March scopes - Your field experiences please

https://Immersive-optics.com/
C

Cottis

Well-Known Member
I am moving towards using a certain rifle as more of an all rounder, so am thinking about changing an existing scope which I love but the weight saving on some of the March offerings are attractive. Saving the thick end of 400gram and reducing overall dimensions when moving on foot is desirable but generally speaking you have to sacrifice one or the other when considering bullet proof construction, excellent mechanics, top optical ability etc etc.

I have never used a March scope but they seem to be getting more of a following and review very well. I really like the look of the SFP and FFP offering in the 3-24/2.5-25 x 42 guise. Even the 52mm obj lens units are under 700grams.

Is it too good to be true? I have always liked good quality Japanese optics and especially with modern ED glass being so good these days.

Has anyone first hand experience of these scopes over a period of time that could provide realistic feedback on performance. Feel free to PM if you would rather not post publicly.

Cheers
 
It just so happens I have made the swap to a March from a Schmidt and Bender PM11 5-20X50 ultrashort.

It took some serious consideration considering the quality of the Schmidt. I have used PM11’s for several years now both in competition and stalking. They have never been let down.

However I have bought a light rifle and the solid lump in a small package just wasn’t fitting. It made the rifle top heavy and to my mind I just wasn’t 100% happy.

I was lucky to be loaned a 2.5-25X42 March. Instantly the rifle handled better. However the eye box was tight and unless i was going prone on a bipod my head took a moment or two to find the perfect sight picture. Not something I wanted when stalking. It was also focus fussy requiring more input with the parallax than just about every scope I have used. I wasn’t worried about the small objective for light transmission, yes it gets dark above X15 mag when it’s not being used in the day. But I don’t stalk above X15 and the glass is excellent.

I had really wanted the 42 objective to tick all the boxes but the tight eye box was a niggle at the back of my mind that was holding me back. As it is my friend also has the X52 objective scope on one of his other rifles and assured me the issue had was a not suffered in the larger scope.

I am now the owner of a March 3-24X52 FFP with illuminated reticle. It’s still 300g lighter than the PM11 setup I had. It is less than 10mm longer and the reticle is absolutely spot on for stalking. If a little thick for printing bug holes.

The turrets offer a solid feel and are not mushy. They are well separated so over travel isn’t an issue that it can be with some scopes that try and get as many mils into a single rotation as possible. The zero stop is easily set with no need to use tiny Allen keys.

The glass is every bit as good as my Zeiss V8 2.8-20X56.

Of course all this is subjective and only you can make the decision.
 
I have both a 2.5-25x42 SFP and a 3-24x42 FFP.
The glass is absolutely on par with Zeiss and the mechanical qualities are even better.
It is no wonder that the eyebox is very limited - high mag and a small objective are the key words here. But on low mag I didn't have any issues with that.

I sold the SFP model when the FFP came out. I have a natural dislike for SFP for the potential shift of POI. However I have never experienced it with this scope.
The FFP model I had then had a veeery fine reticle (I wanted it this way). But this was a limiting factor in its stalking qualities as it wasn't illuminated. It also didn't have capped turrets like the SFP model did. I only used on the range.
 
Thanks for those balanced words guys. Funnily enough, the Zeiss 2-20x56 was a consideration but weight and turret size and operation put me off, as well as yet another weird sized tube.

Good to hear optical quality will not be an issue.

Got me a decision to make.
 
I've used march scopes for quite a few years now in various aspects, and can't see by them...
If you have a problem, or just want it serviced for what ever reason, it's foc.
The turrets just plain work...
If you get the chance to buy, you won't be disappointed!
 
scotch_egg said:
It just so happens I have made the swap to a March from a Schmidt and Bender PM11 5-20X50 ultrashort.

It took some serious consideration considering the quality of the Schmidt. I have used PM11’s for several years now both in competition and stalking. They have never been let down.

However I have bought a light rifle and the solid lump in a small package just wasn’t fitting. It made the rifle top heavy and to my mind I just wasn’t 100% happy.

