-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes New March-FX 4.5-28X52 HM WA
- Thread starter Denys
- Start date
Would have to see it IRL, but I like it. Prefer without the additional spotting reticle.
I would skip the #1, pretty obvious where 1 is
I hear what you're saying, the size has to work in the Goldilocks zone of real world scenarios, if I said clearly usable from 10-18x would that be a fair assessment? Good to know about the spotter grid.
Is it? Is it obvious
Have a custom March made with this and take it to 5-10 of the top 50 prs shooters for final feedback and you have a winner.I hear what you're saying, the size has to work in the Goldilocks zone of real world scenarios, if I said clearly usable from 10-18x would that be a fair assessment? Good to know about the spotter grid.
Is it? Is it obvious
I like your advice (not sure if March would ever make my reticle though). I have a couple buddies in PRS but none in the top 50 unfortunately... and that is part of the problem with getting new reticles to market - how do you "prove" the reticle will be well received?
I could do without the spotter grid and the 1 mil, but to be fair I use my scopes for hunting and steel. Most of the time I am holding more than 1 mil of elevation.
Okay, so here is the next iteration. Removed the spotter grid, re-arranged numbers and put longer horizontal tree lines at every 5 mil mark to give a quick visual reference without taking up too much space. Let me know any additional feedback
Very interesting thread.
My use is near and far group shooting, plinking and military competition.
At the moment I use Athlon Cronus BTR which seems to have been a spot-on choice for me.
I am very close to buying the 4.5-28x52 but hoping they would change:
1) to bright reticle illumination with more than just the center illuminated to work on dark backgrounds.
2) windage turret to non-capped, lockable or not. I have never had my turrets move by themselves, even rushing stairs and whatnot.
Now I shall add my opinions / needs on reticles.
My grief with tree reticles has been lack of .1mil lines for milling targets. In my experience dots do not give strong enough visual accuracy for the job. Milling with precision feels sometimes more like art of guessing than measuring but I would be ready to place bets that a .2 or .3 long line that is spaced .1mil away is the best way to do it.
My basic strategy to milling is to make the target as big as possible by zooming but still be able to see the start and end mil lines at the same time to verify the result. For milling to be succesful I line the other end of the target against a long line at full mil, and then count the lines. Usual problem is to count which .2 line it is while simultaneously checking the target is held against the full mil line. So making unique tenths would help this process.
You could maybe replace or add one more row above the 3rd row up with only .1 lines, going 2mils left and right? Usually milled objects are under 2mil, and the larger they are the closer they are and more margin for error they have.
Your spotting grid also looked good but it is quite easily replaced if the reticle center is supported with enough dots for rough estimation if the hit is observed above the main stadia. Just even very small dots, few and far between, could help with this.
Actually, I noticed your reticle has the 5th and 10th circles with a dot inside. This dotted circle could be placed on a target and use the surrounding reticle for spotting too. Particularly the 10th dot would be good for this, since it is intuitive as I would just read 11th as 1st and so on. There could be made an improvement to make the 10th row slightly thicker or something else to make it stand out just a little more for this purpose.
My use is near and far group shooting, plinking and military competition.
At the moment I use Athlon Cronus BTR which seems to have been a spot-on choice for me.
I am very close to buying the 4.5-28x52 but hoping they would change:
1) to bright reticle illumination with more than just the center illuminated to work on dark backgrounds.
2) windage turret to non-capped, lockable or not. I have never had my turrets move by themselves, even rushing stairs and whatnot.
Now I shall add my opinions / needs on reticles.
My grief with tree reticles has been lack of .1mil lines for milling targets. In my experience dots do not give strong enough visual accuracy for the job. Milling with precision feels sometimes more like art of guessing than measuring but I would be ready to place bets that a .2 or .3 long line that is spaced .1mil away is the best way to do it.
My basic strategy to milling is to make the target as big as possible by zooming but still be able to see the start and end mil lines at the same time to verify the result. For milling to be succesful I line the other end of the target against a long line at full mil, and then count the lines. Usual problem is to count which .2 line it is while simultaneously checking the target is held against the full mil line. So making unique tenths would help this process.
