-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes New March in Exhibitions 2018.
- Thread starter kristian55
- Start date
Couple of quick initial observations.
I'm guessing this is the start of a new series of scopes that will use the Genesis system to allow for huge adjustment ranges. If you're going to make a splash introducing a new technology, there's nothing wrong with going extreme right off the bat to establish the parameters.
March DEON have just moved the goalposts into the next Zip code; it's a whole ne ball game now, if I may be permitted to mix my metaphors.
I notice that the 400MOA of adjustment range is divided into 300MOA up and 100MOA down. That's 5 degrees of up. I also notice that the view remains through the middle of the objective lens, even at 5 degrees, so you're always looking through the sweet spot of the optics.
The zoom range is 10X, so one could expect such things as 2-20X or 2.5-25 or 3-30X and so on. I don't know how useful 300MOA of up elevation is with a 25X or 30X scope, but the possibility is there.
I also notice the 50MOA per revolution knobs are at the rear instead of the middle. I do not understand the significance of that yet, but I suspect it's a product of the sorcery used to move the FFP image while still looking through the middle of the objective lens.
I can't help but wonder what the significance of the "large spherical slider" is at the junction of the objective bell and the scope body. There seems to be the same apparatus at the rear, where the body joins the ocular. "Central gimbal system with slider bearings"? So this is the sorcery part, and it's patent pending. The gimbal is a single-axis model and is for roll motion. Would this be useful for scope leveling, especially since there are no rings involved in the mount.
So much to learn.
I'm guessing this is the start of a new series of scopes that will use the Genesis system to allow for huge adjustment ranges. If you're going to make a splash introducing a new technology, there's nothing wrong with going extreme right off the bat to establish the parameters.
March DEON have just moved the goalposts into the next Zip code; it's a whole ne ball game now, if I may be permitted to mix my metaphors.
I notice that the 400MOA of adjustment range is divided into 300MOA up and 100MOA down. That's 5 degrees of up. I also notice that the view remains through the middle of the objective lens, even at 5 degrees, so you're always looking through the sweet spot of the optics.
The zoom range is 10X, so one could expect such things as 2-20X or 2.5-25 or 3-30X and so on. I don't know how useful 300MOA of up elevation is with a 25X or 30X scope, but the possibility is there.
I also notice the 50MOA per revolution knobs are at the rear instead of the middle. I do not understand the significance of that yet, but I suspect it's a product of the sorcery used to move the FFP image while still looking through the middle of the objective lens.
I can't help but wonder what the significance of the "large spherical slider" is at the junction of the objective bell and the scope body. There seems to be the same apparatus at the rear, where the body joins the ocular. "Central gimbal system with slider bearings"? So this is the sorcery part, and it's patent pending. The gimbal is a single-axis model and is for roll motion. Would this be useful for scope leveling, especially since there are no rings involved in the mount.
So much to learn.
Last edited:
I'm sure you'll have better luck than I did looking for it. I tried "DEON riflescope", "DEON optic" and "march riflescope", and came up empty.
Hell Yeah!! Finally a scope that looks as good as my Counter Sniper optics scope.
No pricing yet but FB is quoting approx $5000 to $6000 and first production roughly end of 3rd quarter.
I think we should bitch some more because a manufacturer has released something that we aren't interested in, while, at the same time, taking a revolutionary step forward in optical-mechanical design.
???? Let me see, there are section on here re. ELR, constant talk about advances in bullets and barrels etc and advances in ballistics and in amongst this the current answer to keep up with optics is to bolt a bloody periscope onto the existing 60++ year old scope designs/concepts to ‘try’ and keep up - and then you go and say ‘something we are not interested in’ - God’s teeth, should folks not be a bit more open minded?
Caveat: Now if you are being sarcastic re the general ‘if it’s not used in PRS it cannot be any good’ I apologies!!
Add to this ‘it’s not pretty’ - well dinosaurs probably thought the mammals that replaced them ‘were not pretty’
Caveat: Now if you are being sarcastic re the general ‘if it’s not used in PRS it cannot be any good’ I apologies!!
Add to this ‘it’s not pretty’ - well dinosaurs probably thought the mammals that replaced them ‘were not pretty’
Last edited:
The issue is the pricing and the fact the Charlie Unit is $1500 and works with existing scopes. Plus the user can set the Charlie unit and adjust it on the fly too. (There is actually a new version of this coming that does it in a better way)
The adjustability is good, the fact it keeps you in the center of the glass is better, and you can get so much elevation in the scope works.
The problem is, ELR is very small percentage wise of the shooting community, the scope is very expensive, companies tried the $5000+ price point, it failed. To win they should have considered a "smaller version" along with a bigger more expensive one.
