March scopes for EDgun ????
Hi all,
I want new scopes, and I’m looking at the March range……
Especially the 3-24×42 which seems light weight but yet with some fantastic reviews…..
Anybody tried those ????
Cheers
Trygve 😀
All Replies
I want new scopes, and I’m looking at the March range……
Especially the 3-24×42 which seems light weight but yet with some fantastic reviews…..
Anybody tried those ????
Cheers
Trygve 😀
I’m sorry, Z, but I’d like to return the posting back to what you asked about originally, away from the discussion about what you should buy instead, and about US States with stores in which you can compare optics—a subject that you’re probably now resenting because now you’re dreaming about the possibility of it as a great location to add another vacation home instead of spending on a March scope. 🙂
I’ve been researching them for the past year. You can’t go wrong, I think. Glass with the best of them. Parallax focus down to 10 yds. And since they are special order, you can get any reticule you want; you are paying the bill, after all.
The uniqueness of the March scopes is the 8x and 10x zoom capabilities that conventional highest-end, 3x or 4x zoom scopes can’t offer. That’s what I would guess to be their unique attraction; plus the fact that, with all those lenses, it’s offered up in what you wouldn’t intuit as coming in a light-weight package.
No one here may be rushing over to March, but a lot of centerfire benchrest shooters are switching over to it. Here’s a group talking about the internals and mentioning that March uses the purest kind of glass there is before doing the shaping and polishing: http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?85151-Internal-organs-of-a-March-scope . In other words, March glass is not in question or doubt. Repeatability is guaranteed. It’s just seems to be a precision-made scope; just that not everyone wants to afford it. But it seems that you will get what you pay for– quality and uniqueness.
When you do contact the makers to give the specs that you’ll want– reticule, i.e.– you may want to ask them if the double, quadruple? (I’m not sure) number of lenses in the scope compared to the regular scopes changes the scale you would use on a sidefocus wheel. In most sidefocus scopes, I imagine, parallax focus, at say 10 yds or 40 yds, (i.e., at 4x and say 12x magnification) will pretty much be at the same yardage markers of the label on your sidewheel (except for those occasional surgically minute fine-tunings done when you change the magnification while keeping the target distance the same). The point is you can pretty much use the same scale on your sidewheel label for all the magnification powers, that is, for parallax adjustment based on the number of lenses in conventional scopes.
I think that the more lenses– or zoom range– in a scope, the more the yardage scale on your sidewheel– from nearest yardage, through middle range, to infinity– will necessitate a shift along the wheel circumference. It’s a characteristic, I think, may exist in these high-zoom scopes because of the higher number of lenses and light travel and refraction and what-not. If that does turn out to be the case, the sidewheel yardage label will probably necessitate a label for each magnification power, especially if it concerns a doubling of the magnification; especially for use with the shorter 125-yd and under range at where most PCP airguns are used. Again, I’m not guessing at a flaw, I’m guessing at a possible characteristic of a shifting yardage scale in high-zoom scopes, that long-range center-fire benchresters shooting out to 600 and 1000 yds wouldn’t notice because the infinity setting would pretty much be the same for all magnification settings since they would tend to shoot at five and ten times the distance of airgunners..
This is all a guess on my part. But I imagine myself asking about March parallax focuse of engineer/assembler during the process of ordering the specs for a March.
I’ve researched the March reviews, and no one mentions this as a behavior in their scopes. So I’m curious. And maybe it would be something you would be interested in knowing about high-zoom scopes. Has this idea occurred to anyone else, maybe?
I’m also thinking that the Chairgun mildot tables wouldn’t match up with the real-world mildot numbers when sighting with a many-lensed scope like the March; that would be a needed upgrade in Chairgun. All of this may be unfounded. But I’ve been looking for the needed unfounding facts and haven’t been able to get an answer.
By the way, Z, don’t hesitate if you want one. March scopes may be the Edguns of the scope world, and the other high-end available 3x and 4x scopes the FX guns of the same scope world that just haven’t caught on yet at what’s happening in the scope world and airgun world of bullpups respectively (the Swedes have said that they’ll never produce a bullpup?— I’m excusing myself for saying this—But what a reaction to change and advancement).
