March- Why not?

[SDHNTR]

2 inches longer and 200+gm heavier, plus 50mm objective puts the SHV in a totally different class of size and weight to the x42 March F in my view

No argument. But it works better and is way less expensive so those are tradeoffs I’ll take.

 

[il_cop]

In asking why someone who had one got rid of it, you're assuming the criteria by which they measure a scope is the same as yours.

The first reply should've been - "What's your use case?"
As @streamerfish alluded to

My dad loves his leupolds. He leaves his rifle in his South Texas deer stand nearly the whole season and only picks it up if theres a nice buck under the corn feeder that morning. He's never heard of swfa, never dialed a turret, and can't comprehend why someone would intentionally drop their scope to see if it holds zero.

I'd say leupold is a perfectly fine option for him.

He's got a different use case then I do.

 

[Stocky]

Have a 3-24x52 March F wish I had the x42.
I really like it the only reason it gets less use is I have multiple RS1.2s and like consistenty between my rifles. I have way less use than @pathnz but no issues.

Pros are the FML 1 reticle is mint for hunting though I do like the new Reticle in the rokscope.
The weight is hard to beat.
Has dialled accurately and repeatably out to 860m on animals.

Cons are that I also agree that its best to ignore the upper end of the zoom except at the range due to the critical eyebox.
Id be just as happy if the zoom stopped at 15-18.

They also anodized them with a marker pen as the ano seems to just about wipe of them. Maybe makes the second hand market cheaper but doesnt seem to help much in NZ

Would prefer capped windage.

They are expensive and I cant warrant buying them except new.

Mine has roughly 10 full days in the field hunting plus a few odd day trips out to shoot goats on a 22 creed kimber without issue but thats not a major test of durability.

I like mine and cost is the biggest negative for me so far.