It's a step forward but you're fooling yourself if you think it is revolutionary. It's an elegant externally adjusted scope, those have and do exist.
The adjustability is good, the fact it keeps you in the center of the glass is better, and you can get so much elevation in the scope works.
The problem is, ELR is very small percentage wise of the shooting community, the scope is very expensive, companies tried the $5000+ price point, it failed. To win they should have considered a "smaller version" along with a bigger more expensive one.
It's a step forward but you're fooling yourself if you think it is revolutionary. It's an elegant externally adjusted scope, those have and do exist.
Any of you guys actually run a Tacom , and understand the mounting issues involved ?
Having a over a pound cantilevered off the weakest part of the scope , like a big lever
introduces problems . This scope will be better than running a big rail with stupid angle like
many have tried ( myself included ) .
The price is pocket money in the ELR world . No doubt this tech can easily be applied to
any optic given a little time . I’m sure the heavy hiitters and early adopters in that world
will be all over this .
Having a over a pound cantilevered off the weakest part of the scope , like a big lever
introduces problems . This scope will be better than running a big rail with stupid angle like
many have tried ( myself included ) .
The price is pocket money in the ELR world . No doubt this tech can easily be applied to
any optic given a little time . I’m sure the heavy hiitters and early adopters in that world
will be all over this .
I use the Charlie unit, and mount on the Rail not the scope
The fact none of you have used it is a problem, you are all guessing
It is by far the best bang for your bang in ELR Shooting
This combo with my Existing S&B has over 600+ MOA of adjustment
The fact none of you have used it is a problem, you are all guessing
It is by far the best bang for your bang in ELR Shooting
This combo with my Existing S&B has over 600+ MOA of adjustment
Nice no one has yet shot with the new unit, I am reserving my judgement until I can get my hands on one. This is a new ballgame and speeds are best left unvented until the unit hits the real world. Anything that shakes us out of 1940s tech is fine by me.
How is it not old tech in a new package?
You just covered the external adjustment under the tube. they are internal vs external but it still adjusts in a similar fashion.
as I said, it's a more elegant externally adjusted scope
Guys are talking in the other thread, it still looks at the barrel and will have to use a mount that raises it up.
You just covered the external adjustment under the tube. they are internal vs external but it still adjusts in a similar fashion.
as I said, it's a more elegant externally adjusted scope
Guys are talking in the other thread, it still looks at the barrel and will have to use a mount that raises it up.
The ELR thread has a hypothetical solution and a wait and see response. But all three threads have you selling a periscope for a comp you only observe.
I'm sure more practical details will emerge from IWA.
I'm sure more practical details will emerge from IWA.
Only observe ?
What does that mean, you think I have not and don't shoot ELR ?
from my 100 yard line my range has targets every 100 yards to a Mile, if I back up behind the line I can shoot 2 Miles+
I shot an event in in New Mexico in November where Ray Sanchez and I both got 4 out of 5 hits multiple times at 2600 yards, we shot, 4000, 3250, and so On.
I am hosting the Warner Tool event on my Range, I have hosted several ELR Events here in CO in the past. Plus I have attended the XLR Event at Gunsite 4x ...
Tell me how I only OBSERVE ... you guys are a fucking joke
What does that mean, you think I have not and don't shoot ELR ?
from my 100 yard line my range has targets every 100 yards to a Mile, if I back up behind the line I can shoot 2 Miles+
I shot an event in in New Mexico in November where Ray Sanchez and I both got 4 out of 5 hits multiple times at 2600 yards, we shot, 4000, 3250, and so On.
I am hosting the Warner Tool event on my Range, I have hosted several ELR Events here in CO in the past. Plus I have attended the XLR Event at Gunsite 4x ...
Tell me how I only OBSERVE ... you guys are a fucking joke
Similar information to what's on the UK site is now live on our page here in the USA. There is picture of the current reticle as well.
http://marchoptics.com/shop/brand_march-optics/firstfocalplane/6-60x56mm-scope
http://marchoptics.com/shop/brand_march-optics/firstfocalplane/6-60x56mm-scope
As an outside observer because I've really got no dog in this hunt as I don't own any March scopes, I was following this thread with interest because the new scope is supposed to be "game changing" and revolutionary. I have to say that the actual release is a real letdown after all the hype. For ELR I'm sure it is interesting to keep all of the travel internal to the scope but unfortunately I don't find this scope do be game changing as this could already be accomplished by other methods....
To the fanboys I say good for you and I hope to read reports back on how great the new scope is.
The real issue as I see it is I can use any high mag scope with my current favorite reticle and add the Charlie to it and accomplish the same thing getting all the details exactly how I want them. LL points this out in a non politically correct way but his points are valid as I see it.
To the fanboys I say good for you and I hope to read reports back on how great the new scope is.
