March scopes

[docmark]

Great high quality scope with no issues. I would recommend the 42 rather than 52 or 56

 

[Savage 22-243 AI]

I'm looking for some feedback from anyone who's spent some time behind march scopes
Particularly the 3-24×52, or 5-42×56.
I've heard mixed reviews about touchy eye box and parallax

I have a Sightron 10-40x60 and borrowed a March bench rest scope for a shoot. After a few days of using the March I had to toss my Sightron in the ditch. I only used the March 8-80x56 scope for a week but wow is all I could say. The guy I borrowed it from was 85 yrs old and explained to me that you start bench rest with a Sightron then when you get older you buy a Nightforce, then when its hard to see through it you buy a March Scope. I am 62 and had zero problems even at high magnification.

 

[8x68s]

Great high quality scope with no issues. I would recommend the 42 rather than 52 or 56

for what reasons? thanks!

 

[Wedgy]

for what reasons? thanks!

The 42mm get really dark as you get up into the 20x range but the 52mm will stay brighter in low light. I have several March scopes and am a big fan of them.

 

[8x68s]

The 42mm get really dark as you get up into the 20x range but the 52mm will stay brighter in low light. I have several March scopes and am a big fan of them.

thank you

 

[docmark]

Great question. I use a scope as an aiming device, not a viewing device. I use binoculars and spotting scope for viewing. I prefer the smaller diameter because it is less bulky and I assume weighs less. If for the bench either will work about equally. If lugging around a mountain or in a rifle scabbard smaller is better.

 

[8x68s]

Great question. I use a scope as an aiming device, not a viewing device. I use binoculars and spotting scope for viewing. I prefer the smaller diameter because it is less bulky and I assume weighs less. If for the bench either will work about equally. If lugging around a mountain or in a rifle scabbard smaller is better.

thank you, sir!

 

[338weatherby]

Does anyone know if the new 4.5-28x52 will be offered in MOA? I only see mils on the Longrange wedsite.

 

[Bruce Treloar]

Most of my benchrest buddies use them and claim they spoil you for other scopes. I don't want to look through one because I can't afford it and may never be satisfied with anything else.
Should I ever have the money for one then I'd be looking for a light 4 to 14 around 45 to 50 diam objective, even a lighter fixed 12X would do the job. This sitting on top of a chrome moly action in a 20 0z 45 to 55% carbon to resin ratio stock. That's what I call a top outfit. Please excuse the rave.

 

[shooters]

Does anyone know if the new 4.5-28x52 will be offered in MOA? I only see mils on the Longrange wedsite.

Exactly what I was hoping for as well!

 

[Send it 284]

They're only offered in mils for know.
I figured this is the push I need to finally switch over

 

[lancetkenyon]

I had a March F 3-24x52 for a while. I love the turrets, the zero stop is the easiest to set ever invented, cut glare better than most alpha scopes, lightweight, low profile, short length, tracked perfectly.
I didn't like the glass clarity for the price, the reticle is too thick, got dark above 20x, parallax was touchy.
Sold it and bought a Tangent Theta TT315M. I will take a 15x max mag and perfect everything else over the March's minor flaws and 24x.

The High Master glass is MUCH better than the older glass. I am actually thinking about the new 4.5-28x52 now....