Rifle Scopes March 1-10 Shorty Dual Focal - Reviews?

[theLBC]

Not on one setting. You’d have to adjust it. But, from 100-600 yards you would find that clarity would be acceptable for rapid engagement if you set it at say 200 and left it due to the fact that 1) Max magnification is 10x and 2) it has a small objective diameter. If you took the time to adjust it between distances, you would have optimal image quality and no parallax.

i think it also depends on the size of the target, since the poa/poi can shift with head position when parallax is off (ime).

 

[NC_Libertarian]

Serious question here…

So when you’re shooting quickly and you need to transition from say, 600 yards and then rapidly engage a 1 MOA~ish target at 200-250 shooting positionally, how do you set your parallax? Mark it and wing it with your weak side hand? Do you drop it off your shoulder? Break your view down range?

I ran a 3.5x-10 M3 for a year on my mk12. Fine for flat range slow fire or bench shooting. However, when shooting off a barricade, etc. I find it much faster to shoot a fixed parallax scope.

Curious if there is a technique to get a parallax adjustable scope fast like a fixed LPVO outside just setting it at 300 and living with the sight picture/ parallax. (Kind if defeats the purpose) I am not sold on my Gen3 1-10 and this scope is interesting to me IF if will work for my style of shooting.

Some of the others have given you good answers, so I will give you a real-world example:

I had a stage last weekend with several shots alternating between 2 targets at about 200yds and 400yd. The targets were the same size, so the longer one is effectively half the angle. I was using my Vortex Gen II-E 1-6xx. The 200yd shot was OK, as the fixed 100yd parallax is not too bad at 200. But at 400, it is getting very out of focus for my eyes. And it starts to have noticeable parallax issues at about 300 as well, with it is getting very noticeable at 400. For a minute-of-man target, you could live with it. But I need better than that.

If I had adjustable parallax, I would have still treated it as a fixed parallax, but I would get to choose that fixed point. I would have set it somewhere in the middle, probably closer to 400 than 300, or maybe even at 400. I would need to use the actual March scope to understand how it reacts to being tuned to one distance and used at a different one. Either way, even if set at 400, it would be acceptable at the larger 200 target (probably no worse than my current scope at 200), and be perfect at 400 (the more difficult target).

Note that it is also possible, if you really know your scope, to reach up and move the parallax without looking at it. The movement would not be exact, but you could get it close. Whether this, or any time-eating method to change parallax during an event, would make sense depends on many, many factors. It likely would not in my above scenario. With a time limit and a relatively small difference between distances, I don't see that it would be helpful in that particular overall task. Find a good compromise distance (for that particular stage) and leave it. When you get to the next stage, set it for the best compromise for that stage. But I have had times where it probably would make sense to dial in some fasion, if I had the option to dial.

As I said, in actual use I would need to use it and figure out where is the best compromise. Every person's eyes are different, and react to glass differently. What is best for me may not be best for you. But at least with adjustable parallax, we all have a range of options to find the best compromise. When you are fixed, you only have one compromise.

BTW: I had a DNF on the above stage due to missing the last shot at 400. A better sight picture probably stops that from happening. So my one available compromise did not work for me on that day.

BTW2: The very next stage after this one had us taking head shots at about 5-7yds. If we hit outside the target, we got a DNF. So I literally went from one shot at 400yds, to the next shot at >10yds. I would be able to dial down to minimum parallax off the clock between stages, so no penalty. I can't think of a better example where adjustable parallax is an advantage than in that scenario.

 

[theLBC]

if i save up enough money to get one of these, where is the best place to buy one?
of course i would like to purchase from a forum sponsor, even if not the absolute best price (within reason).

 

[NC_Libertarian]

I had a Athlon 2-12x42 DMR on my short AR, and honestly, except for being longer, heavier, and not having daylight bright illume, I prefer it, because I really like the 12x vs 10x for long range, BUT I feel 2x is a bit too much magnification for close in, so March 1-10 it is.

I am surprised you see any significant functional difference between 10x and 12x.

I would also expect, though I have never looked through either, that the March would have significantly better glass than the Athlon. It has been my experience that a lesser magnification with a clear view is more useful than higher magnification with a lesser picture quality.

