March durability? Zero retention? How bad is that eyebox?

[Dos XX]

Yes, the reticle is the one I wanted. The CS lady said if I wanted to keep this one they would have to charge me for the extra since it's like $240 more. I hung up the phone.

I'll hold onto it for a few days and decide what I'm going to do. I've been playing with it for the last hour. Feels solid. You can tell the quality is top notch. The power ring is pretty stiff tho, hope it loosens up some. I don't mind the eye box or the parallax being a bit picky, the issue I'm having is I cant get the reticle clear with the ocular focus. I have it turned all the way in to get it almost right, but I can't go anymore and it's still not perfectly crisp. I can see a line double to the reticle that comes and goes (especially with illumination on) and the little hash marks on the vertical wire appear to bend downward. For this alone, it may have to go back. Anyone else have focus issues?

I think you might have something ginked up. I have 2 March High Master 10-50's on competition rifles. One thing I have noticed about those scopes is that when I get the reticle focused, it seems to jump out at me, almost like 3D or something. One of the things I really like about them.

 

[SDHNTR]

I keep trying. I just cant get the reticle right no matter how I play with the settings. So disappointing as I really wanted this scope to work. It just wont focus for me. I sent March an email. Do they have a US based customer service? The only phone number is Japan, with an inconvenient time difference and I really don't want to fight through a language barrier. So frustrating after spending this kind of money and having high hopes.

 

[aman]

Why not send it back to OpticsPlanet? They did send you the wrong item after all.

 

[SDHNTR]

Why not send it back to OpticsPlanet? They did send you the wrong item after all.

Because Ideally, I'd like to keep it if I can get it to work for me. Am I doing something wrong with the focus settings? I don't have this problem with my other scopes. If I cant get it worked out, it will be going back.

 

[BBob]

On FFP scopes and certainly the March, parallax and reticle focus (diopter) do interact. How exactly are you doing this? Are you hand holding the scope? What distance is the parallax set for? What magnification are you trying?

Rifle Scopes - Setting up a FFP rifle scope - A simple PSA on Diopters

bohemr13 X96 MONTHS Premium Member First Sergeant Rating: 3.6/5 this site 7824 posts this site Setting up a FFP rifle scope - A simple PSA on Diopters 03/02/2015 Last edited 03/03/2015 by bohemr13 (9 votes) I recently had a somewhat disgruntled customer return a scope because he complained of...

www.snipershide.com

First and foremost: If you have a First Focal Plane scope, it's less forgiving than a Second Focal Plane scope. Failure to follow through on details will yield issues.

Try this if you're having issues or if you've never setup the diopter and parallax before. I had to figure this out the hard way. I've never seen it clearly spelled in a scope manual that worked. Here's how I do it and the process works.

1) Set to Max Power
2) Parallax set to Infinity (this is very important)
3) Point it at a solid, light background like a white wall or blue sky. You don't want anything except a solid, light color to look at.
4) Start from the diopter all the way into the occular and rotate out.

Don't stare into the optic, open and close your eye as you adjust such that you have no more than about 1 second open, 4-5s closed.

 

[SDHNTR]

On FFP scopes and certainly the March, parallax and reticle focus (diopter) do interact. How exactly are you doing this? Are you hand holding the scope? What distance is the parallax set for? What magnification are you trying?

Rifle Scopes - Setting up a FFP rifle scope - A simple PSA on Diopters

bohemr13 X96 MONTHS Premium Member First Sergeant Rating: 3.6/5 this site 7824 posts this site Setting up a FFP rifle scope - A simple PSA on Diopters 03/02/2015 Last edited 03/03/2015 by bohemr13 (9 votes) I recently had a somewhat disgruntled customer return a scope because he complained of...

www.snipershide.com

First and foremost: If you have a First Focal Plane scope, it's less forgiving than a Second Focal Plane scope. Failure to follow through on details will yield issues.

Try this if you're having issues or if you've never setup the diopter and parallax before. I had to figure this out the hard way. I've never seen it clearly spelled in a scope manual that worked. Here's how I do it and the process works.

1) Set to Max Power
2) Parallax set to Infinity (this is very important)
3) Point it at a solid, light background like a white wall or blue sky. You don't want anything except a solid, light color to look at.
4) Start from the diopter all the way into the occular and rotate out.

Don't stare into the optic, open and close your eye as you adjust such that you have no more than about 1 second open, 4-5s closed.

This is an SFP scope. I set it up the way I've done with dozens of SFP scopes before. LOW power (this is also indicated in the manual) and looking at a plain white wall, or open blue sky. Adjusting as I go and only looking through for a couple of seconds. Right now the scope is taped onto an old rifle stock with folded towels under it to provide proper height. Not perfect but pretty close. I didn't want to fully mount it yet, in case I decide to return it.

 

[SDHNTR]

Did some more playing with it today. Interestingly enough, the reticle gets nice and crisp at higher power. Once I go below 8-10X, that's when it gets fuzzy. What is that telling me?

I also looked through it with my left eye. Wow, what a difference, crystal clear! Damn it!

 

[genticles]

Did some more playing with it today. Interestingly enough, the reticle gets nice and crisp at higher power. Once I go below 8-10X, that's when it gets fuzzy. What is that telling me?

I also looked through it with my left eye. Wow, what a difference, crystal clear! Damn it!

Did you ever get this reticle issue figured out?

 

[SDHNTR]

Yes, I sent it back to March and they tweaked the diopter to get me more adjustment range. All clean now.