The real issue as I see it is I can use any high mag scope with my current favorite reticle and add the Charlie to it and accomplish the same thing getting all the details exactly how I want them. LL points this out in a non politically correct way but his points are valid as I see it.
Hi,
SO what are the specs of a 416 cheytac that they are advertising 3 mile capabilities with?
Sincerely,
Theis
SO what are the specs of a 416 cheytac that they are advertising 3 mile capabilities with?
Sincerely,
Theis
Everything has its purpose.
I am surprised no one has asked what is possible if you add a Prism to this... 800 MOA total in an optical system.
The .416 CheyTac was a wildcat developed for licensing reasons in a specific EU country. There were 3 of them built, and it had to do with politics etc. I have 450 - 550gr bullets cutting edge prototypes, and have actually had conversations and hands on 3 wildcats while here in Europe. Aside from the .416 CT, there is also a .375 that a guy was pushing 1200 m/s or 2900 fps +/- with a 400gr projectile.
What this is not, is an external system that has been internalized. I have been blessed enough to learn from and work with Shimizu-San. This is a brand new system for managing the elevation travel of a scope, a patented system using a new mechanism for movement.
I am surprised no one has asked what is possible if you add a Prism to this... 800 MOA total in an optical system.
The .416 CheyTac was a wildcat developed for licensing reasons in a specific EU country. There were 3 of them built, and it had to do with politics etc. I have 450 - 550gr bullets cutting edge prototypes, and have actually had conversations and hands on 3 wildcats while here in Europe. Aside from the .416 CT, there is also a .375 that a guy was pushing 1200 m/s or 2900 fps +/- with a 400gr projectile.
What this is not, is an external system that has been internalized. I have been blessed enough to learn from and work with Shimizu-San. This is a brand new system for managing the elevation travel of a scope, a patented system using a new mechanism for movement.
The patent has me curious. Is there any way you can find out the patent number? Or application number?
Generally, another thing that makes me curious is why put in the 10x erector ratio into a scope intended for ELR? Could the optical performance be kept higher or prices kept lower with a 10-60x? Or 20-70? Or something even more focused on higher magnifications?
Either way, I do not know enough about the new scope to form any viable opinions, but I am curious.
ILya
The zoom ratio is very versatile , shoot from a few 100 yards to 3 miles . The reticle does
the same . I’ve looked through a High Master 10 60 , it’s about the best picture I’ve ever
seen . This optic will be at least as good , maybe even better .
March already has an 8 - 80 SFP optic , 6 - 60 FFP is a natural progression .
the same . I’ve looked through a High Master 10 60 , it’s about the best picture I’ve ever
seen . This optic will be at least as good , maybe even better .
March already has an 8 - 80 SFP optic , 6 - 60 FFP is a natural progression .
Stuart
https://www.facebook.com/brt.s...83225774/?t=126
I have been asked to do a video explaining the features of the new MARCH Genesis ELR scope. So it's day 2 at the IWA Shooting Sports trade show here in Nuremberg, Germany so we quickly did a video this afternoon. It's a little noisy of course but I hope people find it informative.
You may notice the Heavy Gun Rifle on a Lenzi Benchrest (Italy) just delivered by Alberto yesterday which has now the BRT modifications to handle the weight of these wide rifles. 35kg. Rifle is 416 calibre and cartridge is the Cheytac.
https://www.facebook.com/brt.s...83225774/?t=126
I have been asked to do a video explaining the features of the new MARCH Genesis ELR scope. So it's day 2 at the IWA Shooting Sports trade show here in Nuremberg, Germany so we quickly did a video this afternoon. It's a little noisy of course but I hope people find it informative.
You may notice the Heavy Gun Rifle on a Lenzi Benchrest (Italy) just delivered by Alberto yesterday which has now the BRT modifications to handle the weight of these wide rifles. 35kg. Rifle is 416 calibre and cartridge is the Cheytac.
If I were to hazard a guess, price was not a big concern here. In my mind, Deon (March) wanted to show just how far they could take the state of the art by using the best of their current technology and produce a riflescope that has it all and is so far above any other riflescope that noses will bleed.
They already had the 10X erector. They already had the High Master lens system. They already had the morphing FFP reticle. They added the newly-devised Genesis system for adjustment and the wide angle ocular. Perhaps they thought that 8-80 was a magnification too far (exit pupil would be very tiny and the eye relief would be problematic,) and they settled on 6X base.
Add all these things together, and they created something far above anything else currently on the market. We've already discussed the fact March scopes are boutique scopes; definitely not meant for everyone.
New technology benefits all of us. However, like many technologies technical comments are made on items that the poster has little to no experience with.