You could maybe replace or add one more row above the 3rd row up with only .1 lines, going 2mils left and right? Usually milled objects are under 2mil, and the larger they are the closer they are and more margin for error they have.
Your spotting grid also looked good but it is quite easily replaced if the reticle center is supported with enough dots for rough estimation if the hit is observed above the main stadia. Just even very small dots, few and far between, could help with this.
Actually, I noticed your reticle has the 5th and 10th circles with a dot inside. This dotted circle could be placed on a target and use the surrounding reticle for spotting too. Particularly the 10th dot would be good for this, since it is intuitive as I would just read 11th as 1st and so on. There could be made an improvement to make the 10th row slightly thicker or something else to make it stand out just a little more for this purpose.
Last edited:
I have this scope and an ATACR 7-35. I think the March glass is better. Again, both are good and I don’t think you would be disappointed with either. But the wide angle and clarity from the March seems better to my eyes.
I am waiting for the upgraded 3-24x50 with the new reticle. Need more field of view that 4.5 just doesn’t provide.
I apologize for losing the story here; what is this upgraded 3-24X50 for which you are in a wait state? Are you sure that it will have a wider FOV than the 4.5-28X52 provides at the equivalent magnification?
Thanks, I apologize for my confusion. The March 3-24 comes with a 42mm objective or a 52mm. I am not aware of any March scopes with a 50mm objective. That scope with either objective size, is an excellent scope but it does not have the wide angle eyepiece that the March-FX 4.5-28X52 has, it has the regular eyepiece. This means that at the equivalent magnification the 4.5-28X52 will have an FOV about 25% wider than the 3-24X42/52. The only place where the FOV will be greater is at below 4X. At 3X, the FOV of the 3-24X42/52 is 35 feet at 100 yards and the FOV of the 4.5-28X52 at 4.5X is 29 feet at 100 yards. After 4X, the 3-24X42/52 will always have a small FOV than the 4.5-25X52, at equivalent magnification.
I've been using my 4.5-28 for a few months now and I can honestly say it truly kills the competition in every category.
I glassed a few bulls and bucks with it tonight at 570 yards and I could easily make a shot beyond legal shooting hours at that range without a doubt.
The clarity and contrast is much better than the NF nx8, Mk5 HD, or Vortex AMG.
Most importantly the Fov and eye box are excellent as well
I glassed a few bulls and bucks with it tonight at 570 yards and I could easily make a shot beyond legal shooting hours at that range without a doubt.
The clarity and contrast is much better than the NF nx8, Mk5 HD, or Vortex AMG.
Most importantly the Fov and eye box are excellent as well
Sorry if I missed this elsewhere in the thread but is anyone using one of these on a large frame gas gun? If so, how is it working out. I have a 6.5 LMT and am intrigued by the mag range and relatively light weight.
Got mine today. Seems solid and looking forward to mounting it on an AR15. One thing about it that I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere - the windage turret seems a lot clicker than the elevation one. The windage turret is clicker than a Vortex Razor, while the elevation one is a lot more muted, although there is very little play in it compared to the Razor.
Just want to make sure the difference is normal. This is my first March or any alpha class scope, so not really sure what to expect.
Just want to make sure the difference is normal. This is my first March or any alpha class scope, so not really sure what to expect.
Mine are pretty close, but outside of zero rarely touch windage. You could talk to March and see what they say, maybe send them a video
Thanks! I will send them an email then. Mine is nowhere near close. Razor vs PST Gen II is the best way I can describe it over text.
On the March-FX 4.5-28X52, the turrets are different types. The elevation turret is the "tactical" type from March for which they also provide, in the box, a bigger knob insert with big numbers for old(er) geezers like me. The windage turret is the capped type since many people prefer such a turret in a riflescope that is used, shall we say vigorously. Because the turrets, especially the knobs, are different I can see how that can provide a different feel. The turrets on my March-X riflescopes are all "tactical" type and they all feel exactly the same. I wind both windage and elevation on those; I only ever touch the elevation on my 4.5-28X52 and the windage is capped because the reticle is so awesome and useful.
And yes, please send them an email explaining your observation. The more detailed the report, the better.
And yes, please send them an email explaining your observation. The more detailed the report, the better.
