March FX 1.5-15x42mm Q&A

[SDHNTR]

The massive room range is their niche.

I think there was a desire from some hunters to be able to use the higher powered 24x (and higher x) versions in quick use as a spotting scope to avoid the need to carry another optic. This would mainly be for zooming to evaluate rather than finding game. If the optics suffer at those powers, it isn't of much use.

No chance of that working well. The detail just isn’t there. I tried.

 

[SloppyJ]

This reticle solves a lot of issues I have with FFP scopes. I like my nx8 2.5x20 but at low light, even on the lowest magnification setting, the illumination blows out the view since the whole reticle lights up. I picked up a 4x32 F2 model where there's just a dot that lights up, I can also see the reticle at low power because its SFP. But now my subtensions are only good at 16 and 32. I like that compromise better than the F1 offering. This has piqued my interest on these dual reticles and I'll be digging into it.

 

[DJL2]

If I could somehow get the March FX 1.5-15x42 and the NF ATACR 4-16x42 to have a love child... boy, that would be awesome. Hell, I'd even take a THLR mod2 over a DR design.

 

[Formidilosus]

If I could somehow get the March FX 1.5-15x42 and the NF ATACR 4-16x42 to have a love child... boy, that would be awesome. Hell, I'd even take a THLR mod2 over a DR design.

Yes indeed.

 

[Formidilosus]

Updated.

 

[Formidilosus]

Updated.

 

[JCMCUBIC]

Latest pic:

Original pic:

Comparing the original reticle pic from your earlier post to the latest pic, it seems they reticles were aligned correctly originally. Is the offset from a physical shifting of one of the reticles or from parallax caused by alignment of view (or adjustment)?

Either is an issue, but if it's a physical shifting of one (or both) of the reticles inside the scope, it would reflect on a build failure. ...if I'm understanding correctly....

 

[Macintosh]

Interesting scope for sure. Seems like a “concept scope” akin to a “concept car” you’d see at a car show, ie an R&D project to develop an idea. Props to them for working on it, but bummer it doesnt seem to be race ready for the way I’d use it.

Re some of the comments above about low
Magnification: i like very low mag. I hunt on foot in thick woods, it’s normal to walk up on a deer at 10 yards, have it jump up and bound 90° across your field of view and still be 98% obscured in brush. Having an extremely low magnification scope really helps keep a difficult to see object in view or re-find it, but it does require real clarity. I could see a scope like this being really excellent for an eastern hunter who wants the low magnification for hunting, but also wants to be able to practice at longer range or take trips where a little more magnification perhaps becomes helpful. I think there’s a lot of people this would appeal to, although they may not be the hard-core Western Hunter who lives in the west and has no need for the lowest magnification. my guess is most folks that are shopping for a $2500 scope are also financially more able to have multiple rifles with optics tailored for a specific use-case. Nevertheless It seems most companies have stopped making the 2 to 7-ish magnification scopes, other than the one 2.5 to 8 that isn’t really an option for me, everything is either a LPVO designed primarily for an AR in 3-gun type competition, or it’s a bigger scope that sacrifices some of the field of view or some of the “crossover” useability. If it were race-ready, I could see a scope like this being what a lot of people look for in a “one scope to rule them all” category.

 

[Formidilosus]

Latest pic:

Original pic:

Comparing the original reticle pic from your earlier post to the latest pic, it seems they reticles were aligned correctly originally. Is the offset from a physical shifting of one of the reticles or from parallax caused by alignment of view (or adjustment)?

Either is an issue, but if it's a physical shifting of one (or both) of the reticles inside the scope, it would reflect on a build failure. ...if I'm understanding correctly....

You are correct of course. It’s not parallax, it’s shifted. I’m going to guess it happened sometime in the last few days since it was shot last because it was noticeable the moment I looked through it.

 

[Formidilosus]

Updated. Played more with the scope- the misalignment in the reticle varies by power it’s a full half mil off at 3-4x, and .4’ish off at 6x. When zooming up and down in power the two reticles float around each other.

 

[Formidilosus]

Updated.

First loss of zero between 300-400 rounds. Scope was pulled off of rifle.

 

[Aion]

I have been following your review with great interest. Do you have any idea what may have caused that missalignment? Has March an answer to this?
At 300-400 rounds this should not happen to such an expenaive scope. Do you think it is still a salvagable optic when repaired or not to be recommended for hunting?

 

[Formidilosus]

I have been following your review with great interest. Do you have any idea what may have caused that missalignment?

My guess is vibration and/or impact.

Has March an answer to this?

Have not contacted them.

At 300-400 rounds this should not happen to such an expenaive scope. Do you think it is still a salvagable optic when repaired or not to be recommended for hunting?

This scope is an over “engineered”, extremely complicated, very compromised optic just to have a 10x mag ratio. While there are some design aspects or features that have usefulness, mostly it’ll it is about how many features can be combined into one scope.

So, no- I would not personally choose this scope for field/hunting use.