When you get your head back out perhaps you can explain to me and the rest of us US citizens who are fortunate enough to test scopes at our local stores why anyone on GOD’s green earth would need a long range scope like a March on an air rifle that can only shoot out to 100 yards/meters or so?
I understand we don’t need one and I can afford one but for what reason would I or anyone want one on an air rifle? Is it bragging rights?
Perhaps I should look into the March 8-80×56. I mean if you’re going to go for it, go all the way.
I believe you would need to know if the reticle uses true MILS(6283 milliradians/360degrees), US MILS(6400/360), RUSSIAN MILS(6000/360) or something else.
I’m fairly certain that Chairgun defaults to true MILS.
If there is any difference it can be corrected using the software and firing a few MIL holdover shots then taking a measurement to reset the DotSep to match your observed results.
I want new scopes, and I’m looking at the March range……
Especially the 3-24×42 which seems light weight but yet with some fantastic reviews…..
Anybody tried those ????
Cheers
Trygve 😀
I’m sorry, Z, but I’d like to return the posting back to what you asked about originally, away from the discussion about what you should buy instead, and about US States with stores in which you can compare optics—a subject that you’re probably now resenting because now you’re dreaming about the possibility of it as a great location to add another vacation home instead of spending on a March scope. 🙂
I’ve been researching them for the past year. You can’t go wrong, I think. Glass with the best of them. Parallax focus down to 10 yds. And since they are special order, you can get any reticule you want; you are paying the bill, after all.
The uniqueness of the March scopes is the 8x and 10x zoom capabilities that conventional highest-end, 3x or 4x zoom scopes can’t offer. That’s what I would guess to be their unique attraction; plus the fact that, with all those lenses, it’s offered up in what you wouldn’t intuit as coming in a light-weight package.
No one here may be rushing over to March, but a lot of centerfire benchrest shooters are switching over to it. Here’s a group talking about the internals and mentioning that March uses the purest kind of glass there is before doing the shaping and polishing: http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?85151-Internal-organs-of-a-March-scope . In other words, March glass is not in question or doubt. Repeatability is guaranteed. It’s just seems to be a precision-made scope; just that not everyone wants to afford it. But it seems that you will get what you pay for– quality and uniqueness.
When you do contact the makers to give the specs that you’ll want– reticule, i.e.– you may want to ask them if the double, quadruple? (I’m not sure) number of lenses in the scope compared to the regular scopes changes the scale you would use on a sidefocus wheel. In most sidefocus scopes, I imagine, parallax focus, at say 10 yds or 40 yds, (i.e., at 4x and say 12x magnification) will pretty much be at the same yardage markers of the label on your sidewheel (except for those occasional surgically minute fine-tunings done when you change the magnification while keeping the target distance the same). The point is you can pretty much use the same scale on your sidewheel label for all the magnification powers, that is, for parallax adjustment based on the number of lenses in conventional scopes.
I think that the more lenses– or zoom range– in a scope, the more the yardage scale on your sidewheel– from nearest yardage, through middle range, to infinity– will necessitate a shift along the wheel circumference. It’s a characteristic, I think, may exist in these high-zoom scopes because of the higher number of lenses and light travel and refraction and what-not. If that does turn out to be the case, the sidewheel yardage label will probably necessitate a label for each magnification power, especially if it concerns a doubling of the magnification; especially for use with the shorter 125-yd and under range at where most PCP airguns are used. Again, I’m not guessing at a flaw, I’m guessing at a possible characteristic of a shifting yardage scale in high-zoom scopes, that long-range center-fire benchresters shooting out to 600 and 1000 yds wouldn’t notice because the infinity setting would pretty much be the same for all magnification settings since they would tend to shoot at five and ten times the distance of airgunners..
This is all a guess on my part. But I imagine myself asking about March parallax focuse of engineer/assembler during the process of ordering the specs for a March.
