Rifle Scopes New March-FX 4.5-28X52 HM WA

[Denys]

Here is a picture of the new March-FX 4.5-28X52 HM WA scope that was discussed here a while back. I mounted it on FTR Match AR-15 and took it shooting. This copy has the FML-PDK tree-type reticle.

As is my wont, I have sunshade, the fast lever, the middle focus wheel and the March flip caps and rings.

I really like the wide angle eyepiece.

 

[jzerfoss]

What was the price on it? Anything you dislike yet?

 

[Denys]

This is a preproduction model. All the information should be coming out next week or soon after.

 

[Birddog6424]

This looks like a really innovative optic. I'm interested to hear what you think..

 

[Denys]

Dude........I'm so jealous you get to test that. I shoot 400-500 rounds a month through a lot of high end rifles and I've never been able to test anything but a barrel. What do you think of that optic? I really liked the 3-24x52 but thr parallax/eyebox sensitivity make it no better than the nx8 other than 5oz less. I hear the new wide angle eyepiece makes it appear you're watching a big screen.

You might want to look here for the FOV comparison.

Rifle Scopes - March riflescopes FOV compared

Here is a little diagram I have put together showing the field of view (FOV) from a March-X 10-60X56 HM with a standard eyepiece (about 20 degrees on the left, at the FOV from the March-FX 4.5-28X52 HM with the 25 degree wide angle eyepiece. The target for both scopes is 21 yards away and I...

www.snipershide.com

 

[Glassaholic]

Thank you for posting Denys. I have been evaluating a pre-production model myself and just had a chance to take it out for some steel yesterday, the scope performed extremely well and I'll be posting some pictures and thoughts soon. This scope, I think, might shake things up a little as it fills a niche that few other scopes in this class can fill.

A couple questions. Do you have an image of the FML-PDK reticle you are using? The one in my scope is the FML-TR1 and I really like that design as it is a well thought out .2 mil hash tree reticle where the tree virtually disappears in the background if you don't need it (a feature I prefer). Also, can you tell me more about the large parallax wheel you have on there.

 

[Denys]

1- You can view the layout of the FML-PDK reticle here. Scroll down a bit.

And you can download the details here: https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-Sept-4.5-28x52-P2.pdf

In my picture about FOV comparison, the scope on the right is the one with the FML-PDK reticle. I'm posting the picture here so you don't have to chase it down.

As for the large focus wheel, it's an accessory from March. It's called the middle focus wheel. It comes in 3 flavors depending on which focus knob you have. You can then elect to install one of the two large focus wheel on top of the middle wheel for ultra precise focus adjustment. I have just the middle wheel on my 4.5-28X52 and 1.5-15X42 as that is quite sufficient for my needs and I don't want to overload the riflescopes. However, on my March-X 10-60X56 HM, which I use in F-class competition, I have installed the large 3.5 in wheel as you can see here.

You can find these accessories here. Look for the middle focus wheel and the large wheel.

I hope that answers your questions.

 

[jzerfoss]

1- You can view the layout of the FML-PDK reticle here. Scroll down a bit.

And you can download the details here: https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-Sept-4.5-28x52-P2.pdf

In my picture about FOV comparison, the scope on the right is the one with the FML-PDK reticle. I'm posting the picture here so you don't have to chase it down.
View attachment 7439732

As for the large focus wheel, it's an accessory from March. It's called the middle focus wheel. It comes in 3 flavors depending on which focus knob you have. You can then elect to install one of the two large focus wheel on top of the middle wheel for ultra precise focus adjustment. I have just the middle wheel on my 4.5-28X52 and 1.5-15X42 as that is quite sufficient for my needs and I don't want to overload the riflescopes. However, on my March-X 10-60X56 HM, which I use in F-class competition, I have installed the large 3.5 in wheel as you can see here.
View attachment 7439739

You can find these accessories here. Look for the middle focus wheel and the large wheel.

I hope that answers your questions.

The 10-60 looks optically better in those pictures.

 

[Denys]

You should not judge too much from a pair of quick handheld Smartphone pictures. That said, the March-X 10-60X56 HM sets a very high bar for resolution and IQ being the very best high magnification riflescope on the planet.