As a shooter you now have multiple choices for extended range: as a shooter if you are comfortable with adjusting your platform in order to deal with changing scope tilt, mechanical systems are, potentially, your way to go,
The Charlie TARAC does not require any changes to the shooters platform ie.. changing comb height and butt pad position. Indeed I have a gimbal system I built 2yrs ago under my desk but decided not to go the mechanical route.
The capability to shoot full mag at extended distances is problematical to the atmosphere conditions as we all know. How often will you use 60x at 2 miles? If it is 1% of the time a premium is being paid for a 1% use. If you use 25-30x on average the range of scopes $$ increases dramatically. Don't get me wrong I find the March magnification abilities to be astounding.
Clarity: new units are clearer than original units from 2yrs ago.
Concerning scope issues due to mounting a Charlie: we are not aware of any to date- including non-braked 50cals. Though it weighs 1lb 6 ozs the vector moment of the recoil event is essentially at least 90% plus along the scopes axis- the strongest section. We do recognize the potential of failure, especially on light bodied scopes, and offer the customer 3 mounting options.
The Charlie is not limited to bell or rail mount. We have introduced a new method of attachment specifically addressing target scopes and lack of rails - without mounting to the bell.
Our range is also much higher concerning MOA/MIL shift. We have built units at 200MIL and will soon send units out at 300+mil but our adjustments are in 10's of degrees.
You can shoot 400+moa on a 34” barrel with no riser, cheek or butt piece with 1.5” tall rings.
We have also already addressed the 45" barrel. The first units will be in shooters hands in a couple of weeks. It too also uses a standard rail and 1.5” tall rings. It will be used this year to go past 6Kyds. It will have a base range of 22.5degrees elevation. Shooting from the same position you do your 100yd zero. Or 50yd zero- yes our unit goes negative also.
Price: $1500 for a Charlie. 1 scope = $1500. 2 scopes = $1100 (adding one more adapter.) 3 scopes = $850 per scope... Plus what is not shown in many of the calculations of cost is the cost of a riser, cheek piece and but pad.
As an entry level ELR shooter: you can use your $300 scope with a Charlie and have your 400moa shot. Starting with your 6.5 Creedmoor. Then transfer it to your .338Lap, then to your .375. then to your .416... and still shoot it instantly on all of the guns. 4 guns x $5,000= a lot. Do I believe a shooter will transfer their March scope - YES- just making sure apples and apples are compared.
Our unit can transfer scope to scope gun to gun. Rail to Scope mount, Scope mount to Armor mount. All the same mechanism. Same shift.
Field adjustment: tall target, and verniers have been used. We have a company (of which a major Sniper's Hide contributor witnessed) absolutely adjusted multiple times on the fly in the field at a recent publicized shoot.
The adjustable unit will adjust 100moa per click. Or 30mil per click or 60mil per click.... your choice.
All scope settings will usually have a first round confirmation. To NOTE: only a hand full of guys (3) had first round and consecutive 3 round hits at the ELR event at SHOT.
Gun Smith to mount the Charlie: The Charlie is the most forgiving optic you can mount and certainly does not need a gun smith.
Your 100yd zero position on the rifle is exactly the same at 3 miles. I believe a sniper saying is "consistency = accuracy".
I would believe you will need a riser to compensate for any barrel length versus MOA. That is why we ask for barrel length in our calculations: to confirm the unit will function with your platform and your intended MOA. Our unit starts out 1.3” above the scope center line.
We are ITAR on all of our products: we are currently working with a handful of companies on export licenses for import.
I am impressed with the technology presented by March and wish them the best of luck. However, I want to make sure we are truly comparing apples and apples and for those who are not truly familiar with the Charlie…
As a shooter you now have multiple choices for extended range: as a shooter if you are comfortable with adjusting your platform in order to deal with changing scope tilt, mechanical systems are, potentially, your way to go,
The Charlie TARAC does not require any changes to the shooters platform ie.. changing comb height and butt pad position. Indeed I have a gimbal system I built 2yrs ago under my desk but decided not to go the mechanical route.
The capability to shoot full mag at extended distances is problematical to the atmosphere conditions as we all know. How often will you use 60x at 2 miles? If it is 1% of the time a premium is being paid for a 1% use. If you use 25-30x on average the range of scopes $$ increases dramatically. Don't get me wrong I find the March magnification abilities to be astounding.
Clarity: new units are clearer than original units from 2yrs ago.
Concerning scope issues due to mounting a Charlie: we are not aware of any to date- including non-braked 50cals. Though it weighs 1lb 6 ozs the vector moment of the recoil event is essentially at least 90% plus along the scopes axis- the strongest section. We do recognize the potential of failure, especially on light bodied scopes, and offer the customer 3 mounting options.