 

[genticles]

Awesome. Thanks for responding to such an old thread!

 

[MT_Wyatt]

This thread appears to be the most recent/relevant discussion on March scopes…..

I got to hear asking the same question that started this thread - what’s the verdict? Anyone have anything new to add since last spring on March, good/bad etc? With swfa and Nightforce, and recently it seems Trijicon, being the most acceptable scopes with regards to durability on Rokslide……is March “durable” as a higher end optic that’s isn’t 30oz plus? I too am not really into the Trijicon reticle choices, although the credos have a nice reasonable mag choice in the 2.5-15.


For FFP, this March reticle seems to be one of the better heavier outer, with useful hatched inners I’ve seen….

 

[SDHNTR]

So far so good, but I really can’t say I’ve given this scope a thorough working over yet. My main rifles wear Nightforce and those have done most of the hunting and shooting this season. March does apparently do some impact testing, but they are rather vague about exactly what that entails other than a quick clip of a Japanese mad scientist beating on one in a lab. But at least they are doing something, which is more than can be said for most manufacturers.

I actually had a lengthy exchange with their marketing person about how if they could market their compact line as being both “lightweight” AND durable, they would fill an unfilled niche and probably sell more. Not sure if it sunk in. Not sure how much they care about marketing actually. They just seem later focused on making quality optics, which isn’t a bad thing.

 

[madcalfe]

any update on your march for durability? how you liking it. they just came out with a new model that looks like a perfect mountain hunting scope. 1.5x15-42mm FFP at a nice 24.69oz, locking elevation and windage turrets. This could replace the ATACR 4-16x42 if it holds up!

 

[Formidilosus]

any update on your march for durability? how you liking it. they just came out with a new model that looks like a perfect mountain hunting scope. 1.5x15-42mm FFP at a nice 24.69oz, locking elevation and windage turrets. This could replace the ATACR 4-16x42 if it holds up!

Thick donut reticles suck. Well, donuts at all.

 

[madcalfe]

Thick donut reticles suck. Well, donuts at all.

Hahah. I’m not overly a fan of that reticle either. But for hunting 700 yards and in it should be ok. This is their dual reticle one.

 

[Formidilosus]

Hahah. I’m not overly a fan of that reticle either. But for hunting 700 yards and in it should be ok. This is their dual reticle one.

View attachment 540441

I would use the duel focal plane one.

Because everyone thinks donuts are so great in scopes, I have to use the dang things constantly. Used a scope with one of the “better” donuts for 3 seasons. In that time on animals fully half of them, the required wind hold was in the thick portion of the donut itself, or in the dead space around it. Not seeing the bullet impact was normal in those shots.

Donuts, especially .5 mil thick ones, are only a good idea to those who don’t shoot in varied conditions in the field.

 

[SDHNTR]

I would use the duel focal plane one.

Because everyone thinks donuts are so great in scopes, I have to use the dang things constantly. Used a scope with one of the “better” donuts for 3 seasons. In that time on animals fully half of them, the required wind hold was in the thick portion of the donut itself, or in the dead space around it. Not seeing the bullet impact was normal in those shots.

Donuts, especially .5 mil thick ones, are only a good idea to those who don’t shoot in varied conditions in the field.

Exact same reason why I’m not a fan of donuts either, unless we’re talking maple bars.

So far, I definitely like this March scope, but I’m not in love with it. The focus is definitely finicky, and sometimes it seems I just can’t get it right. That could, however, very well be related to something specific with my own eyesight. I did have to have this scope modified by them, so I know I don’t have your average vision. Mechanically, it tracks perfectly and holds zero well. Although I haven’t dropped it, and don’t really plan to. I sure would love to see Form drop one though (someone else’s, LOL). They do claim impact testing from the factory, I got a note saying mine passed, and show a Japanese scientist looking dude in a marketing video beating on it and then testing on a collimator. I think that’s more than most manufacturers do.

 

[Beetroot]

I would use the duel focal plane one.

Because everyone thinks donuts are so great in scopes, I have to use the dang things constantly. Used a scope with one of the “better” donuts for 3 seasons. In that time on animals fully half of them, the required wind hold was in the thick portion of the donut itself, or in the dead space around it. Not seeing the bullet impact was normal in those shots.

Donuts, especially .5 mil thick ones, are only a good idea to those who don’t shoot in varied conditions in the field.

Its suprising that the LRHS reticle did a donut right ( sectioned so it didn't obsurce the main stadia) but every other donut since hasn't followed suit.

Having the first windage marks not starting until 2mil is incredibly stupid.

 

[Dobermann]

any update on your march for durability? how you liking it. they just came out with a new model that looks like a perfect mountain hunting scope. 1.5x15-42mm FFP at a nice 24.69oz, locking elevation and windage turrets. This could replace the ATACR 4-16x42 if it holds up!

Not sure what a 10x erector ratio is going to do for durability ... Jeff H said he's comfortable with 5 to 6, but 8 is too much ...

 

[SDHNTR]

Not sure what a 10x erector ratio is going to do for durability ... Jeff H said he's comfortable with 5 to 6, but 8 is too much ...

The 10x zoom is totally unnecessary. It has nothing to do with durability. I don’t get it personally, but it’s March’s thing and that’s what they built their shop on. They won’t build a lower zoom ratio. But man, if that did make a 5 or 6x in the Compacts, it would be nearly perfect IMO.