Rifle Scopes New March in Exhibitions 2018.

[Lowlight]

I have not reviewed the 5-40x, but i have shot them, they are fine for what they are, but i never saw the need for 40x at the time they had any popularity

As far as the tired talking point about "Objective Review" I did do an objective review them twice, the 3-25x I used both. The first was picky, the second was better, but when I was offered to buy the demo unit at 1/2 price I turned it down. Some call that clue

It's a decent scope, it's not the only thing in its class to consider, as I don't like the high mag ratio as a personal thing

 

[Lowlight]

Hensoldt's never had the reticle,

It;s more than just "GLASS" they didn't have zero stops, they were older designs and then the new ones were way over priced, big and heavy,

I easily own 4 Hensoldts, including the 3-26x it's HUGE, so yes factors go into these decisions which is the POINT !

You default to things NOBODY gives a shit about, they are looking at more, which is why they get picked.

The company matters too, when companies like NF sit down with PRS shooters with ELR Shooters, with F Class Shooters they make products people want and use, vs dictating what you think is important.

When the company is weak the sales are weak, can you dig it

 

[Lowlight]

Here is the clue,

You guys are running around chasing the sword and completely miss understand the Riddle of Steel



It's more than the scope, it's a combination of elements, putting them all together takes effort, one day you'll figure it.

Meanwhile the IOR Crying Towels are on sale at Amazon

 

[DellaDog]

March optics marketing sucks (here in the states anyway). No question.

When has anyone ever gone into a custom shop and seen a March on the floor? I’ve seen Vortex, Nightforce, Swarovski, Hensoldts, etc. - but not a single March, ever.

I recently picked up my first custom build and the shop offered to mount my scope, a March 3-24x52 T1. They carried all the above scopes but this was the first March they’ve mounted - the first.

Long story short, everyone in the shop looked through the scope and came to the same conclusion - one hell of a scope, PARTICULARLY for its size and weight. Both shop owners had never seen one in person, which absolutely floored me.

Personally, I don’t love the reticle choices and I don’t think illumination is worth the extra bucks (for my needs) but I’ll repeat my claim - at 13”, 24oz, 24x mag, superb turrets and zero stop - there simply isn’t any other scope out there that matches these specs, it doesn’t exist. (except the S&BUS at a significant price increase)

(Also, parallax down to 10yds. is a big plus for those of us that play with PCP air rifles)

That’s not fanboy shit, just facts.

 

[BallisticPrimate]

Hensoldt's never had the reticle,

It;s more than just "GLASS" they didn't have zero stops, they were older designs and then the new ones were way over priced, big and heavy,

I easily own 4 Hensoldts, including the 3-26x it's HUGE, so yes factors go into these decisions which is the POINT !

You default to things NOBODY gives a shit about, they are looking at more, which is why they get picked.

The company matters too, when companies like NF sit down with PRS shooters with ELR Shooters, with F Class Shooters they make products people want and use, vs dictating what you think is important.

When the company is weak the sales are weak, can you dig it

Of course I agree it's a combination of factors that goes into picking a scope. My most used scope is a 4-16 NF - that little scope does just about anything I could ask of it and if forced to pick between it and the 5-40 I'd lean NF every time. But that doesn't stop me from appreciating just how good the 5-40 March is.

Perhaps we're taking past each other so let me be clear - I don't think a March 5-40 is the best optic for PRS style shooting - the reticle isn't there and the high end mag is redundant - it's clearly a design biased to ELR stuff and F-class etc. However, it's difficult to think of another scope that does as many different things well - if it offered a better reticle it would be competitive with anything else in its class.

 

[Lowlight]

And still, my 3-24x sits unused... LOL,

You guys act as if I have not touched just about everything out there,

We are talking past each other, let's recap on the agreement

1. US Marketing - Sales and Distribution SUCKS - we agree
2. The Reticle is sub-par, not awful, but not up to 2018
3. The 5-40x is really no different than many others, but it includes the above
3. The 3-24x is picky, sure the x52 is an improvement over the x42, but it's still picky
4. Reticle choices still suck
5. Tactical Shooters don't care about the zoom range, to use your words, not mine, redundant

Also, the cost, while cheaper now, was originally listed at $3200, now $2600, versus scopes with much better feature choices. You can get an Ultra Short at $3600, so initially, the cost was only $400 difference.