It would take an opportunity for me to look through both to see if I agreed with you.

 

[gnochi]

if i save up enough money to get one of these, where is the best place to buy one?
of course i would like to purchase from a forum sponsor, even if not the absolute best price (within reason).

EuroOptic has them! I think LongRangeSupply is a commercial sponsor here too, but not sure.

 

[chase723]

i think it also depends on the size of the target, since the poa/poi can shift with head position when parallax is off (ime).

The small objective size of LPVOs minimizes the parallax error, which is why they use small objective lenses for fixed parallax LPVOs. For instance, with the Gen 3 razor parallax error at 1000 yards is ~4 inches.

For larger objective lenses, what you said is very true.

 

[steve123]

I am surprised you see any significant functional difference between 10x and 12x.

I would also expect, though I have never looked through either, that the March would have significantly better glass than the Athlon. It has been my experience that a lesser magnification with a clear view is more useful than higher magnification with a lesser picture quality.

It would take an opportunity for me to look through both to see if I agreed with you.

Its surprising how much difference 2x more makes to me. It feels like "hmmm, at 10x" the target is pretty small, and at 12x its a more "normal" visual in size because I've used 12-16x the most often in NRL22. I also feel more confident using 12x as well as seeing where the bullet goes.

I think many would also be surprised at how good the glass is in that Helos G2 2-12x42 DMR. I without a doubt prefer it for long range vs the March. There's also something fun to me using the big .3 mil dot??!! That's pretty much how precise my AR is and a .2 mil hold is just off the edge of the dot. But yes you'd just have to try it to know if its something you'd like.

Most could care less but both of these scopes might end up on pcp air rifles, 22rf's, or who knows what else I might want to use for close in so that 10Y parallax makes these two scopes very versatile to me.

 

[NC_Libertarian]

The small objective size of LPVOs minimizes the parallax error, which is why they use small objective lenses for fixed parallax LPVOs. For instance, with the Gen 3 razor parallax error at 1000 yards is ~4 inches.

For larger objective lenses, what you said is very true.

Where did you get this number?

 

[chase723]

Where did you get this number?

It’s actually less than 3”

Parallax Error Calculator - Leland-West Insurance

This quick calculator shows the amount of parallax error that may occur using a fixed-parallax scope to sight onto an object placed at a known distance.

www.lelandwest.com

 

[DacianMH]

I was today years old when I heard about the new offering from March. Anyone gotten some hands-on time yet?

Their 1-10 Shorty appears to have all the ingredients of a winning LPVO to sit on top of an all purpose battle rifle (SR-25 ACC). Intended usage is Heavy Metal division in various carbine competitions including Run N Gun matches. Typical targets range from 5-750 yards, typically at least 3 MOA or bigger out at the longer ranges.

Personally, I'm most curious about the daylight brightness and performance on 1x. I currently have a Vortex 1-10 but the March is nearly 5 oz lighter and that is a sizable difference when you are running with it on your back for up to 8 miles.

It’s definitely day light bright! The 1x isn’t a true 1x more like the Razor GenIII 1-10 where the 1x is less actually…more like .7 but the eye box is much better than the Razor. It’s easier to get behind. The photos I took are with my iPhone 13. No special adapter. The illumination is on 1 only in the photos.

 

[DacianMH]

Do you think it has a place on a hiking hunting rifle

If you’re looking for the simple yes or no answer…yes. If I’m tracking what you’re saying, I have this setup on a Sig Cross .308 16” and the whole setup with my titanium can and Scalarworks Leap 02 mount is just under 8.7 lbs…loaded. And it holds zero. The leap mount is wide enough (or deep enough) in the ring and the base that is solid as far as I tested running 168gr bullets for the last 200 rds if you follow Scalarworks recommended torque spec of 25 inch lbs.

 

[smarcus]

I decided to take the TierOne mount off and go with individual NF Ultralight 1.57 rings. Saves 5 ounces and seems very stout. We will see. This a 16 inch 6.5 Grendel I use for hunting deer and Hogs during the day.

 

[FatBoy]

I decided to take the TierOne mount off and go with individual NF Ultralight 1.57 rings. Saves 5 ounces and seems very stout. We will see. This a 16 inch 6.5 Grendel I use for hunting deer and Hogs during the day.

