translating up or down, I'm just glad they went with 10mil turrets.
    this has to be a sick product for me to consider spending 4k on a scope lol, I ain't made of money.
     
    #42
    Cody S said:
    that other dude should check out the other reticles they have, they make some decent trees but I'm super anal about reticles and nothing until the wbr flipped my switch.
    Hot take, I'd rather have the Shuriken turrets instead of the writable ones, I'm not sure what I'd write on there but who knows, maybe it'll come to me when I've got it in front of me.
    Are the shuriken turrets non-translating?
    Not that I care all that much about the turrets translating up or down, I'm just glad they went with 10mil turrets.
    this has to be a sick product for me to consider spending 4k on a scope lol, I ain't made of money.
    Click to expand...
    The writable turrets are something you would use on every stage that has multiple targets for prs, virtually every competitor marks the turrets now for targets it makes dialing and such much faster.

    The writable turrets are the exact same as the Shuriken internally they just do not lock, locking was also intentionally omitted to simplify the prs model for a feature that isn’t used very often in prs. The turrets are translating turrets but on the prs model there is just a vertical line so you never actually see anything other than your dial location just as you would on a non translating turret. It’s been discussed already but translating turrets provide more robustness to the design in general as they are directly driving the erector assembly versus being driven by a secondary mechanical operation on non translating.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Fret and Cody S
    #46
    Denys said:
    As I understand it, the shuriken turrets are not a straight up replacement for the turrets on the March-X 10-60X56 HM. To have the shuriken turrets on this riflescope would require a change in the way the scope body is machined. DEON did this for the 5-40X56 when they produced a Gen II model of that riflescope. They did this for the 5-42X56 Gen II, and for the 1-10X24 Shorty when it went from 33/30mm body to straight 34mm body. The March-X 8-80X56 HM WA Majesta was designed with the shuriken turrets.
    Click to expand...
    Good info. So I would think they probably will stick to the status quo on the 10-60x turrets.
     
    #50
    TheOE800 said:
    So will the FML-WBR only be available in the writable turrets model?
    Click to expand...
    At this time that is correct, I can inquire about potentially having it available in other models but I don’t think this is the plan at this time.

    The writable turrets are also usable in a hunting situation if you have some known distances you wanted to setup elevation dials for ahead of time.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: carbonbased
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    Glassaholic
    Rifle Scopes Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56 Review and comparison with NF ATACR 4-16x42, S&B US 3-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52
    Replies
    129
    Views
    12K
    Kickin45
    Kickin45
    Glassaholic
    Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 vs March 3-24x52 vs Schmidt 3-27x56 - battle of midrange magnification juggernauts
    Replies
    32
    Views
    8K
    Glassaholic
    Glassaholic
    carbonbased
    Flare / Glare / Backlit notes on 4 scopes (NX8 4-32, Razor Gen II 4.5-27, Razor LHT 4.5-22, S&B 5-25)
    Replies
    10
    Views
    454
    carbonbased
    carbonbased
    Glassaholic
    Rifle Scopes March FFP 1.5-15x42 MPVO Review and Comparison (w/ Nightforce and Athlon)
    Replies
    246
    Views
    23K
    OlivierFR
    O
    Glassaholic
    Rifle Scopes Alpha Class Long Range Scope Review - TT, ZCO, Schmidt, March, Vortex
    Replies
    206
    Views
    32K
    Dutch308
    D
    Top Bottom
    Back
    Home
    Forums
    Merch
    Alerts