The Charlie is not limited to bell or rail mount. We have introduced a new method of attachment specifically addressing target scopes and lack of rails - without mounting to the bell.
Our range is also much higher concerning MOA/MIL shift. We have built units at 200MIL and will soon send units out at 300+mil but our adjustments are in 10's of degrees.
You can shoot 400+moa on a 34” barrel with no riser, cheek or butt piece with 1.5” tall rings.
We have also already addressed the 45" barrel. The first units will be in shooters hands in a couple of weeks. It too also uses a standard rail and 1.5” tall rings. It will be used this year to go past 6Kyds. It will have a base range of 22.5degrees elevation. Shooting from the same position you do your 100yd zero. Or 50yd zero- yes our unit goes negative also.
Price: $1500 for a Charlie. 1 scope = $1500. 2 scopes = $1100 (adding one more adapter.) 3 scopes = $850 per scope... Plus what is not shown in many of the calculations of cost is the cost of a riser, cheek piece and but pad.
As an entry level ELR shooter: you can use your $300 scope with a Charlie and have your 400moa shot. Starting with your 6.5 Creedmoor. Then transfer it to your .338Lap, then to your .375. then to your .416... and still shoot it instantly on all of the guns. 4 guns x $5,000= a lot. Do I believe a shooter will transfer their March scope - YES- just making sure apples and apples are compared.
Our unit can transfer scope to scope gun to gun. Rail to Scope mount, Scope mount to Armor mount. All the same mechanism. Same shift.
Field adjustment: tall target, and verniers have been used. We have a company (of which a major Sniper's Hide contributor witnessed) absolutely adjusted multiple times on the fly in the field at a recent publicized shoot.
The adjustable unit will adjust 100moa per click. Or 30mil per click or 60mil per click.... your choice.
All scope settings will usually have a first round confirmation. To NOTE: only a hand full of guys (3) had first round and consecutive 3 round hits at the ELR event at SHOT.
Gun Smith to mount the Charlie: The Charlie is the most forgiving optic you can mount and certainly does not need a gun smith.
Your 100yd zero position on the rifle is exactly the same at 3 miles. I believe a sniper saying is "consistency = accuracy".
I would believe you will need a riser to compensate for any barrel length versus MOA. That is why we ask for barrel length in our calculations: to confirm the unit will function with your platform and your intended MOA. Our unit starts out 1.3” above the scope center line.
We are ITAR on all of our products: we are currently working with a handful of companies on export licenses for import.
I am impressed with the technology presented by March and wish them the best of luck. However, I want to make sure we are truly comparing apples and apples and for those who are not truly familiar with the Charlie…
I would like to step back from the discussion for a moment and point out an important fact that should not be overlooked: we have representatives from two companies that offer competing approaches to solving the same problem in a coherent, articulate and exceedingly civilized manner.
I implore you all: let's refrain from the mudlsinging that we are all occasionally guilty of and keep this discussion going in. This is great for all of us.
Now, onto the subject matter at hand.
General disclaimer:
I have used a bunch of March scopes, but never laid eyes on the Genesis.
I have never used any of the TacomHQ products but drooled over them rather extensively during SHOT and I am harboring plans to build a 338LM using their structured barrel. I have also been looking at their TARAC products for the "long range subsonic" project I am thinking of putting together.
As I have mentioned, I am not really a ELR shooter, but shooting a subsonic 8.6CM or Blackout to 1000 yards and then some is very interesting for me and I suspect I can do that with either TARAC CHarlie or the Genesis and the limiting factor is going to be me, not the gear (interestingly, if I want to use the reticle for holdover, I can also do that with the larger lensed TARAC Alpha and save a bunch of money).
If I were to hazard a guess, I think the Genesis will do well with people who build a dedicated rig to shoot ELR, while TARAC will own the portion of the market where people want their regular precision rifle to reach out way out there.
For now, I am in the second category, although paradoxically when I finally put together my project for which I want to use Tacom's structured barrel, that will be a good platform for March's Genesis.
I do like to see innovation. I work for a company that builds optomechanical devices, so Tacom's solution really appeals to me in its brilliant simplicity. March's Genesis looks like a clever solution, although I am really itching to see that patent. One interesting quirk there is that once you get into that $6k or so price range, you will start getting into the price range where you will likely soon see interesting Electro-Optical solutions to the same problem.
Either way, with all the new product introductions, this is promising to be a very interesting year.
ILya
I implore you all: let's refrain from the mudlsinging that we are all occasionally guilty of and keep this discussion going in. This is great for all of us.
Now, onto the subject matter at hand.
General disclaimer:
I have used a bunch of March scopes, but never laid eyes on the Genesis.
I have never used any of the TacomHQ products but drooled over them rather extensively during SHOT and I am harboring plans to build a 338LM using their structured barrel. I have also been looking at their TARAC products for the "long range subsonic" project I am thinking of putting together.