This past weekend at the 1000 yard match, I was running my March-X 10-60X56 HM at 60X for the first two relays. On the third relay, I backed off to 50X so I could get a wider FOV to better monitor the mirage as it was switching back and forth by that time.

 

[Glassaholic]

1- You can view the layout of the FML-PDK reticle here. Scroll down a bit.

And you can download the details here: https://marchscopes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-Sept-4.5-28x52-P2.pdf

In my picture about FOV comparison, the scope on the right is the one with the FML-PDK reticle. I'm posting the picture here so you don't have to chase it down.
View attachment 7439732

As for the large focus wheel, it's an accessory from March. It's called the middle focus wheel. It comes in 3 flavors depending on which focus knob you have. You can then elect to install one of the two large focus wheel on top of the middle wheel for ultra precise focus adjustment. I have just the middle wheel on my 4.5-28X52 and 1.5-15X42 as that is quite sufficient for my needs and I don't want to overload the riflescopes. However, on my March-X 10-60X56 HM, which I use in F-class competition, I have installed the large 3.5 in wheel as you can see here.
View attachment 7439739

You can find these accessories here. Look for the middle focus wheel and the large wheel.

I hope that answers your questions.

Thank you Denys, appreciate that.

 

[Anzac]

Also, very interested to hear of your experience with this particular March and also Bill's with the FML-TR1 reticle please!

 

[RayDBonz]

Any updated on the 4.5-28x52?
When will they be available to the public?

 

[Denys]

Also, very interested to hear of your experience with this particular March and also Bill's with the FML-TR1 reticle please!

If that was meant for me, I've only shot it at 600 yards in an F-class competition atop my AR-15 and had a great time with it. I love the wide angle view; the turrets were great and I adjusted quickly and easily and it stayed put, as you would expect from a March. I have not had occasion to take it elsewhere recently as I had a state F-class match and I have been overwhelmed at work.

 

[Denys]

Any updated on the 4.5-28x52?
When will they be available to the public?

The March website has the final detailed specs on the riflescope with the PDK reticle

D28HV52WFML (MIL, Tactical) | MARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design CorporationMARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design Corporation

MARCH Scopes Official Site

marchscopes.com

And for the TR-1 reticle:

D28HV52WFIML (MIL, Tactical, Illumi) | MARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design CorporationMARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design Corporation

MARCH Scopes Official Site

marchscopes.com

I believe everything is about ready to go, but that will come from Deon. Check the website periodically; they will post the notice there.
March website

 

[ormandj]

Thank you for posting Denys. I have been evaluating a pre-production model myself and just had a chance to take it out for some steel yesterday, the scope performed extremely well and I'll be posting some pictures and thoughts soon. This scope, I think, might shake things up a little as it fills a niche that few other scopes in this class can fill.

A couple questions. Do you have an image of the FML-PDK reticle you are using? The one in my scope is the FML-TR1 and I really like that design as it is a well thought out .2 mil hash tree reticle where the tree virtually disappears in the background if you don't need it (a feature I prefer). Also, can you tell me more about the large parallax wheel you have on there.

You've had hands on ZCO/TTs, right? How's it compare optically? If it's in the same ballpark, with less weight, and the wider FOV with at least reasonably close durability - that's a pretty big win for March.

 

[Glassaholic]

Also, very interested to hear of your experience with this particular March and also Bill's with the FML-TR1 reticle please!

The FML-TR1 is my favorite reticle right now, having used it with both the 5-42x56 HM and the 4.5-28x52 HM. What would you like to know so I don't ramble

 

[Glassaholic]

You've had hands on ZCO/TTs, right? How's it compare optically? If it's in the same ballpark, with less weight, and the wider FOV with at least reasonably close durability - that's a pretty big win for March.

I own the ZCO and my friends own the TT's so I only have limited experience with the TT, but I also have a Minox ZP5 that is superb optically and probably the most comparable to the TT. I have only had a pre-production 4.5-28x52 to play with and there is another set of updates before final production, my guess is the 4.5-28x52 won't be in dealers hands until 2021 unfortunately. March really wants to get this scope right and they're listening to shooters from all over the world who've been evaluating this scope. Like you said above, if they execute on this scope I think it will be a huge win for them, but until I see the final production unit I don't want to say too much. What I can say is FOV is huge, maybe the widest of any scope I've seen in this class, and once they offer it with the new locking turrets found on the 5-42x56 I think you won't be able to pry it from my hands. Hopefully the next generation will be available soon.