View attachment 7788909

I’m sure that’s rock solid but damn it looks strange.

 

[bigwatchpilot]

I decided to take the TierOne mount off and go with individual NF Ultralight 1.57 rings. Saves 5 ounces and seems very stout. We will see. This a 16 inch 6.5 Grendel I use for hunting deer and Hogs during the day.

View attachment 7788909

NIce setup...other than the stock I built the EXACT same rifle

 

[TheOE800]

I’m sure that’s rock solid but damn it looks strange.

Could maybe fit two six-bolt rings or at least a six- and a four-bolt.

 

[smarcus]

Could maybe fit two six-bolt rings or at least a six- and a four-bolt.

Honestly, I was looking for something NV height and considered purchasing a Spuhr SP-3024: 30mm Cantilever Mount 0 MOA - 1.89" and chopping the front ring off. Keep the base and all the lugs and then chop it right where the front end angled up. With a Dremel and some black sharpie for touch up.... But I have refrained. Wonder how much it would weigh?

 

[NC_Libertarian]

Honestly, I was looking for something NV height and considered purchasing a Spuhr SP-3024: 30mm Cantilever Mount 0 MOA - 1.89" and chopping the front ring off. Keep the base and all the lugs and then chop it right where the front end angled up. With a Dremel and some black sharpie for touch up.... But I have refrained. Wonder how much it would weigh?
View attachment 7789205

About 60% of original.

 

[Conqueror]

Honestly, I was looking for something NV height and considered purchasing a Spuhr SP-3024: 30mm Cantilever Mount 0 MOA - 1.89" and chopping the front ring off. Keep the base and all the lugs and then chop it right where the front end angled up. With a Dremel and some black sharpie for touch up.... But I have refrained. Wonder how much it would weigh?

You could get one of their non-cantilever mounts, cut it in half, and split the cost with someone else who has a March.

 

[NC_Libertarian]

I decided to take the TierOne mount off and go with individual NF Ultralight 1.57 rings. Saves 5 ounces and seems very stout. We will see. This a 16 inch 6.5 Grendel I use for hunting deer and Hogs during the day.

View attachment 7788909

I suspect that is a very viable setup, as long as you can keep the front ring on the upper and not have to position it on the handguard.

For me, I don't think this is quite far enough forward. Do you have another set of rails to move it forward? And how much farther can you slide it forward before the radius on the tube interferes with the ring?

 

[smarcus]

I suspect that is a very viable setup, as long as you can keep the front ring on the upper and not have to position it on the handguard.

For me, I don't think this is quite far enough forward. Do you have another set of rails to move it forward? And how much farther can you slide it forward before the radius on the tube interferes with the ring?

If you put the rings closer together you could move it forward another slot. If I did that I would be NTCH so I’m good with it as is.

 

[smarcus]

If you put the rings closer together you could move it forward another slot. If I did that I would be NTCH so I’m good with it as is.

Remember that the scope caps stick out in the rear and make it longer in the back than it is. It’s further forward than you think.

 

[smarcus]

Remember that the scope caps stick out in the rear and make it longer in the back than it is. It’s further forward than you think.

Here is a better picture

 

[NC_Libertarian]

Here is a better picture

View attachment 7791753

You are correct, it is farther forward than I thought.

Mine is supposed to ship in about 3 weeks, so I will be able to experiment myself.

 

[smarcus]

Glad I could help.

 

[NC_Libertarian]

Glad I could help.

A question about the MK throw lever: Is that the Standard or Pro model?

 

[smarcus]

A question about the MK throw lever: Is that the Standard or Pro model?

Standard. I believe the pro is more nicely finished. The standard is a bit rough.

 

[DacianMH]

if i save up enough money to get one of these, where is the best place to buy one?
of course i would like to purchase from a forum sponsor, even if not the absolute best price (within reason).

EuroOptic has MIL/LE pricing. Got mine there and they’re one of their dealers i believe.

 

[DacianMH]

You could get one of their non-cantilever mounts, cut it in half, and split the cost with someone else who has a March.

Id be willing to try this!

 

[smarcus]

Id be willing to try this!