As I have mentioned, I am not really a ELR shooter, but shooting a subsonic 8.6CM or Blackout to 1000 yards and then some is very interesting for me and I suspect I can do that with either TARAC CHarlie or the Genesis and the limiting factor is going to be me, not the gear (interestingly, if I want to use the reticle for holdover, I can also do that with the larger lensed TARAC Alpha and save a bunch of money).
If I were to hazard a guess, I think the Genesis will do well with people who build a dedicated rig to shoot ELR, while TARAC will own the portion of the market where people want their regular precision rifle to reach out way out there.
For now, I am in the second category, although paradoxically when I finally put together my project for which I want to use Tacom's structured barrel, that will be a good platform for March's Genesis.
I do like to see innovation. I work for a company that builds optomechanical devices, so Tacom's solution really appeals to me in its brilliant simplicity. March's Genesis looks like a clever solution, although I am really itching to see that patent. One interesting quirk there is that once you get into that $6k or so price range, you will start getting into the price range where you will likely soon see interesting Electro-Optical solutions to the same problem.
Either way, with all the new product introductions, this is promising to be a very interesting year.
ILya
"Far above" is a questionable term that should not be used lightly and definitely not until the product is out there proving its mettle. I usually take marketing people to task for using such hyperbole and that even includes marketing people who work for me.
What you are saying here is that this scope is a "tour de force" for the sake of being "tour de force".
That is a terrible way to argue the merits of a niche product because an ELR guy can easily interpret it as "we wanted to make the spec sheet look really cool so we are making you pay more money for an extra mag range instead of using that money to design a larger objective lens system that will actually make a difference at higher magnifications where this scope will spend 99.99% of its time".
The argument that they already had the erector system makes no sense. They also had the erector system for the 10-60x56 High Master. Perhaps, there is something about the 10-60x56 internal design that makes it difficult to convert to FFP and that's a perfectly reasonable argument. However, and take this with a grain of salt since I am not an ELR guy, for this application I can't really see why I would ever need to go down to 6x, but I can see spending a lot of time at high magnification, especially since it has no bearing to my adjustment range. And one of my original questions still remains: why not step up to a large objective lens. If there is a niche out here that can easily accomodate that, it is ELR.
ILya
Frank, it's an old tactic. One deployed by many here. They figure if they talk bullshit enough times, it will become true.
I did not use superlatives, only relatives.
I will also restate here that I do not work for March or Deon or anything of the sort; I have been using a March-X 5-50X56 scope that I bought 4 years ago at full price as an upgrade to a Nightforce NXS 12-42X56.
I do not shoot ELR, I am an F-TR competitor who shoots 1000yards matches at least every month, year round in south Texas and around the country and continent. I run my March at 40X, virtually all the time, and when it's not at 40X, it's because I cranked it to 50X.
I have no insight into the decision-making behind the Genesis riflescope and I don't read minds; I am just an observer.
As an outside observer, I look at the Genesis offering and read the spec sheet and see what they highlight:
400MOA of elevation adjustment. 50MOA per rev.
The High Master lens system (Super-ED glass.)
The highest zoom ratio and FFP magnification in the World.
Wide angle eyepiece.
Parallax free from 10 yards to infinity.
Yes, I do see the Genesis, not as a "tour de force" but more like a statement "this is the state of the art if FFP scopes."
As an outside observer who knows that March is a boutique riflescope outfit; they have just elevated the state of the art very high but they won't take the industry by storm simply because they do not have the production capacity to be anything other than a boutique company. That's also why they can create such products as the Genesis and scopes like the March-X 5-50X56 or 8-80X56, the highest zoom ratios and the highest magnification riflescope on the planet.
I will also restate here that I do not work for March or Deon or anything of the sort; I have been using a March-X 5-50X56 scope that I bought 4 years ago at full price as an upgrade to a Nightforce NXS 12-42X56.
I do not shoot ELR, I am an F-TR competitor who shoots 1000yards matches at least every month, year round in south Texas and around the country and continent. I run my March at 40X, virtually all the time, and when it's not at 40X, it's because I cranked it to 50X.
I have no insight into the decision-making behind the Genesis riflescope and I don't read minds; I am just an observer.
As an outside observer, I look at the Genesis offering and read the spec sheet and see what they highlight:
400MOA of elevation adjustment. 50MOA per rev.
The High Master lens system (Super-ED glass.)
The highest zoom ratio and FFP magnification in the World.
Wide angle eyepiece.
Parallax free from 10 yards to infinity.
Yes, I do see the Genesis, not as a "tour de force" but more like a statement "this is the state of the art if FFP scopes."