 

[Anzac]

Ramble away!
I don’t know if you’ve used the 5-40 FML-1. I know you’ve used the Minox MR-4 thus a brief comparison please.
many thx.

 

[Glassaholic]

Ramble away!
I don’t know if you’ve used the 5-40 FML-1. I know you’ve used the Minox MR-4 thus a brief comparison please.
many thx.

I have had experience with the FML-1 but I think you meant the FML-TR1 (hard to keep track of all the crazy numbers). When I first bought my ZP5 5-25 the MR4 quickly became my favorite reticle. I am a fan of center dot reticles and apparently am not the only one because most major manufacturer's now offer some kind of center dot reticle. The original FML-1 reticle had a huge gap from the center dot to the crosshair lines and with .5 mil hash marks it left me always wanting for something more usable for wind holds close in, and the reticle was so thick at higher mags (on the 3-24x52). So when I first looked through the ZP5 with MR4 I was pleasantly surprised, the center dot seemed larger than the SKMR series from Kahles (my K624i center dot always got lost for my eyes) and the Christmas tree section was thinner than the rest of the reticle and the use of dots it makes the tree virtually disappear when you don't need it - one of my complaints with tree reticles if you mostly dial elevation is they are so thick in the tree section it obscures the view, I view a tree as backup and not something I would normally use (thought I'd like to train myself more to utilize the tree in more situations). So the big plus with the MR4 is the reticle isn't too thick, it has a center dot and it has a tree that is thin enough it doesn't obscure the view. I honestly did not think I'd find a reticle I liked better until I realized that my eyes have gotten worse over the past few years and I'm finding it harder to find that center dot, so when TT announced their new Gen 3XR I was pleasantly surprised to see them mimic the MR4 but offer a larger center dot...YES! And when I look through my friends scopes with the Gen 3XR I get very envious. Enter the March FML-TR1, this is a design by the Hide's own ILya who also owns a TT with Gen 3XR so I can't help but think he drew from a number of design principles that work really well. The center dot is larger and the center area of the reticle is thicker at .075 mil but immediately outside the center and all the way to the 2 mil mark the reticle is thinner at .03 mil and then beyond the 2 mil mark both horizontally and vertically the thickness is at .06 mil. The Christmas tree dots are at .03 mil for the small ones and .06 mil at the full mil marks. The design also has a tree portion above the main horizontal stadia which allows for wind hold references if you are shooting at objects closer than your zero. What this all translates to is my "new" favorite reticle design because it has the larger center dot and cross but then goes to thinner and with the smaller Christmas tree dots making it easier to see splash without obscuring the view. I think competition shooters will find it very easy to use, hunters will also find it beneficial with the larger dot and cross making it very easy to find center even in the thick stuff (where big game like to hide) and the Christmas tree will not obscure your view. Keep in mind, these are my personal views and reticles are very much a personal preference.

WARNING: DO NOT USE THE BELOW IMAGE AS A REPRESENTATION OF OPTICAL QUALITY!!! This image is for reticle reference only, there are two many factors in taking a through the scope image that can make it look like less quality that what the naked eye sees. I took this image during a recent shoot at Chaffee County shooting range near Buena Vista, CO using the pre-production March 4.5-28x52 with FML-TR1. The pig was at 600 yards and the spinner below it was a bit closer, but this gives a good idea of how the thickness looks through the scope - notice how the Christmas tree portion disappears, but to the naked eye is still very usable if need be and the center dot is large enough to not have to hunt for it, even on these black targets I found it usable where the MR4 would have gotten lost. There was hardly any wind this day and @canezach and I were holding maybe .1 - .2 if at all much of the time and this reticle made it very easy for me to do so.

 

[Denys]

Did you BBQ that pig after you shot it? I wonder what kind of rub you would use on that one? I'm thinking one with lots and lots of cayenne pepper. Lots of if.

 

[RayDBonz]

Is that photo in post #20 at 28x?

View attachment 7456934

 

[Glassaholic]

Is that photo in post #20 at 28x?