Size and weight = compromises I don't need to worry about. I can save plenty of weight with the competition, the fact they maybe 2" longer makes no nevermind. That 2" is not giving you anything over me.

Those are facts,

 

[BallisticPrimate]

And still, my 3-24x sits unused... LOL,

You guys act as if I have not touched just about everything out there,

We are talking past each other, let's recap on the agreement

1. US Marketing - Sales and Distribution SUCKS - we agree
2. The Reticle is sub-par, not awful, but not up to 2018
3. The 5-40x is really no different than many others, but it includes the above
3. The 3-24x is picky, sure the x52 is an improvement over the x42, but it's still picky
4. Reticle choices still suck
5. Tactical Shooters don't care about the zoom range, to use your words, not mine, redundant

Also, the cost, while cheaper now, was originally listed at $3200, now $2600, versus scopes with much better feature choices. You can get an Ultra Short at $3600, so initially, the cost was only $400 difference.

Size and weight = compromises I don't need to worry about. I can save plenty of weight with the competition, the fact they maybe 2" longer makes no nevermind. That 2" is not giving you anything over me.

Those are facts,

I don't disagree that for Tactical Shooters there are better options (I use/have used a lot of them). The issue as I see it is that some people are suggesting that the March is as good or better than the competition that is designed from the ground up with the tactical game in mind - that is a mistake.

With that said if you want a scope that can cover everything from air rifle to ELR, as well as pull duty as a (relatively) lightweight and compact hunting/target scope there's nothing that competes directly with the 5-40. It's in it's own class as defined by the above criteria.

 

[DellaDog]

... With that said if you want a scope that can cover everything from air rifle to ELR, as well as pull duty as a (relatively) lightweight and compact hunting/target scope there's nothing that competes directly with the 5-40. It's in it's own class as defined by the above criteria...

Exactly. I’d include the 3-24s as well.
It’s been a good discussion - I think we’ve covered it all.

 

[Lowlight]

The 5-40x only has 24 Mils of adjustment

The Vortex AMG is lighter and has 28 Mils of adjustment and is cheaper, plus it is 100% Made in the US, (well other than them sourcing the reticles elsewhere because the US supplier dropped the ball) Same size package lengthwise

ELR wise, magnification can hinder, less cuts out a lot of the atmosphere. I would have to see the reticle spec in terms of how much it covers the target

 

[Clearlight]

If

and still, nobody uses them ... go figure we all must be missing out on an awesome optic

As my March gently weeps on the floor under the seat of my car

If you hate it so much , why does it live in your car ? I’m sensing some
secret love there : ) . At least you have a 100% reliable back up optic !

 

[Lowlight]

I pulled it off at the range and never took it out of the car

I have NF, Burris, and the March in there. There are also several empty unimounts

I did have an S&B in there for a while too, my car is my office, there is a lot of stuff in it, easily 6 tripods of various sizes.

3 shooting mat

3 chronographs

Ammo, Ammo and More Ammo

 

[DellaDog]

I’ll take your car scope.
(The March one that is)

 

[Lowlight]

sure send a check I will sell it too you

 

[BallisticPrimate]

Frank - is the AMG your pick as a crossover optic - PRS/Hunting? The price is right on those and the new reticle looks excellent. I've been trying to purchase a Minox ZP5 but there's no stock, looking hard at the AMG now

 

[Lowlight]

I like the AMG a lot,

its one of my favorite and once I remember I need to get another one. I keep moving this one around to use it.

I like them for a smaller optic

 

[DellaDog]

Deal. What you want?
PM if you like.

 

[Clearlight]

Regarding 5-40 reticle size , a quick look at their Aus website says the
center dot is 0.05 and line thickness is 0.04 MIL .