As an outside observer who knows that March is a boutique riflescope outfit; they have just elevated the state of the art very high but they won't take the industry by storm simply because they do not have the production capacity to be anything other than a boutique company. That's also why they can create such products as the Genesis and scopes like the March-X 5-50X56 or 8-80X56, the highest zoom ratios and the highest magnification riflescope on the planet.
Now, I see where we diverge. I do not see how Genesis can make a claim to "state of the art in FFP scopes" and I can take that argument apart in a matter of seconds.
I can easily see how Genesis can make a claim to "state of the art in ELR scopes" and that is the discussion I am most interested in.
As far as your list of specifications goes let's look at them one by one:
1) Adjustment range: this clearly the key specification and is what really makes the scope interesting
2) High Master lens system: this is a marketing term and means nothing other than it is likely better than the previous optical system used by March. I hear good things about it and it sounds like contrast has been improved. However, I have no obvious way of saying whether it is better than competing designs that had notably better contrast and micro-contrast than earlier March scopes. Given that so far the High Master re-design has only effected SFP scopes and the very expensive Genesis, most of us (FFP shooters) will never know what this really is until there is a more relevant High Master optical system to our world. I do not doubt it is very good, but I am not keen on the superlatives.
3) Highest zoom ratio is a technical challenge, but for scopes of this type I can make a good case that this is a solution looking for a problem. It is less important to me than an appropriate and usable magnification range. Highest magnification is important to target shooters and ELR people and since this is where I see this scope making an impact, this is a good thing (I am not going to rehash my questions about larger objectives).
4) Wide angle pieces simply brings March more in line what what other top end scopes already have, given that the eye relief has gotten shorter. Given the application, I would have probably preferred a larger diameter WA eyepiece that would allow them to keep the eye relief where it was.
5) Parallax adjustment from 10 yards to infinity merely brings us back to the question of whether the parallax adjustment is going to be finicky or not. 5-40x56 was not bad, so I hope this one is as good or better. Still, perhaps I am missing something, but why would I care about a 10yard parallax on an ELR scope? I would gladly sacrifice short parallax distance if it gave me greater adjustment granularity at long range.
Lastly, something that was not mentioned before: I see that the illumination adjustment is listed as a "6 level" adjustment. Is it a new design that fixes the limitation of the current illumination system?
Reticle illumination is where March has traditionally been a little behind the curve compared to the competition, so I am very curious about this one.
ILya
Last edited:
Excellent point. I agree that "state of the art in ELR scopes" is more apt.
It is my understanding that the High Master Lens system uses Super ED glass, which from my photography penchant means Nikon glass as they introduced the term with some of their lenses. Then again, they (Nikon) also have fluorite glass lenses, so go figure. Of course, someone else might be using the term Super ED. So who knows.
As for the illumination thing, I have the add-on 6-level illumination module from March on my 5-50X56. I replaced the original module with the 6-level module. However, I cannot say that it is the same 6-level module as the one used on the Genesis because I can't see the proper details on the pictures of the Genesis. My 6-level module goes on and off by pressing the middle and I adjust the intensity by rotating a built-in dial. When I turn it off and then on, it stays at the level that I selected on the small dial.
For the parallax adjustment, I added the large focus wheel to my scope. The neat thing with such a short focus range, for me at least, is for dry firing.
It is my understanding that the High Master Lens system uses Super ED glass, which from my photography penchant means Nikon glass as they introduced the term with some of their lenses. Then again, they (Nikon) also have fluorite glass lenses, so go figure. Of course, someone else might be using the term Super ED. So who knows.
As for the illumination thing, I have the add-on 6-level illumination module from March on my 5-50X56. I replaced the original module with the 6-level module. However, I cannot say that it is the same 6-level module as the one used on the Genesis because I can't see the proper details on the pictures of the Genesis. My 6-level module goes on and off by pressing the middle and I adjust the intensity by rotating a built-in dial. When I turn it off and then on, it stays at the level that I selected on the small dial.
For the parallax adjustment, I added the large focus wheel to my scope. The neat thing with such a short focus range, for me at least, is for dry firing.
And what exactly is "wrong" with the reticle. I have a habit of putting the dot on where I want the bullet to go and use the spaces for aiming off. Is there a better way?
My Astro-Physics apochromatic refractors use Super ED glass and they have been using that term since the early 1990s...nothing new
1. I’m old enough to remember when 300 horsepower was considered a lot of power
in a production car . Now we can drive several 500 hp models off the lot . Innovation .
Spring for a Bugatti , you get 1000 hp ....
2. Best way to satisfy your curiosity is head to a range with an F Comp and had have a
look through a competitors HM optic . I shoot a wide range of disciplines : from 22 lr up
to big magnums at ELR , and irons on my Enfield service rifle . You would appreciate the
difference between an NXS and a Comp model , signifiicant upgrade .