Doubtful, I rarely ever shoot above 20x at distance. I did a comparison with my ZP5 5-25 and ZCO ZC420 when I first had the scope and looked at the different mil values, the March had considerably larger FOV than both throughout. But I do not want to post any numbers until I get a production model scope.

 

[Glassaholic]

Did you BBQ that pig after you shot it? I wonder what kind of rub you would use on that one? I'm thinking one with lots and lots of cayenne pepper. Lots of if.

Cayenne pepper and a lot of sulfuric acid to tenderize the metal... er, meat

 

[Anzac]

Hey Bill.
Many thanks for that info re the new FML-TR1 reticle. I was referring to the FML-1 of our older 5-40x56 March scopes and agree with all of what you’ve alluded to. A pity it can’t be retrofitted as I much prefer that TR1 reticle. I’m not finding a compelling reason (aside from the High Master wide FOV) to “upgrade” my venerable 5-40 atm.
What a great way of putting more iron in your diet!

 

[Denys]

Hey Bill.
Many thanks for that info re the new FML-TR1 reticle. I was referring to the FML-1 of our older 5-40x56 March scopes and agree with all of what you’ve alluded to. A pity it can’t be retrofitted as I much prefer that TR1 reticle. I’m not finding a compelling reason (aside from the High Master wide FOV) to “upgrade” my venerable 5-40 atm.
What a great way of putting more iron in your diet!

You're looking at it wrong. You don't want to "upgrade", you want to "complement" your excellent venerable 5-40X56, with a 5-42X56. This way you can have your cake, and eat it too, so to speak.

 

[ormandj]

I'm about || close to selling off one of my ZCO 527s to see what this scope is about. I can't wait until we get some solid reviews with direct comparisons. I've never had a March before and this one is temping to give a try.

 

[Bayoubigcat]

I like this reticle, especially the center. 0.2 vertical hashes on a solid horizontal are too cluttered. I find a broken 0.2 horizontal allows for much better observation of impacts and subsequent corrections.

This reticle (the center portion) reminds me a bit of S&B’s LRR-Mil Reticle.

 

[Chasing3]

Any update on when vendors will have these available for sale?

 

[Denys]

The MSRP has been posted at the March website. You can order the new scopes now. Remember, these are all hand built; your best bet is to order one now and get in the queue. There's about a one month lead time, but that could be different for the new models. Your dealer will know.

 

[808caliber]

Cant wait to get more feedback from yall. Seems like a perfect fit for a hunting rig. Looking at a base weight rifle of 6ish and then with this optic weighin around 2. Thatll put me around 8ish fully ready. Been hunting with my zco 5-27 and the only thing misssing is more fov on low end.

 

[arob]

March FX 4.5-28 FML-PDK reticle that some of you are curious about. Please forgive the crappy picture of the reticle. But you get the idea. This scope thus far has exceeded my expectations in every way. The optical performance is as good as anything else I have used. I will try to get a better reticle photo tomorrow if someone wants it. Honestly, what they did with the eyepiece is impressive.

 

[arob]

Here is another picture of the reticle @20X. House is about 600 yards. Taken with a hand held IPhone.

 

[Glassaholic]

Thank you arob, the FML-PDK reticle is non-illuminated and pretty thin if I recall making it more competition oriented, have you used this in PRS or similar events yet?

 

[arob]

I do not find it to be overly thin at all. One of my main complaints is that this scope is not illuminated. At this price point and against similar scopes, it is crazy to not be illuminated. It needs illumination to be serious in the hunting market for sure. Everything else is pretty dog gone good. I have shot it in practice so far and it has worked very well. I will be using some more coming up in the PRS Finale.

 

[Bertoli888]

@arob
Any chance you can post a picture at 10-12x ? Thank you.

 

[arob]

Here you go, with a TT 5-25 as reference. Taken with an IPhone so keep that in mind.

 

[Glassaholic]

I do not find it to be overly thin at all. One of my main complaints is that this scope is not illuminated. At this price point and against similar scopes, it is crazy to not be illuminated. It needs illumination to be serious in the hunting market for sure. Everything else is pretty dog gone good. I have shot it in practice so far and it has worked very well. I will be using some more coming up in the PRS Finale.