I don't know if that will work because the the bar that the QD levers are on is all one piece. If you cut it, I don't know if it clamps correctly or how many lugs are underneath. The reason I looked at the extended mount was because you could chop the front ring but still retain the entire base with all it's lugs and and clamping points.

 

[DacianMH]

I don't know if that will work because the the bar that the QD levers are on is all one piece. If you cut it, I don't know if it clamps correctly or how many lugs are underneath. The reason I looked at the extended mount was because you could chop the front ring but still retain the entire base with all it's lugs and and clamping points.

I’ll have to do some more in depth research. I have access to a bunch of Sphur mounts at my buddies shop so I’ll have to take a look. Better probably to open it up to 33mm on just the front ring but i don’t know how it would be affixed to either a lathe or a mill. Probably a mill would work better but thats gotta be precise and i personally dont have that skill set. For the price of a Sphur you’re better off buying March’s scope mount ahead made for it.

 

[Glassaholic]

Really hope they come out with a nice dual focal plane tree reticle

 

[avidflyer]

Really hope they come out with a nice dual focal plane tree reticle

thought they did??

 

[NC_Libertarian]

I’ll have to do some more in depth research. I have access to a bunch of Sphur mounts at my buddies shop so I’ll have to take a look. Better probably to open it up to 33mm on just the front ring but i don’t know how it would be affixed to either a lathe or a mill. Probably a mill would work better but thats gotta be precise and i personally dont have that skill set. For the price of a Sphur you’re better off buying March’s scope mount ahead made for it.

Trying to bore out an existing 30mm scope mount to 33mm is a significant undertaking, and that is assuming there is enough material in the mount to bore it out that large. To keep everything in alignment, the task is not trivial, and this is coming from an experienced machinist.

The truth is, despite the shortcomings with the 2 available options, there is not much reason to use anything other than the correct March or Tier One mount. Unless you have a specific reason to not use either of these options. Examples of such reasons:

1) Availability has been an issue at times.
2) The March is heavy, and has very little cantilever. The weight is troublesome, and the cantilever may be a no-go for some applications.
3) The Tier One has plenty of cantilever, but is REALLY heavy. The weight is even more troublesome. And they have been out of stock every time I ever looked.

So unless one of the above reasons drives you towards another option, you are probably better off going with 1 of the 2 current options.

 

[smarcus]

This is what they have on their website

 

[Glassaholic]

thought they did??

I have been a little out of it but have not seen a model with DFP tree, they have a standard DFP (non-tree) is all I'm aware of.

 

[TheOE800]

I have been a little out of it but have not seen a model with DFP tree, they have a standard DFP (non-tree) is all I'm aware of.

So the TR1 is not DFP?

 

[Glassaholic]

This is what they have on their website

I'll crawl back in my hole now and come out when winter is over So is that reticle available today?

 

[Glassaholic]

So the TR1 is not DFP?

It is DFP, that is what the DF stands for, I just haven't kept up for a bit. Reticle is interesting, would like to see it first hand...

 

[NC_Libertarian]

I'll crawl back in my hole now and come out when winter is over So is that reticle available today?

Yes, people have started taking delivery about 2 months ago. Mine is due to be delivered in 3 weeks.

 

[NC_Libertarian]

It is DFP, that is what the DF stands for, I just haven't kept up for a bit. Reticle is interesting, would like to see it first hand...

The March name for the reticle is DR-TR1. It is Dual Focal just like the original, but with a tree on the FFP reticle.

 

[NC_Libertarian]

So the TR1 is not DFP?

The March name for the reticle is DR-TR1. It is Dual Focal just like the original, but with a tree on the FFP reticle.


PS: Glassaholic, I quoted the wrong poster above.

 

[TheOE800]

Hokay, glad that’s cleared up.

Yes, people have started taking delivery about 2 months ago. Mine is due to be delivered in 3 weeks.

Had mine in hand late December and there were more in stock.

 

[DustBun]

https://www.marchscopes.co.uk/product/march-1x-8x24-1x-10x24-shorty-unimount/

Did you purchase this specific mount? If so, are you happy with it? I ask because they have 2 of them in stock. Audēre and MK Machining are back ordered.

