March riflescopes

anyone have experience with these? i'm shopping scopes. noticed their line. I know they were once a benchrest fav

Tony has a Mil/Mil version and loves it.

Among better quality "tactical" scopes, March had the worst tracking.

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/08/13/tactical-scopes-mechanical-performance-part-1/

Buy a Hensoldt. I've looked through them and they are absolutely amazing.

Excellent mag to weight ratio

yes I like the weight, most of these scopes weigh more than the rifle

Yep it's pretty dumb how heavy some are. Really throws off the balance of some guns

$$$$$$$$

Just trying to help him out.

He is a man of simple tastes, only the finest.

I'm still getting by just fine with NXS's, but if I hit the Lotto, a Hensoldt is on the list to buy.

Buzz,

what will this scope be used for - hunting, target shooting?

hunting but I do like overkill

I've narrowed it down to another Swaro Z6, Leupold HD-6

Then I saw the March, 21-23 ounces

I know I would be good with "just" a scope

Stay away from Leupold.

The Nightforce NXS Compact 2.5-10x42 is working nicely for me on my lighter hunting rifles.

I had a NF 2.5-10 great scope, I have a swaro 3-10 on the rifle now, great scope but I want to do some astronomy while in my dear stand, MORE POWER for nature research.

What have is perfect for the rifle a Barrett Fieldcraft, 6.5 Creed, I just love magnification when I need it or want it.

OR, I may go to the Safari Club Convention and buy a Proof Research Summit

I'm just fickle and goofy

I do believe there was some discrepancies in the math there. The blog quoted overlooked that the particular model used was calibrated in NATO mils instead of true mils, which was what the test was based on. If you adjusted for the scale used, the March scope performed as well as other top scopes. The March scope was also a bit of an outlier for the comparison; most of the scopes that were being compared had 50mm or 56mm objectives.

I have never owned one, but they have an excellent reputation. If you're hung up on glass, they are supposed to have great quality glass. And if you ever start twisting turrets, it would be a better choice than a Leupold or Swaro/Zeiss in similar price range. Great choice if you ask me.

We tested a 3-25, I wasn't that impressed with the glass and the parallax setting was extremely finicky, constantly having to tweak it.. With their benchrest background and shooting at static, known distances I can see it working for that environment.

I have a FFP MIL/MIL 5-40X56. It's an outstanding scope. I'm not sure where I heard about them first but Tony helped me with the decision. He let me look through his when I took everything to him to build my 6.5Creedmoor. For the money it was the best at the time.

great scopes no problem with the ones I have

I owned a March F 3-24x52 for a while. Good scope that always tracked Well for me. Glass was clear, somewhere between my Leupold vx-6 and Swarovski X5i. The reason I got rid of the scope was the FML-1 reticle was almost unusable under 12 power. It was difficult to make out the dot in on any kind of dark target and the hash marks disappeared which may be different on the illumination model. The parallax was a little touchy and I found I had to adjust it on hunting trips when I needed to shoot.

I bought another Swarovski at the safari Club Show, to good of luck with the others I've owned, lightweight. perfect for my application.

Thanks for all the comments.