 

[Lowlight]

The reticle works, I looked at it, it was better than I remember it being, you can use the post too and drop the round between the dot and post, it's okay

You can have the scope for $1500

 

[DellaDog]

I missed it, which model?

 

[Lowlight]

3-24x42 I have to see if it was illuminated I dont recall and it's probably a 6400 model too LOL

 

[Clearlight]

Bargain ! A reliable scope for the price of some less reliable brands ,
not going to mention any names .....

 

[DellaDog]

6400 or not, if it’s illuminated tell me where to send the check.

 

[CBDR]

I was close to going with the 3 x 24 on a light weight custom bolt gun. I poured over so many reviews, comments and you know why I could not bring myself to get it. Two questions kept recycling in my thought process. One: Why are they not popular with the PRS guys? Two: That fucking gray rubber boot covering the illumination switch. I deal with water trying to take me down 5 days a week. Could not shake those concerns, moved on. I'm close real, real close. Spent the past six months saving and trying to separate my wants from my needs.

 

[DellaDog]

700 yards through a hand held iPhone. Small and light enough to fit comfortably on an AR (20”) and still pick out the hits and misses.

Your x42 will fit even better.

 

[UNRL Ghandi]

March 3-24x52 was going to be my be all end all of scopes. Thought I'd have one on every rifle I owned. Chose it over the S&B 5-25x because I wanted something lightweight and a lower magnification for a target/hunting rifle. At the time it was going to replace an NXS 5-25x since I hunt in woods with 50-75 yard max shots but like to shoot in 600 yard F-Class competitions.

I was super impressed when I first opened the box. Lightweight, sleek, and what I expected for $3200. But when I looked through the scope I noticed a black spot near the reticle, looked almost like a piece of the reticle chipped off. I contacted Kelby's and was told I was going to have to send it to Japan to fix and I had to pay shipping. Decided I'd deal with the spot since it didn't obstruct anything and was just annoying.

Glass was great, I liked the MOA reticle and the floating dot and also how on the 3x the outside bars were thick and focused your eye to center but got out of the way when you zoomed in. But damn it if I couldn't get the parallax to agree with me. Was super touchy and the parallax adjustment knob turned only about half a turn between 10 yards and infinity. Very hard to get things focused for me, so I sold it.

Honestly, if they fixed the parallax I'd maybe buy another one but only if someone reputable positively reviewed it first. Would prefer NF or Vortex to make a 3-24 ATACR or AMG. Love my current AMG for my long range gun and my 2.5-10x NF for hunting. Mash dem suckers together and I'll buy 5.

 

[TheOE800]

Well, they’re both 4x erectors so I’m not sure how much mashing will get you a higher zoom ratio.

 

[Papagrizzly]

Ghandhi, I would like to clarify some issues:

Since we (March Optics USA) took over the distributorship about 3+ years ago, the following was implemented right away:

1) We started a USA service center with factory trained personnel.
2) If a scope is sent back to Japan for whatever reason under warranty we foot the bill for sending it overseas.
3) The 6400 issue has been resolved many years ago and any scope that is bought after we took over more than 3 years ago ie.. any new scope, is guaranteed to come with the 1/6283. This is shown on the front page of the March Optics site, but taking the excerpt from the site

Milliradian (Mil-rad) Reticle Scopes
We often get asked if our Mil-rad calculations are "correct" to the USMC standards. Yes, they are.
Any March Scope with a Mil-rad reticle that you purchase from March Optics USA, Inc. or from Bullets.com is guaranteed to precisely match the USMC spec Mil-rad which is 1/6283

4) We also offer larger wheels for finer side focus adjustments.
5) Oh, and another thing, if someone has a 6400 scope they would like changed to the 6283, be sure to contact us. We will send it to the factory to get it changed.

There has also been a lot of talk about our marketing. We do a lot of advertising to certain groups. Yes, we may be lacking in advertising to the PRS group, but Deon is a small manufacturer that makes each scope individually. We were the first to introduce the 1 - 4.5 Service rifle scope when they changed the rules to allow scopes in Service Rifle competition at Camp Perry. Both the 2016 and the 2017 President's 100 matches were won by different shooters using a March scope. The development of new scopes from Deon is slow and methodical. We have no issues placing orders and almost every model of scope shown on the March site is in stock for same day shipping. We do not wait for customers orders before we order. We run many ads in magazines, other forums and also have a booth at the SHOT show.