I was lucky to be loaned a 2.5-25X42 March. Instantly the rifle handled better. However the eye box was tight and unless i was going prone on a bipod my head took a moment or two to find the perfect sight picture. Not something I wanted when stalking. It was also focus fussy requiring more input with the parallax than just about every scope I have used. I wasn’t worried about the small objective for light transmission, yes it gets dark above X15 mag when it’s not being used in the day. But I don’t stalk above X15 and the glass is excellent.

I had really wanted the 42 objective to tick all the boxes but the tight eye box was a niggle at the back of my mind that was holding me back. As it is my friend also has the X52 objective scope on one of his other rifles and assured me the issue had was a not suffered in the larger scope.

I am now the owner of a March 3-24X52 FFP with illuminated reticle. It’s still 300g lighter than the PM11 setup I had. It is less than 10mm longer and the reticle is absolutely spot on for stalking. If a little thick for printing bug holes.

The turrets offer a solid feel and are not mushy. They are well separated so over travel isn’t an issue that it can be with some scopes that try and get as many mils into a single rotation as possible. The zero stop is easily set with no need to use tiny Allen keys.

The glass is every bit as good as my Zeiss V8 2.8-20X56.

Of course all this is subjective and only you can make the decision.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same mind. Replace my Kahles 624i for March 3-24X52 FFP.
What Ret have you got?
I'm thinking FML1 best of both worlds.
 
trucraft said:
I'm in the same mind. Replace my Kahles 624i for March 3-24X52 FFP.
What Ret have you got?
I'm thinking FML1 best of both worlds.
Click to expand...

I have got the FML-1.

The reticle at X3 mag when illuminated is very visible. My Schmidt ultrashort had .05 centre dot and lines. Even at X5 mag the reticle was hard to see in low light.

The March is definitely the best of both worlds.
 
I bought mine from March UK in Sussex 2 years ago. It's the 3-24x42 FFP with illuminated FML1 reticle. I use it on a .308 Sako 85 for stalking (mainly hill) and for use on the range. The OP asked if it was all too good to be true; not really considering the price, they're not cheap. Personally I prefer Zeiss glass but it does perform very well as a relatively light and robust all-rounder. I don't use it much below a magnification of 8x, perhaps it would have been better if it was a 6-24 x 42, could have had a slightly thicker reticle at the lower end. So as far as practical use goes, at a magnification of 8x, absolutely fine for stalking, no eye-box issues that I've noticed. Not at its best above 20x but perfectly useable. I don't think there's anything else on the market like it.
CH
 
Last edited:
Klenchblaize said:
Can the March glass really be in the same league as Kahles, Zeiss or S &B?

K
Click to expand...

I was very sceptical before committing to a March. Like I said I have still got a Zeiss V8 2.8-20X56, a Schmidt PM11 3-20X50 and a Schmidt ultra short PM11 5-20X50. Suffice to say the March is up to the job. My stalking is mainly thick woodland that isn’t managed. It gets very dark under the canopy. I was struggling to see the reticle on the Schmidt’s where I have no issue with the March and I certainly don’t think I have to take an early bath when it comes to the twilight factor.

This is all subjective. Only you can decide if the glass works for you. They all have different coatings and give a different image.
 
Everyone I know who uses them are very happy with their performance, only comment is that they need setting up properly, very fussy eye relief.
 
I have got a 3-24X52 March alongside 3 Schmidt PM11’s 4-16, 3-20 and a 5-20 ultra short also a Zeiss 2.8-20X56 V8. I sold the 1.8-14 v8’s

The March is my current favourite purely because it is so light weight.

For circa £350 I should pick up a Pard 007 to try.

But the 008 lrf seems to be a game changer for £800 ish. With quality mounts I can take any of my scopes off and on without loss of zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

meopta R5 scopes
Replies
8
Views
1K
Hunter 6.5
H
Have any of you swapped your German scope for Day/Night scopes? (HIK Micro Alpex)
2 3
Replies
58
Views
5K
Steff
Steff
Sold: Element Nexus 5-20x50 FFP 30mm Mrad
Replies
0
Views
131
Macloaded
Macloaded
Sold: March 10-60x52 Riflescope
Replies
0
Views
242
0284
0
MRAD, MOA, Ballistic turrets and BDCs!
Replies
9
Views
959
Stalker-of-the-deer
S
BRACES of Bristol - Sauer 100 XTA Stainless Package
Back
Top