I’ve researched the March reviews, and no one mentions this as a behavior in their scopes. So I’m curious. And maybe it would be something you would be interested in knowing about high-zoom scopes. Has this idea occurred to anyone else, maybe?
I’m also thinking that the Chairgun mildot tables wouldn’t match up with the real-world mildot numbers when sighting with a many-lensed scope like the March; that would be a needed upgrade in Chairgun. All of this may be unfounded. But I’ve been looking for the needed unfounding facts and haven’t been able to get an answer.
By the way, Z, don’t hesitate if you want one. March scopes may be the Edguns of the scope world, and the other high-end available 3x and 4x scopes the FX guns of the same scope world that just haven’t caught on yet at what’s happening in the scope world and airgun world of bullpups respectively (the Swedes have said that they’ll never produce a bullpup?— I’m excusing myself for saying this—But what a reaction to change and advancement).
Not to mention that this “feature” is very subjective from eye to eye and doesn’t increase dramatically once you get past a certain price range.
The other question you might want to look into is how is their customer service?
I don’t know where your from, but here in Texas, things may be a little different. And you are not going to find the variety any where else that you will at a good Optic counter. Without the various brands side by side, it is impossible to compare them.
Our large gun shows are at times. hundreds of yards across. Even the small shows are right a 100 or more. The ceilings are HIGH. with Mercury lighting hanging from them. Usually hanging quite a ways down from the ceilings which are usually either painted flat black, or are sprayed insulation, with a lot of texture. Poor optics cannot see past the lights when sighted right by them, much less resolve the texture of the ceiling. Good optics can make them out. Great optics, will reveal the texture, and shade. A much tougher test than the gun range!
Some of our Gun Stores here have optic rooms set up. They have hunting Muriel’s painted on a wall, with fully adjustable lighting. Both from fully dark, to very bright, and anything in between. Along with adjustable reds, greens, blue lighting with the white light. A combination, or all can be used.
Other stores have resolution charts on the wall, high, and in a darked ed area. At a fairly long range. Still others, have full, mounted animal displays set up in natural surroundings just for checking the optics they sell. So yes, you can test at a store, or show.
In small stores, that do not have these things, I go early, and either give the counter person my Driver lick. and take scopes outside to check, or request a counter person accompany me. (Gives me someone to hold several different scopes). 😆 😉
And finally, you have to know what to look for and how, and when. In other words, you have to know at a little about what you are doing. (And dont check the scopes at factory settings), They are set to look good in a typical department type store. Use the AO, focus, and power settings. And NO, the AO is not the Focus. 😉
Texas tends to be a bit friendlier than many of our neighbors to the north west, and the store managers are more than happy for their employees to do this for you. Hunting is “BIG” Business in Texas! 😉
I’ve only owned one Khales, It was on my custom .257 Weatherby. It walked out of my home, along with my other weatherby’s, and Colt Python collection one day while I was at work. Never saw them again.
I hate a damed thief! 👿 The other weatherby’s had Zeiss and Swarovski scopes on them. The one Air Gun they stole had the typical POS Lupy vari X-II on it. Loved the gun. Scope-not so much.
The Khales was a 8×56 heavy post model designed for hunting Black Russian boar at night, in the pale moon light. 😆
Man was that scope bright! It was stolen in 1992, and I miss that Scope too this day! 😥
I bought it at a gun show in Austin Texas, used, and they had no Idea what in the hell they had. 😈 Soooo I bitched about the fact that it was not a variable, 🙄 and they sold it to me for $125.00 😆 😀
KnifeMaker
Not to mention that this “feature” is very subjective from eye to eye and doesn’t increase dramatically once you get past a certain price range.
The other question you might want to look into is how is their customer service?
The service & warranty issue is a valid point.
Because of some Japanese law March can only offer a 5 year warranty on paper– but according to their distributors if you have a problem with the scope at any time send it back and you’ll be taken care of without hassle.