Despite our lackluster marketing, our sales are triple what the previous distributor was able to achieve.

And, back to the scope discussion that started this - THE GENESIS, it is something else and in a few days people will see what the fuss is all about.

 

[UNRL Ghandi]

Well, they’re both 4x erectors so I’m not sure how much mashing will get you a higher zoom ratio.

Realize they're both 4x erectors. I meant put the two scopes in a room with some candles and Barry White and let the magic happen so that the resulting mash-up would end up with a magnification range of the March 3-24x but in the ATACR or AMG line and not cost me $5k. Can't a girl dream?!

Papagrizzly, appreciate the info. Curious to see The Genesis.

 

[Denys]

Just as a comment on the side focus of the March scopes. I added the middle focus wheel to my March 5-50X56 mid last year and I find it allows me to be more precise without trouble. This month, I added the large 3.5 inch wheel after playing with that setup in the March booth. I really wish I would have had that installed before Connaught where we kept bouncing between 700 and 900 meters with intermediate stops at 800 meter. I would even consider putting a sticker of some type on the large wheel to indicate the distance at which the scope is focused. Old geezers like me need all the help they can get remembering stuff. That would have saved me some embarrassment and ammo when a few months after Connaught, I went to shoot at our monthly 1000 yard matches and forgot to remember that I had left my rifle set for 700 meters to use as a backup rifle for the team at the Worlds Team matches. I was the wind coach so my rifle stayed at 700 meters. I was one rev off when I started at 1000 yards. Since I rarely change my distance, that was not on my checklist.

This getting old, is getting old. Sigh.

But the large wheel allows me to be surgically precise on the side focus.

And before someone else says it; yes, I'm sure it's not for everyone, especially the high-speed/low-drag crowd but I would argue that the middle wheel would be great for them.

 

[Rthur]

They would do well to offer reticles of this nature:

R

 

[Papagrizzly]

Do we not like this one?

 

[Lowlight]

Not really,

I would do the old one before this one, it's ugly

 

[DellaDog]

Not really,
I would do the old one before this one, it's ugly

Sheesh, another unbiased fact based statement.
The "old one" has a .1 floating dot center (arguabley too thick), while the T1 has an open .06 center - nearly half the size.

Again, facts.

 

[Rthur]

Do we not like this one?

View attachment 6878964[/QUOTE
To busy in the center section, obscures to much.

R

 

[Lowlight]

I don't like it, what is your fucking problem, I cannot have a damn opinion on it

if you like it you shoot it

It doesn't look "open" to me

Gee the same opinion after mine, go figure, we didn't just roll over

 

[Lowlight]

Hey Douche,

How does one have an "Unbiased" fact-based opinion on an image ?

You either like it or you don't Reticles are like picking a favorite color, everyone sees it different

 

[DellaDog]

I'm done sir.
At one point this was an enlightening discussion.

 

[Lowlight]

Good saves banning your ass, Maybe i just need to take an Old Larue Stance and block March bullshit since not a single one of you douchebags can take the criticism

You want everyone to accept your opinion as fact, meanwhile you read statements like this:

went to shoot at our monthly 1000 yard matches and forgot to remember that I had left my rifle set for 700 meters to use as a backup rifle for the team at the Worlds Team matches. I was the wind coach so my rifle stayed at 700 meters. I was one rev off when I started at 1000 yards. Since I rarely change my distance, that was not on my checklist.

And you figure why we have a difference in that opinion

 

[THEIS]

Hi,

What facts are you looking for in a reply to a question of whether "Do we not like this one?"

How about you answer an opinion seeking question with facts because I would like to see this...

To answer the question which is ASKING OPINIONS by the way....I do not like it either, not that it matters

The center is horrendous and way to cluttered based strictly off the image posted by Shiraz.