If anyone is curious to how it sounds like, here's the video I sent to March. There clicks on the elevation dial should be audible, but you might need to turn up your volume to hear it.
Got a response back very quickly from them:
Sounds like it is not a problem then. Very cool they even offer the option to modify it.
Got a response back very quickly from them:
Sounds like it is not a problem then. Very cool they even offer the option to modify it.
Both of mine sound more like your elevation to be honest, they are on the "quieter" side, but if March is willing to upgrade to get you that more distinct "clunk" sound that is a bonus, I tend to prefer the "clunk" over the "clink"
but it's really personal preference.March announced their 15th year anniversary with 15% off sale: https://marchscopes.com/news/11620/ . If you ever wanted any March scope then it seems like this is the best time to buy it.
Hopefully their US dealers will participate in the sale!
Edited to add: I see Long Range Supply is advertising the 15% off sale, now until 14 Mar.
Edited to add: I see Long Range Supply is advertising the 15% off sale, now until 14 Mar.
Last edited:
I’m looking for a hunting scope for a new rifle. Is the 4.5-28 usable in the woods on 4.5x? I like the TR1 a lot but from the pictures on March’s site it looks like the PDKI might be better at 4.5x, does anyone have any insight either way on this?
Also the shuriken turrets are now available on these, are they a better option compared to the standard turrets? Both being the same, locking and exposed seems like a plus.
Also the shuriken turrets are now available on these, are they a better option compared to the standard turrets? Both being the same, locking and exposed seems like a plus.
I don't hunt so I cannot answer the question from experience. On the other hand, I can't see how the 4.5-28X52 would be a problem in the woods set at low power. Either reticle would work but I am more familiar with the PDK and the PDKI. I have the PDK in my 4.5-28X52. At 4.5X, the tree part of the reticle looks more like a chevron which should be great for hunting.
The shuriken locks on the new turrets are fantastic. The locks are easy to use and once set, do a great job of locking. There is no conceivable danger of the lock being bumped and unlocking by mistake. The feel of the turret clicks is superb, with great tactile feedback, and the audible feedback is nice also. It's not a metallic sound, it's more low-pitched, like hitting wood with the top of your fingernail. (Best I could conjure up on the fly.)
The shuriken locks on the new turrets are fantastic. The locks are easy to use and once set, do a great job of locking. There is no conceivable danger of the lock being bumped and unlocking by mistake. The feel of the turret clicks is superb, with great tactile feedback, and the audible feedback is nice also. It's not a metallic sound, it's more low-pitched, like hitting wood with the top of your fingernail. (Best I could conjure up on the fly.)
Thank you for the feedback, sounds like the shuriken turrets are worth the extra cost.
The PDKI certainly looks like a better low power hunting reticle in the pictures but I’m really hoping someone tells me the TR1 works great as well in the same situation lol.
In all honestly I don’t need anywhere near this fancy of a scope on a hunting rifle, my main rifle wears a 3-15 LHT that works perfectly fine for most of my hunting and sfp is better in the woods. I really should just grab another one of those or maybe an XTR 3 and save the money but I’m trying to convince myself this is the scope I need…
Are you really looking to put a 28 power optic on your woods rifle?
I've done a fair amount of hunting with mine (successfully), but it's not on a timber rifle
No I have multiple hunting rifles and stands, some can only shoot up to 100 yards and some much further. But even the stands with more range can have deer pop up anywhere from 0 to 500+ yards. Where I sit dictates the rifle I use. One rifle could certainly do all but what fun would that be?
I never thought of doing that, it’s not something I’d do on a heavy recoiling hunting rifle tho. Good idea tho.
Mine is the non illuminated reticle so I keep it above 6 x in low light where shots could happen quickly, it works well but illumination would be even more better
I like FML-TR1. I think it works well for a FFP hunting reticle. It’s very versatile reticle. I attended a shooting course recently that incorporated a lot of timed hasty tripod/setup shots and did not have any issues making times and finding the reticle. @Glassaholic did a big a write up on the scope and reticle. It would probably help your decision.
I actually did read that thread before this one, lots of good information for sure. It looks like a great reticle for everything I’m just concerned with low power use.
Similar threads