Here in the US the March importer/distributor is Kelbly’s and they’re good to work with. I’ve also heard good things about their Australian importer/distributor. Not sure how the situation is over in Europe.
100% agreed on shows & convention center lighting– it’s a very poor environment to evaluate a scope’s optical performance but you can still do rough comparisons.
As far as glass quality, a big part of it is subjective; what some people see others don’t. Some scopes will give certain people headaches or eyestrain and others won’t. Much like anything else there is a price point where diminishing returns take over. Below that price point you pay a little more for much better performance and above that price point you can pay lots more for just slightly better performance. Right about $2000-2500 is where my personal “diminishing returns” point is when it comes to scopes; $2000 buys some very nice scopes and beyond that price you’re paying much larger amounts of money for smaller performance gains. Still worth it in some situations though… otherwise I wouldn’t have 3 S&B 5-25s on my 3 favorite rifles and I also wouldn’t be considering trying a Kahles 624i. I recently spent some time behind one and the Kahles is really, really nice!
Shows and stores are great places to see scopes to understand and compare all qualities except comparing image quality.
Not to mention that this “feature” is very subjective from eye to eye and doesn’t increase dramatically once you get past a certain price range.
The other question you might want to look into is how is their customer service?
And tube dia. has absolutely NOTHING to do with light gathering, (Brightness), unless your are comparing toilet paper rolls. In scopes, it is a function of Objective dia. Quality, of glass, coatings. erector design, and the size of the exit pupil is the function of the ocular eye piece. Yes, I know scope charts show exit pupil as twilight factor. That is so outdated, it is laughable. It is only the diameter of the exit pupil. And still, this is the function of the ocular lens and design.
A bit reason why most low cost bino’s have tiny ocular lens, and most high quality binos have very large ocular lens. Same with scopes.
KnifeMaker
KnifeMaker
As we where in FB… you deserve one for these post
¨I Like¨
😆 😆 😆
Mac
Have to agree with Machine Gun, I have a lot to say but dont fancy typing it right now (bad head, Guiness created 😳 )
This is quite topical for me as for some months I have been researching scopes with a view to buying a new “top of range” one for a new gun I am having built – but the scope I got would sit perfectly on my R3 (maybe thats where it will end up ❓ )
Two weeks ago I went to the British Shooting show (biggest public show in Europe) to look at all the scopes on show, have to say on paper March were top choice for me
Looked through and twiddled with Sightron, Zeiss, Swaro, Khales, Vector, S&B, lots more……everyone was there
The March scopes were just outstanding for me when sat next to all of these, I am no expert and all this talk of “glass” i cannot see much difference between the top end ones but March are simply as good optically but tiny, lighter, mechanically beautiful and I did get a show discount and a set of free Third Eye Tactical rings
For me the most suitable scope (mainly for HFT a slight compromise) was the 2.5-25 MIL version (the 1-10 is perfect for HFT but I needed some versatility) have to agree though for hunting with an airgun I can see no better scope than the 3-24FFP MIL version
The most shocking for me were the S&B PMII, you could fit a comparable March inside the parallel section of the darn things, they are HUGE 😯 😯 😯
Cannot wait for new gun its a hand built ISP Airstream, with bead blasted Titanium outside, grey anodised parts sitting in a Gary Cane laminated HFT stock 😎 😎 😎
For those that do not know, the Hensoldt is the professional line of Zeiss. IMO, there is not a better scope on the planet! Khales is owned by Swarovski.
And tube dia. has absolutely NOTHING to do with light gathering, (Brightness), unless your are comparing toilet paper rolls. In scopes, it is a function of Objective dia. Quality, of glass, coatings. erector design, and the size of the exit pupil is the function of the ocular eye piece. Yes, I know scope charts show exit pupil as twilight factor. That is so outdated, it is laughable. It is only the diameter of the exit pupil. And still, this is the function of the ocular lens and design. And has absolutely nothing to do with how much light is getting to your eye. Only the Dia. of the circle of light you are seeing. It does however, all things being equal, make getting on target quickly a bit easier.