Sincerely,
Theis

 

[Papagrizzly]

Rthur - may be a good point. I don't use that reticle for my type of shooting so have to rely on opinions of shooters who actively use these types of reticles for the PRS type of shooting. It is my understanding that the T1 reticle was designed with the input of Special Forces in Europe for engagement and they have been very happy with it for practical field use.

In any case, I suppose the thing to do would be to ask the opinions of several PRS shooters as to what they would prefer to see for a reticle. If there is some sort of consensus without infringing on someone's patent, we would be happy to get Deon working on something. For that matter, we would even consider working with a Patented Reticle and pay royalties for a well accepted design.

 

[Rthur]

Rthur - may be a good point. I don't use that reticle for my type of shooting so have to rely on opinions of shooters who actively use these types of reticles for the PRS type of shooting. It is my understanding that the T1 reticle was designed with the input of Special Forces in Europe for engagement and they have been very happy with it for practical field use.

In any case, I suppose the thing to do would be to ask the opinions of several PRS shooters as to what they would prefer to see for a reticle. If there is some sort of consensus without infringing on someone's patent, we would be happy to get Deon working on something. For that matter, we would even consider working with a Patented Reticle and pay royalties for a well accepted design.

As I haven't shot behind all new reticle choices I see a trend moving towards the .2 mil hash marks being favored by many.
I prefer the dot center and it may be a result of my aging eye sight.
Military reticles are a different tool for a different job from my understanding.
I think one of the best "newer" ideas was the subtensions in the first half mil from center.

R

 

[Lowlight]

If the SF designed it, it must be great, my bad for the negative opinion

 

[BangBangBlatBlat]

Rthur - may be a good point. I don't use that reticle for my type of shooting so have to rely on opinions of shooters who actively use these types of reticles for the PRS type of shooting. It is my understanding that the T1 reticle was designed with the input of Special Forces in Europe for engagement and they have been very happy with it for practical field use.

In any case, I suppose the thing to do would be to ask the opinions of several PRS shooters as to what they would prefer to see for a reticle. If there is some sort of consensus without infringing on someone's patent, we would be happy to get Deon working on something. For that matter, we would even consider working with a Patented Reticle and pay royalties for a well accepted design.

I think there is something to be said about their being a divergence in tactical/military shooting in the Military, and even Europe vs. United States that might have lead you to believe that this reticle would be great. It might actually be great for PRS; I haven't seen it in person so maybe it looks better.

By doctrine, I know the military in the United States has moved to hold-over type scopes with Horus reticles. The opinion a lot of good shooters hold is that they are needlessly cluttered garbage that is meant to shortcut proper training, or building a proper scope. It looks like this reticle was made in the same idea of being able to make very precise shots while exclusively using hold-overs; that is probably great for single target engagements with the benefit of a spotter. The guys in Europe probably like the reticle because it's like a Horus with less junk in it.

In PRS, you have to be your own spotter. Being able to read trace through your rifle scope is a HUGE advantage, and having your longer shots be at the bottom edge of your scope while you are holding over is not very smart. Most good shooters will dial their elevation on a stage and shoot. In ideal circumstances, we get to see the vapor trail go slightly above the center, and then descend down right onto the target.

Even on stages that require holding over, most shooters will dial to an intermediate distance so that they can hold slightly under for closer targets. We are not making really bold elevation corrections with the reticle. I think most matches with a holdover stage, I've only had at most 3 mils of hold-over. Most of the time the tree doesn't need to be there.

My personal opinion that the FML-1 would be the reticle a good place to start with. Starting at 2 Mils, add some dots every half mil in a tree shaped pattern. Or dot every half, and micro dot every 1/4. Or something to that effect.

 

[Papagrizzly]

Bangbang - to a certain extent it is similar to the way we shoot, except that we have the advantage of actually looking at a target that has lines on it.

