How would you rate the glass and turrets on the LRHS vs March and NF?Now this is a great thread...keep it going. That's the kind of info I like reading!
I have two March, three NF, and one Leupold M4 (plus Bushnell LRHS, Minox, Nikon Monarch X, Leica, Zeiss etc). All really good, March slightly better. IOR Valdada 4.5-14x50 probably the best glass I have...
But if I could have only one scope it would be NF NXS, it just inspires confidence....
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
March & Leupold
- Thread starter Rich Coyle
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
Depends on the model. Many Leupold's adjust in IPHY.
Mk4s adjust in MOA. Mine are 1/4clicks, which is .26 IPHY.
The NXS scopes I tested were 1.09 IPHY *1/4 = .27 IPHY per click.
This is not a problem, but it isn't MOA either. The delta unaccounted for adds up with number of clicks dialed for shots(1/2 IPHY error per 50clicks in this case).
I suspect most scopes out there do not dial in true increments of anything in particular.
There is no reason to think your scopes do until you've tested to find this. So I highly recommend it & enter your resultant click value in IPHY(the highest resolution) into your ballistic software.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
Why would I 'confront' NF?
Do you think this is a rare condition in the scope industry?
Go ahead & test whatever scopes you shoot & then confront the makers about your resultant click values not being true in MOA. See what that means to them.
-Prediction: it won't mean they'll change their design for you. After all, they never guaranteed their click values to any tolerance, and they are 'somewhat' MOA...
Do you think this is a rare condition in the scope industry?
Go ahead & test whatever scopes you shoot & then confront the makers about your resultant click values not being true in MOA. See what that means to them.
-Prediction: it won't mean they'll change their design for you. After all, they never guaranteed their click values to any tolerance, and they are 'somewhat' MOA...
Papagrizzly
New Member
Every March scope that is currently sold includes a pair of flip up lens covers like these:
Further, for those guys that make an uninformed statement that the reticles are "too fine" here's the range of reticles that March offers
March Optics - Home of the World's Best Rifle Scopes
March offers a whole host of scopes for different disciplines. Whether it is for Tactical, Target, hunting etc.
March Optics - Home of the World's Best Rifle Scopes
Besides a PRO discount for National Team shooters and Media, MARCH also offers a nice discount to LEOs and Military, both current and retired. The glass on these scopes is incredible!
Further, for those guys that make an uninformed statement that the reticles are "too fine" here's the range of reticles that March offers
March Optics - Home of the World's Best Rifle Scopes
March offers a whole host of scopes for different disciplines. Whether it is for Tactical, Target, hunting etc.
March Optics - Home of the World's Best Rifle Scopes
Besides a PRO discount for National Team shooters and Media, MARCH also offers a nice discount to LEOs and Military, both current and retired. The glass on these scopes is incredible!
Papagrizzly
New Member
As a clarification to the above post, "Every March scope that is currently sold with tactical turrets includes a pair of flip up lens covers"
Thanks.
Looking forward to Bruce Ventura's comment.
The LRHS glass pops like Leica or Swaro. Great contrast and color. With my eyes though resolution is similar to NF. March is more similar to LRHS vs NF.
Both March and NF have great turrets, and have a high quality "feel" to them overall. The LRHS is near or at the same quality in my mind. For $1600 you would be hard pressed to find a better overall scope...
Thanks for the comparison from someone owning all of the above scopes. It helps put things in perspective for someone who doesn't have an opportunity to look at all these different glasses side by side.