A big reason why most low cost bino’s have tiny ocular lens, and most high quality binos have very large ocular lens. Same with scopes.
KnifeMaker
KnifeMaker
I want new scopes, and I’m looking at the March range……
Especially the 3-24×42 which seems light weight but yet with some fantastic reviews…..
Anybody tried those ????
Cheers
Trygve 😀
Yes Zoco, i try one of these last week, on a Steyr Scout .308 Superb scope, Moa turret, geat click repetition, but FOR ME, at 24x it have a small field of view.
I´m happy with my Sightron SIII and Hawke by now.
Seeyou
(as allways sorry for my spelling) 😉
Mac
edit: Did some “light” reading… 😆 and it is claimed it doesn’t gather or transmit more light but it does allow for a larger exit pupil size, which means you are looking at a larger reproduction of the image that is being gathered through the objective lens. While it may not be “brighter” i’d argue that because of the larger image at your eye you have more resolution and therefore a benefit over the smaller tube diameters.
Interesting stuff. Thanks for bringing it up Kiba!
I knew you were being a little sarcastic on your ring comment– hence why I put the little razz face. 🙂 I know where you’re coming from having recently picked up 5 Spuhr mounts to go along with new glass on my favorite powder burners– I wish the mounts were included with the price of the scopes… 😯
The design of the ocular housing and lenses also has a lot to do with how “friendly” an eyebox is. Some of the really high end scopes often use 40mm or larger lenses on the ocular! That’s as big as many lesser scopes objective lenses. The eyebox of say a Hensoldt 4-16, 6-24 or Kahles 624i really needs to be used to be believed as they have such a huge sweet spot. The eyebox on my S&B 5-25s are pretty darn good but not in the same league as the previously mentioned Hensoldt or Kahles.
I keep looking for a “step up” in the optics department over the Bushnell 3-12 x 44 FFP G2DMR on my R3; I’d like to find something in in the 16-25x max magnification range but finding an ffp/mil/mil scope in that power range with true 10Y parallax capability is difficult. There are plenty of options out there that meet most of that criteria until you start looking for 10Y parallax capability. If I didn’t have to occasionally shoot a rat or squirrel at around 10Y (and want my image to be perfectly clear and parallax free while doing so) it would be a lot easier to find a scope! About the only scopes that are mil/mil/FFP in that power range with 10Y parallax capability are the S&B 5-25 and the March 3-24. The S&B is nice but big and heavy on an air rifle (tried it on my R3 anyways for a day) and the March is much more the size & weight I’m looking for but I’d really like to see some other reticle options.
Trijicon 5-20 is a nice scope at 1/2 the price. center mildot also glows .
i currently have one on my cricket, glass is excellent, leupold quality.
i think it a little overkill for an airgun ,but its alot clearer than a hawke
especially at great distances, the parralex starts at 40 to infinity but you can take 10 yard shot with it no prob the glass is still clear. but hey if youve got that kind of cake for a scope why not go for it 😉
With all other things being equal, 30mm vs. 1″ tube diameter has no bearing on amount of light transmission. Clarity is a completely different subject all together.
I’ve never personally seen a March scope so have no input there.
If the Leupold Mark 6 3-18×44 wasn’t so tactical reticle wise I would recommend it.
Except that the 35mm rings are a bit pricey.
I’d like to get a Sightron 10-50x with the 1/4″ moa clicks for field target, it’s the “poor man’s” March. 😆 For $1300. 😯
I like the idea of the bigger tube diameter, more light is always better for clarity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
100 yards?!?!
I know MANY people who use the March 80x scopes for field target and that is only to 55 yards…
My scope was $1000 and it is on a $2500 rifle. I have a rule though (simply because I am not made of money) scope should be 1/2 or less of the rifle price.
I have my eye on a $1300 scope, which is really nice but when you zoom in to 50x is when you see why the high high end scope are priced they way they are.
Oh and 80x is like nothing you have ever seen. The one issue is it can be difficult to find the target if you are zoomed all the way in. 😉