Time to buy. High(ish) dollar scopes?

[340PR]

But it's a picture, through a scope, it must be taken with a grain of salt. It adds the interaction of the camera which is not an eyeball by any means. I shoot similar range and have never seen something as bad as that kahles picture looks. It looks to me like the camera is aligned too far bottom left as well from the shading on the top right.

As I said, I have looked through several of the kahles, Various NF HD but I am not a fan of their reticles, Steiner, only one but it broke, twice, zeiss, swaro, which are both awesome but not what I want for a tactical scope, razor, which I have seen 4 go bad, mid match. Also a Minox but I am not sure what model. The glass was great but the standout to me has been the kahles.

Edit: smaller fields of view? I shoot a swfa 3-15x42 out to 1500 yards and very rarely wish I had more magnification. I wish I had a thinner reticle, but magnification has never been an issue. I am never going to run it at 25x, hence the ffp. Chances are it will live around 18x, occasionally get a little bigger on tough targets from stable positions.

Take a look at the NF 5-25x56 F-1. great glass, excellent in low light and illuminated. ATACR reticle simple but functional. A close second for me, is the new Trijicon 4.5-30x56 F-1 almost as good as the NF, and about 1/2 the cost..

 

[Schnyd112]

I hear you on upgrading optics. My best scope currently is a Bushnell ERS 3.5 - 21 x 50 with an H59 reticle on my Ruger Precision Rifle. Very good but a "tier 2" scope compared to say an S&B.

But I'm going one step higher for my 6.5 CM Browning X-Bolt Pro mountain rifle with a MARCH 3 - 24 x 42 FFP, mil/mil W/illuminated reticle. Spendy but perfect for this rifle. Short, light, high quality and top line ED glass.

You may want to look closely at Meopta for high quality but very reasonable prices.

Eric B.

This is the March I have looked at, online, but never seen in person. Do you have it yet? Or have you used it? Hell, Are you west of the Rockies? I may have to host you and your optics for a weekend.

 

[lancetkenyon]

I have, or have had, or have shot behind almost all of the top tier glass.

I love my Kahles K624i Gen 3. It is my go-to scope for load development. It has been on probably 30 different rifles, over thousands of rounds. Always returns exactly to zero on the rifle it lives on.

Is it as good as a S&B, Premier, or Tangent Theta? Not quite, maybe 95%. But is it as good as a NF or USO? Yep. Is it better than almost all other scopes? In my opinion, yes. I would not hesitate to buy another one. And I have two S&B, two Premier, two TT, and a March to compliment the stable and compare. I have stepped up from other scopes, like SWFA HD, Steiner T5Xi (mine was not so good at all), Vortex Razor Gen I, Vortex Razor Gen II, Vortex AMG, Zeiss, Leupold, etc.

 

[lancetkenyon]

This is the March I have looked at, online, but never seen in person. Do you have it yet? Or have you used it? Hell, Are you west of the Rockies? I may have to host you and your optics for a weekend.

You would not be sorry with a March. I have the 3-24×52 FML-1 on a lighter weight hunting rifle. Perfect choice for that route.

 

[the hunter]

I have, or have had, or have shot behind almost all of the top tier glass.

I love my Kahles K624i Gen 3. It is my go-to scope for load development. It has been on probably 30 different rifles, over thousands of rounds. Always returns exactly to zero on the rifle it lives on.

Is it as good as a S&B, Premier, or Tangent Theta? Not quite, maybe 95%. But is it as good as a NF or USO? Yep. Is it better than almost all other scopes? In my opinion, yes. I would not hesitate to buy another one. And I have two S&B, two Premier, two TT, and a March to compliment the stable and compare. I have stepped up from other scopes, like SWFA HD, Steiner T5Xi (mine was not so good at all), Vortex Razor Gen I, Vortex Razor Gen II, Vortex AMG, Zeiss, Leupold, etc.

What is your job, I would like it so I could git all of that stuff to

 

[Danehunter]

Lance,
Thanks for the endorsement. Two guys in my gun club use the big MARCH scopes on there F Class rifles. One said he feels the glass is so good that he can read mirage better and here in Nevada's hot summer mornings that is important.

So I guess the MARCH scopes are well worth the money. My problem is that I have to wait until I can save more money for a 3 - 24 x 42 MARCH for my new Browning X-bolt Pro in 6.5 CM. "The Boss" wants to travel this summer which will slow my savings plan but hopefully I can get one by August 2019.

Eric B.

 

[xsn10s]

I've heard good things about IOR Recon Tactical.

 

[lancetkenyon]

Lance,
Thanks for the endorsement. Two guys in my gun club use the big MARCH scopes on there F Class rifles. One said he feels the glass is so good that he can read mirage better and here in Nevada's hot summer mornings that is important.

So I guess the MARCH scopes are well worth the money.

Eric B.

I hunt AZ and NM. From 110° to sub-0°. While I have only had the March for less than 6 months, I have used other top tier scopes in just about every condition barring arctic type hunts. I think the March glass is compatible to NF ATACR F1 glass. Not quite there with Premier, S&B & Tangent Theta, but well worth the asking price for some of the other features you get. Light weight, shorter length, and low profile turrets, illuminated reticle, and actually, probably the best glass at cutting glare when shooting into the sun.

 

[Danehunter]

SECOND THOUGHTS ABOUT MARCH SCOPES

After looking at The Precision Rifle Blog's test of scopes I found the MARCH 3 - 24 x 42 scope near the bottom of the list for optical quality and AT the bottom of the list for turret adjustment quality. The PRB test results are a bummer after getting my hopes up for this particular scope. But I know Cal's tests are nothing if not totally reliable.

So I really wonder if a Bushnell Elite LRHS 4.5 - 18 x 44 illuminated would not be a much better buy in terms of quality as well as price.

Eric B.

 

[lancetkenyon]

That test was performed BEFORE March switched from 1:6400 to the common MIL of 1:6283 that everyone else uses. So tracking was not "off", just that it was different than other "MIL" scope's actual adjustment.

 

[gohring3006]

This weekend is a good weekend.
So is right before SHOT or shortly after.

 

[KyCarl]

Everyone has been blowing up my inbox with Black Friday deals!
This might be a good time to be looking?

 

[Danehunter]

Lance,

Either I missed that comment on PRB or Cal should have mentioned it more prominently in the graph. If true then what about the PRB optical assessment? I'm just taken aback at his report on MARCH optical quality. Everyone else says it is very good to excellent.

Eric B.

 

[lancetkenyon]

It is pretty well known that March used to use the 1:6400 until a few years ago. They have corrected that.

Snipershide review. MIL value talk around the 3:00 to 7:45 mark.



Like I said, glass is not as good as a S&B, Premier, Tangent. But optical clarity is subjective. I think it is just as good as all NF NXS I have looked through. And I have shot behind 8-10 or so. Better than Razor Gen I, on par with or better than my Razor Gen II and Razor AMG.

Here is a few benefits over the top 2 Vortex Razors...half the weight of a Gen II, and half the lowest mag range of the AMG.

Watch this review.