Unlike many on the US Team, I use a simple crosshair reticle with a 3/32" dot in my 10-60 March. I will generally put some initial wind on the gun depending on how fast it is running, switching etc, and then holdover for the rest of the string. We shoot 20 shot strings at 1000 yards. When I won the Canadian National Championship a couple of years ago, we were pair firing (one cannot gun them down and chase the spotter), and at one point I had 6 1/2 minutes on the gun and was holding aim at the edge of the target due to a pickup. That's a lot for magnum caliber. Watching a trace is impossible for me as I shoot a .300 WSM. Hard to watch a trace when the recoil pushes my shoulder/parts of my upper torso back 6" with each shot and the rifle moves away from the center of the target even when the rifle is sitting on a rest. We are not allowed to use muzzle brakes.

With the PRS shooters, they have the challenge of no lines on the target, different distances and different positions, so it gets a little complex and what works for F-Class, will not work for PRS and vice versa. I will try to post a picture of the T1 Tree reticle as seen through the scope as it is not so busy in reality as shown in the graphics, but still may be busy for some.

In the meantime everyone's opinion, positive or negative, is valuable as the goal is to present to the market what the consumer wants and not what we want.

 

[MStew308]

Great thread here guys. I'd love to join in but i'm too busy trying to find Lowlight's car. It's been brought to my attention that it houses a treasure trove of goodies that i can't afford LOL.

 

[koshkin]

Great thread here guys. I'd love to join in but i'm too busy trying to find Lowlight's car. It's been brought to my attention that it houses a treasure trove of goodies that i can't afford LOL.

I'd be careful with that. He can pick off from a considerable distance, so I would try to get it into a sheltered area first

Aside from that: March has some work to do to become a better fit for the tactical world and it will take some time. However, they are making steps in the right direction and participating in different online communities like this one (having thick skin helps) is not a bad way to go.

Personally, I like March scopes and they have their niche, but for a general purpose precision scope I prefer something else (Tangent Theta). However, I look at a lot of scopes and my picks are re-evaluated constantly.

As far as reticles go, it is really personall and the T1 reticle mentioned above is not my favourite either largely for reasons already mentioned. That is, however, a personal preference. I do not like Horus reticles very much either. Just about only "exclusively holdover" reticle I like is David Tubb's DTR, although that may be partially driven by the fact that I like David a whole lot more than I like Todd. DTR obscures a lot less of the target than Horus reticles do or than March's T1.

For that matter, if I could get David's DTR into March 3-24x52 (with High Master glass would be nice), I would buy one. It has some quirks, but I can live with them.

ILya

 

[Conrad]

I'd be careful with that. He can pick off from a considerable distance, so I would try to get it into a sheltered area first

Aside from that: March has some work to do to become a better fit for the tactical world and it will take some time. However, they are making steps in the right direction and participating in different online communities like this one (having thick skin helps) is not a bad way to go.

Personally, I like March scopes and they have their niche, but for a general purpose precision scope I prefer something else (Tangent Theta). However, I look at a lot of scopes and my picks are re-evaluated constantly.

As far as reticles go, it is really personall and the T1 reticle mentioned above is not my favourite either largely for reasons already mentioned. That is, however, a personal preference. I do not like Horus reticles very much either. Just about only "exclusively holdover" reticle I like is David Tubb's DTR, although that may be partially driven by the fact that I like David a whole lot more than I like Todd. DTR obscures a lot less of the target than Horus reticles do or than March's T1.

For that matter, if I could get David's DTR into March 3-24x52 (with High Master glass would be nice), I would buy one. It has some quirks, but I can live with them.

ILya

I still have some light hunter premiers 3-15x50 with the DTR that I would make you a good deal on.

 

[koshkin]

I still have some light hunter premiers 3-15x50 with the DTR that I would make you a good deal on.

I would rather not deal with potential Premier warranty issues, but thanks.

ILya

 

[Conrad]

I would rather not deal with potential Premier warranty issues, but thanks.

ILya

Fair enough. I ran the serial numbers through TT and they are covered by them for their trade in program so you basically have $1000 in coverage.

 

[cjgemm]

Do we not like this one?

View attachment 6878964

I guess this is one of the designs Desert Tech decided not to use.