-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Frank,
I think you should send me all your scopes for secondary evaluation. Hell, I'll even pay shipping.
This one looks to have a mag. range that would be useful to just about anyone. Would be nice to have a scope you could crank down to 3x and hunt deer with in thick woods then run it up to 24x for plinking steel on the weekends.
I think you should send me all your scopes for secondary evaluation. Hell, I'll even pay shipping.
This one looks to have a mag. range that would be useful to just about anyone. Would be nice to have a scope you could crank down to 3x and hunt deer with in thick woods then run it up to 24x for plinking steel on the weekends.
Very nice. Looking forward to a review of the scope. The 3-24x42 looked awesome, so I am excited to see the reviews on this one.
Lol fml-1 reticle.. Could imagine what that's supposed to look like to match the description
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I actually like the FML reticle. It serves it's purpose and is not distractingly busy. Having 10mm more objective diameter than the 3-24x42 will capture and transmit more light and provide greater eye relief. I look forward to Frank's review and hope that he finds that those benefits offset the size and weight gain of the 52mm over the 42mm.
Skip
Skip
I'm very much looking at this scope for a well balanced lighter weight tactical competition rifle (.260, 26" #6 GAP contour) to replace my S&B 3-20x50 as I move it over to an upcoming AI. My biggest concern is durability from it being so lightweight. In my mind there's built, over built and under built. I just want to know if it's the latter coming in at half the weight of the new Vortex.
In the other scope review, ounce for ounce, the 42mm little brother of this scope was by far the best. Can't wait to see if the larger objective of this one pulls it up there with the best rated scopes.
I like this one much better than the 42mm version, the increase in objective makes a noticeable difference in my opinion, your's of course may vary.
I've had the 3-24X 42mm scope for over a year and even used on my MRAD 338LM for 6 months and moved it to my DTA SRS A1 with 338LM conversion and have fired over 3000 rounds of 338LM and several hundreds of rounds of 260 Rem and 308 with no issues whatsoever. Tracking is still spot on with great turret clicks and exceptional zero stop. I don't feel the 52mm versions is worth the extra money for me. The glass quality is right up there with the "Big Boys".
Awesome, thanks bro. I think it will certainly be able to take the .260 I'll have it on! Bonus time is right around the corner and I've set aside a chunk for a top end scope. I'm looking at a non-illuminated x52 version for this one.
The reticle will be something for me to get used to as it will be my first try at a floating dot center, coming from currently running a H2CMR but still having extensive past with a standard mildot and similar styles. Those little .2 hash marks can spoil you though...
I think you'll find you love the floating dot center. Has never obscured anything I have shot at!
While a few of us are waiting on Frank to put this scope through its paces and come back with some more detailed observations, here is a recent review I found on the scope. I don't mean to hijack the thread, but this may whet the appetite of a few people until Frank can provide his thoughts:
The March 3 ? 24 x 52mm FFP Scope by Richard Wild | Target Shooter Magazine
The March 3 ? 24 x 52mm FFP Scope by Richard Wild | Target Shooter Magazine
Thanks for the link,
I think I need a month off looking at scopes!!
So much research, it's great we have so many options!!
The FML-1 reticle that comes on the March 3-24's isn't that much different than the one on the SWFA SS HD 5-20x50mm scope. I don't see what the whining is about since the SWFA is well regarded. And I own them both.
Last edited:
We may see a review from LL next month on it if he isn't too busy, but it seems he's been on the road for the last couple-few weeks from the sounds of his recent posts. It's well known he doesn't post anything definitive until he has put several hundred rounds under the belt of a new scope. For now I think we will have to be satisfied with his earlier post that he likes it much more than the x42 version.
Oh, and I bought a BEAST for a planned AI so if I'm getting a March, it will have to wait for me to sell my PMII first. I'll let these scopes get run through the wringer first.
I know I hang on some of these threads when I'm waiting on feedback from a new product, so I feel like I should post something about the 3-24x52 that I've been running for about 2 months now. I've owned 2 of the 42mm versions and never had a hiccup from either, one now resides on my wife's rifle and she loves it. The 52mm is more of the same. These scopes are amazingly well-built, and very solid for such a light overall package. I am not nice to my gear, and I've yet to lose zero or have any issue with a March scope. The reticle is the same as the 42mm models, I use the FML-1 and prefer the bold lines over many thinner reticles out there. The tapered outer bars make it easy to find things on low power and stay on them while dialing up to whatever I intend to shoot with. I rarely use the high magnification (18+) but I've been making it a point to use it more often with the larger objective. Crystal clear. I have had no trouble spotting hits out to 1360yd, and seeing trace for my team mates when shooting together. The controls are somehow even better than on the 42mm, with a slightly taller turret and more crisp clicks. I love the low profile of the March turrets, and 10 mils per turn is perfect for me. The mag ring spins easily, but not too easy. The parallax knob is just like the 42mm, with a lot of adjustment from 10m-100m, and very little from 100-infinity, but I find this to work well for matches where I don't have time to adjust the parallax except for gross adjustments. I generally leave my parallax set in the middle unless I'm shooting very small/far targets. Overall, I'm very happy with this scope. It addresses the area where it was most lacking, while retaining the best features and the light weight.
I guess it worked out okay.....
I guess it worked out okay.....
I was hoping we may have seen a video review by now. It's a very compelling little package all the same, I am leaning towards one of these next year for my next build.
I am still working on it, and I am admittedly behind by about a month... with the work prior to the Scout.com move and my travels this summer it slowed me down quite a bit.
I will repeat,
I really like the March 3-24x52mm I know guys are huge fans of the 42mm but in my opinion, this is scope done right. It's much more forgiving and in that small package, it works on a host of smaller rifles we see.
I do have to email Kelby's about the question regarding the mils .. is it 6400 or 6283 ?
But overall, my experience has been good. Once the move is finished, I am gonna jump back on these, and unveil them on the new site, so my apologies for the delays
I will repeat,
I really like the March 3-24x52mm I know guys are huge fans of the 42mm but in my opinion, this is scope done right. It's much more forgiving and in that small package, it works on a host of smaller rifles we see.
I do have to email Kelby's about the question regarding the mils .. is it 6400 or 6283 ?
But overall, my experience has been good. Once the move is finished, I am gonna jump back on these, and unveil them on the new site, so my apologies for the delays
No need to apologise Frank given the amount of work you have had on lately. The family and paying the bills come first. Being a smaller 'boutique' manufacturer, March scopes generally sell themselves but it's good to hear this new model is flexible in its function and use.
Similar threads
