Re: Review: March-F 3-24 x 42 FFP
So, i've been keeping an eye on the write ups on these scopes and I have sent TY a pm or 2 about his true impression of the scope. He encouraged me to take a look for myself and I finally decided to make a road trip up to Kelblys last Saturday. I met up with Ian and spent about 1.5 hours glassing different items at different ranges with 3 scopes out to about 1.25 miles. For compairison I brought along a friends 6.5-20 MK4 and one of my PH 5-25's.
The first thing that really struck me about the scope is the size of it. I know you see the pics and hear how small they are but, they are truely tiny when compaired to the scope I am used to running.
The second thing that I noticed when compairing it to the other scopes is that the March really is that clear. During this testing, I have come to the realization that I am a glass whore. This particular MK4 is a scope I had sold to my friend about 15 months ago and haven't spent much time behind one since. I used to think they were "really nice" but now, I wonder how I ever used one with any success.
When glassing around between the PH and the March, what I really think stands out the most is the size of the reticle in the March. The reticle commands much of the view. Where the PH Gen II almost "blends in" the March is BOLD. I prefer the PH reticle but it's really almost unusable at less than 11x. The March FML-1 reticle is still quite visable at 3x (although you certianly can't range with it there) and the floating dot is small enough at 24x that the whole thing still works. At the longer distances (estimated 21-2200 yds) the PH really seems to have more definition and clarity. I don't intend to use the March at those distances but we had some items avalible to look at and compair the 2 and the PH wins out. Most likely due to the 56mm obj and the 34mm tube.
I still brought a March home with me but, if size and weight were not a concern, I would have left my PH on this rifle. One other thing worth commenting on, I never felt that I was looking through a "little" scope or noticed any tunnel vision. It really is an impressive scope all in all and it still retains 28 mils of adjustment in a 30mm tube. I have it mounted on a 20moa rail in Burris signature rings with a 10moa insert. At this point I have 20 mils of adjustment which will be plenty for what this rifle will be used for.
My only gripe would be the size of the reticle. I plan on using the scope mostly around the 15x-18x area and the reticle is okay at those mag levels. I will still have the abiblity to crank it up to 24 if I need to although it is not ideal. I was also interested in the PH LT but, I can't convinece myself to spend that much on a scope that is limited to 15x and 12mils of elevation.
There is alot of talk about the eyebox being touchy at or above 20x and to be honest, my current exposure to the scope has just been laying prone behind it and on the bench. At this point, once I got the eye relief adjusted and the height of my cheek piece set, the eyebox has not given me any issues whatsoever.
I will be using the scope at the Rayners "sniper match" this Sunday so, I am REALLY looking forward to putting it through it's paces and getting behind it for some positional situations to see how it faires.
So far, I am impressed with the scope and Ian at Kelblys. I got a nice tour of their facility while I was there. I feel bad at this point that I haven't had them build me a rifle yet. Beautiful actions, top notch bedding (probably the best I have seen at this point) and beautiful stock work. They make their own triggers, actions, stocks and rings.
I don't mean to take over Ty's thread here. I will post more after my match this Sunday at Rayners. I hope to get some pics as well.