3. What zoom ratio do you want ? We can push the boundaries , or just keep plodding
along with the same old tech :/ .
4. As far as I can tell , they have built just a few proto’s so far . Plenty of time to add / change
eyepiece as required . It’s a boutique company , they may be able to spec whatever you
want with appropriate $ . Get in touch with them , they might appreciate your input .
5. Short focus allows the optic to be used on rimfire comp rifles . I shoot my 22 lr out to
550 yards every week on my local ( nearest ) range . Cheap ELR wind practise ! You are
correct , 5-40 model is fine parallax wise . I notice that two members of the design team ,
are multiple time World Champions , with a few rimfire Wins included .
6. Looks like the same push push illum system , but with a wider range , for NV on the
bottom setting , and daytime bright on the highest setting .
Can’t wait to get my hands on one of these optics , looks like it’s a while away from
production . Plenty of time to iron out specs and details , still really at prototype stage .
As a note on your 1000yd subsonic project: we built just such a unit for "use" two years ago using the Alpha units you are thinking about. To note the Alpha units will be magnification limited but the 1000yd subsonic shot at 15x is absolutely a real solution. Add a NV to the system...
We also use a version of the Alpha's with our Charlie scope mount to bring a big rail with a 1100m zero back DOWN to 100 meters. For a fast simple, low cost <40moa shift the Alpha's are hard to beat.
That's pretty much what I had in mind, except with me not being a magnification hog, was thinking if doing it with a 1-8x or a 2.5-10x scope. It sounds like that should work well.
ILya
OK. I sent some emails to the guys at IWA about the Genesis and what it can and cannot do.
The most important point to get across at this stage is the Genesis you see on FB is a prototype that is going to the R&D stage after IWA.
Based on this real world R&D, like all prototypes, there will be tweaks but March will keep us all posted.
The most important point to get across at this stage is the Genesis you see on FB is a prototype that is going to the R&D stage after IWA.
Based on this real world R&D, like all prototypes, there will be tweaks but March will keep us all posted.
1) Comparing erector ratio of a riflescope to horsepower of a car is at best a silly comparison. At worst... well I promised to keep it civil, so I'll let you fill in the blanks.
2) I have looked through HM scope a couple of times, but not enough to get a detailed evaluation and I am a detail oriented guy. What does it have to do with NXS? These do not compete against each other. Just like the Bugatti thing, this is just a false comparison. A little intellectual honesty instead of fanboy-ism seems to be in order.
3) This is a loaded question. For a dedicated long range scope, I do not think zoom ratio is anywhere in my list of things to consider. By itself, it is not important enough. For other scope types it is important. For this one, I am not so sure.
4) I am not looking to have a custom scope made and I have talked to Deon people a few years ago when they were all at SHOT. Given the language barrier with them and the fact that Shiraz with whom I do not have a language barrier seems to be on this thread, input is exactly what I am providing here. A larger diameter eyepiece that keep the eye relief a little longer with wide FOV may not be a bad idea.
5) Cheap ELR practice is a great thing, but unless you plan to sell these to airgunners somehow, I do not understand a need for 10m parallax in lieu of more precise long range parallax adjustment. As for the World Champion stuff, this seems to be brought up all the time. We all know that some exceedingly capable shooters in their disciplines are involved with March scopes, for example Shiraz and Denys who have posted on this thread. Does that excuse the product announcement from some constructive criticism from the rest of us?
6) I am very curious how that will work. There are two illumination modules I have seen for March FFP scopes: Lo and Hi intensity. Low is not quite low enough and High is not quite high enough. If the dynamic range was extended and combined into a single unit, that is a very good thing.
I look forward to seeing how the scope develops between now and full scale production.
ILya
It's enlightening to see the same comments, as well as similar responses to Ilya, and his reaction is for the fanboys to be "intellectually honest" vs playing the same game they play with me. Can't claim Frank is biased when Ilya says the same thing, granted in a much nicer way, however reading his frustration demonstrates to the viewers where I come from, the only difference is, I rarely bite my tongue.
They have a hard time handling dissenting opinions and now you can see it.
They have a hard time handling dissenting opinions and now you can see it.
I have a lot of mileage with March scopes and I generally like them. They have their strengths and their weaknesses like everything else and I think it is important to be aware of them.
My tolerance for fanboy-ism is pretty limited though. It is one thing to like the product and quite another to be a fanboy.
Still, I am trying to maintain civility. I was told that I need to be nicer to people, so I am really trying...
ILya
I heard tale I should be nicer too
I disrespectfully declined, getting too old to change my stripes.
I disrespectfully declined, getting too old to change my stripes.