 

[TheOE800]

Did you purchase this specific mount? If so, are you happy with it? I ask because they have 2 of them in stock. Audēre and MK Machining are back ordered.

No complaints. I keep my eyepieces about even with the end of the upper receiver and that is enough eye relief for me.

 

[Glassaholic]

Hokay, glad that’s cleared up.



Had mine in hand late December and there were more in stock.

Oh nice, what do you think of the reticle? How well aligned is the FFP hash marks with the SFP main cross? How prominent are those wind dots, are they easy to find when you need them?

 

[DustBun]

No complaints. I keep my eyepieces about even with the end of the upper receiver and that is enough eye relief for me.

Thank you for the information. I just ordered it from marchscopes.co.uk. It was £245.08 or $331.54 with shipping which is far less than anyone else and they had 2 in stock. No one had it, other than Canada who wanted $599.

 

[TheOE800]

Oh nice, what do you think of the reticle? How well aligned is the FFP hash marks with the SFP main cross? How prominent are those wind dots, are they easy to find when you need them?

I haven’t had a good look through it since I set it up, hoping to get out to the range with multiple projects soon.

 

[gxer]

Trying to bore out an existing 30mm scope mount to 33mm is a significant undertaking, and that is assuming there is enough material in the mount to bore it out that large. To keep everything in alignment, the task is not trivial, and this is coming from an experienced machinist.

The truth is, despite the shortcomings with the 2 available options, there is not much reason to use anything other than the correct March or Tier One mount. Unless you have a specific reason to not use either of these options. Examples of such reasons:

1) Availability has been an issue at times.
2) The March is heavy, and has very little cantilever. The weight is troublesome, and the cantilever may be a no-go for some applications.
3) The Tier One has plenty of cantilever, but is REALLY heavy. The weight is even more troublesome. And they have been out of stock every time I ever looked.

So unless one of the above reasons drives you towards another option, you are probably better off going with 1 of the 2 current options.

I wonder if anyone has ever tried the old shorty extended scope ring designed for 1-8x shorty. it has 8 screws to hold the scope just behind the turret

Long Scope Ring 30mm x 1.400" - Grizzly Industrial

We are thrilled to announce our new premium March scope rings, proudly made in the USA! A custom rifle and a premium scope deserve the highest quality scope rings made. <p>These aircraft grade 7075-T6 Aluminum rings have the strength of steel at less than half the weight and are machined in...

www.grizzly.com

Not sure about the weight but it looks like a lighter mount than any unimount

 

[NC_Libertarian]

I wonder if anyone has ever tried the old shorty extended scope ring designed for 1-8x shorty. it has 8 screws to hold the scope just behind the turret

Long Scope Ring 30mm x 1.400" - Grizzly Industrial

We are thrilled to announce our new premium March scope rings, proudly made in the USA! A custom rifle and a premium scope deserve the highest quality scope rings made. <p>These aircraft grade 7075-T6 Aluminum rings have the strength of steel at less than half the weight and are machined in...

www.grizzly.com

Not sure about the weight but it looks like a lighter mount than any unimount

Never seen that mount before, I would try one if I could get it. The Grizzly site says "ready to ship," but I question that they actually have it. I just put 300 of them in a cart, and the site was going to let me buy them. So I doubt they have an inventory system attached to the internet sales page.

 

[DacianMH]

Trying to bore out an existing 30mm scope mount to 33mm is a significant undertaking, and that is assuming there is enough material in the mount to bore it out that large. To keep everything in alignment, the task is not trivial, and this is coming from an experienced machinist.

The truth is, despite the shortcomings with the 2 available options, there is not much reason to use anything other than the correct March or Tier One mount. Unless you have a specific reason to not use either of these options. Examples of such reasons:

1) Availability has been an issue at times.
2) The March is heavy, and has very little cantilever. The weight is troublesome, and the cantilever may be a no-go for some applications.
3) The Tier One has plenty of cantilever, but is REALLY heavy. The weight is even more troublesome. And they have been out of stock every time I ever looked.

So unless one of the above reasons drives you towards another option, you are probably better off going with 1 of the 2 current options.

Yes i believe you’re spot on. Thinking back on what i said i realized its too complex to bore it out. So a single 30mm ring thats got enough depth will be the easier way to go for now.