Thank you, if the PDK reticle is the one I'm remembering, it was too thin to be illuminated, that was part of the design intent of the FML-TR1 specifically so it could be illuminated. looking forward to hearing your experience during a PRS competition. March is also looking at a turret housing that is blank, similar to the Burris Race Dial they are offering for their XTR III scopes, I think that would be an interesting addition as well. Looks like the final production copies of the 4.5-28x52 will be making their way to the states by February just in time to get prepared for hopefully an opened up season of competition in 2021 - I think most of us are ready to put this lame year (2020) behind us!

Bummer that SHOT Show cancelled for 2021, maybe a bunch of us from the Hide can get together and create our own SHOOT Show

 

[arob]

Honestly, when Vortex can put illumination in a $1000 optic that has the same reticle features, I’m not buying that. Make the reticle a little bigger or whatever, but for this reticle and scope to not be illuminated is a big miss. I love the people, and I’m liking the scope, but it will be hard to get people to buy this scope to shoot PRS and hunt with. I will say March has been easily the most responsive optics company I have ever dealt with and am looking forward to using this scope for the next year.

 

[arob]

I’m not sure where March got the idea that PRS shooters and hunters needed a thinner reticle to begin with? If someone wants a scope with these features , magnification range, great glass in a small package and doesn’t need illumination you will love this scope I believe.

 

[Bertoli888]

For a minute, I thought my search has ended. But no illumination back to square one again!

 

[makaug]

There are 2 reticles that will be available with illumination, the FML-TR1 and FML-3, just not the FML-PDK seen in this thread. See: https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d28hv52wfiml/

The FML-TR1 is the reticle I'm most interested in.

 

[arob]

There are 2 reticles that will be available with illumination, the FML-TR1 and FML-3, just not the FML-PDK seen in this thread. See: https://marchscopes.com/scopes/d28hv52wfiml/

The FML-TR1 is the reticle I'm most interested in.

Yes we got that part, that’s the point.

 

[makaug]

Sorry, lost track of what had and had not been covered in these threads, I guess I should review more before posting.

 

[Glassaholic]

Yes we got that part, that’s the point.

I think makaug was responding to this

For a minute, I thought my search has ended. But no illumination back to square one again!

and wanted to point out that only the FML-PDK is not illuminated, but that March is offering illumination with the other reticles they offer. The FML-TR1 is my favorite reticle right now, the fact it is illuminated is an added bonus for many (myself included).

Honestly, when Vortex can put illumination in a $1000 optic that has the same reticle features, I’m not buying that.

Illumination is not that simple, there are relationships to the focal length, erector, objective diameter and reticle thickness. Because March scopes tend to be so short (focal length) their limitations are different from others.

 

[arob]

If anyone has questions feel free to message me.

 

[Chickentoast]

Here you go, with a TT 5-25 as reference. Taken with an IPhone so keep that in mind.

Wow, TT is a lot clearer - is it that big of a difference in real life? I was almost set on the March 5-42 until that pic.

 

[arob]

Wow, TT is a lot clearer - is it that big of a difference in real life? I was almost set on the March 5-42 until that pic.

Chickentoast, it’s through an IPhone. The pic was only taken to show relative size of the reticle at 12X compared to something else. Do you take an eye test through a piece of dirty glass? To answer your question, the two scopes are different. The pure resolution edge probably goes to the TT, but they are pretty close. The March seems to have a much larger image transferred to the eye. Don’t read too much into the pictures where clarity or resolution is concerned.

 

[arob]

I will let you all know how it does at the PRS Finale.

 

[Chickentoast]

Chickentoast, it’s through an IPhone. The pic was only taken to show relative size of the reticle at 12X compared to something else. Do you take an eye test through a piece of dirty glass? To answer your question, the two scopes are different. The pure resolution edge probably goes to the TT, but they are pretty close. The March seems to have a much larger image transferred to the eye. Don’t read too much into the pictures where clarity or resolution is concerned.

So, regarding relative clarity, what is the approx % difference between the two, or others? I've never looked through top glass, and am trying to get a quantitative idea of where the image quality will be compared to my LOW scopes before purchasing. All I've read is non-specific generalities. Understand it's subjective, and also diminishing returns in the upper tier.

 

[Eaglearcher20]

Based on all the high praise I’ve see for March in general, then specifically the Mag range, weight and reticle I think will go perfectly on my 6.5 Fix rifle.