March 8-80 v Sightron 10-50 SVSS ED

[Ccrider]

For 600 to 1000 yard benchrest, how do these two scopes compare?

 

[Ccrider]

Surely someone has experience with both of these scopes.

 

[Ranger188]

Actually, those are the 2 I haven't looked thru
Looked thru (owned all) a March 10-60x56 HM, Sightron SIII 10-50x60
Vortex GE, Trijicon 5-50x56 and a NF comp.
I wanted to try the March 8-80 but went with the HM
Everyones eye's are a bit different, but this is how I'd rate those.
Trijicon and March are really close, but for the price difference, not much of a contest.
The Sightron SIII is really bright and a close match to the Golden Eagle. I like the GE reticle the best
out of all of them.
The winner to ME is the NF It's slightly clearer and brighter than the others. If price isn't considered
The Trijicon for the price is hard to beat.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

The March-X 8-80X56 and its brother the 5-50X56 are among the first riflescopes to use ED glass, a single element. The 8-80X56 is still the most powerful riflescope on the planet. It is available with various reticles and I favor the MTR-5 for F-class; I would think it would work really well for BR also. I started with the MTR-2 in my 5-50X56 about 8 years ago, but age caught up to my eyes and I had March swap out the MTR-2 for the thicker MTR-5 a couple years back. I have since acquired a March-X 10-60X56 HM with its 2 Super-ED glass lens elements and I made sure it had an MTR-5 reticle also.

I run my 5-50X56 at 40X for 1000 yard competition, regardless of conditions. I found that, to my eye, the 10-60X56 HM had its IQ degrade less rapidly due to conditions compared to the 5-50X56 and I run my HM at 50X all the time.

I do not shoot benchrest, so I'm not sure if IQ at high magnification is important. For F-Class, it is critical to get the best IQ at high mag settings.

 

[garandman]

I got a Sightron 10 -50 x 60 I use for 50 yd rimfire BR. Really impressed with the quality..

 

[HTSmith]

I got a Sightron 10 -50 x 60 I use for 50 yd rimfire BR. Really impressed with the quality..

I have two of the Sightron SIII 10-50x60's and like them very much. A Sightron engineer let me look through one of the 10-50 SVSS ED's at the range. From 10 minutes with the scope and not being a technical scope guy, I have couple of observations--1) The optics flat "pop" and 2) It is a big and heavy scope. So my somewhat uneducated opinion is this would be a dang good scope for long range bench rest if you can make weight with it. Maybe someone with more direct experience will comment shortly.

 

[garandman]

I have two of the Sightron SIII 10-50x60's and like them very much. A Sightron engineer let me look through one of the 10-50 SVSS ED's at the range. From 10 minutes with the scope and not being a technical scope guy, I have couple of observations--1) The optics flat "pop" and 2) It is a big and heavy scope. So my somewhat uneducated opinion is this would be a dang good scope for long range bench rest if you can make weight with it. Maybe someone with more direct experience will comment shortly.

Yer quite correct. Its big and heavy and best suited to an unlimited BR class. You can dial up to 50 x for long range / close up to target, or dial down for heavy mirage.

Mines a dot - crosshairs... no ranging or BDC.

 

[FNSafari]

IMO, more important than the look viewing through the scope is how robust the internal support of the erector tube is and does the scope hold point of impact and does it adjust honestly.

 

[USMCDOC]

Well i have tried a new Sightron SVSSED scope.. i put it on a Turbo V-2 with a picatinny rail. Using UTG PRO steel rings. Once mounted and zeroed, i ran the elevation up 7 minutes aimed at a dot on the target and let er go.. then dialed that 7 min of elevation back down and put the cross hairs on the hole and put one right through the original hole.. i really like how you can lock the windage and elevation on the scope.. all clicks were positive and solid.
As for the view. I would say it is as good as the NF Comp.. to which i have one of those as well. Where the Sightron really excels beyond the NF is the parallax adjustment.. it is deff a step above all others in my honest opinion.
I feel that you can see the mirage better with the NF than with the Sightron. i may post more impressions as i get more used to using it.. but since this was the first day, i have to say that i don't regret my decision to purchase this Sightron scope and i feel that i would be happy to do it again if i felt i needed another scope..

 

[6MMsteve]

the ten mile trijicon is very bright scope and a tank

 

[Falfan2017]

I’ve looked through both and for br I might not go with either. Sightron is great but is huge and heavy. Really have to build the lightgun around it to make weight.
the March is sharp at lower powers but 80 power is excessive and just amplifies mirage. No real benefit to it over their 10-60 hm scope which is excellent.

 

[Ccrider]

I’ve looked through both and for br I might not go with either. Sightron is great but is huge and heavy. Really have to build the lightgun around it to make weight.
the March is sharp at lower powers but 80 power is excessive and just amplifies mirage. No real benefit to it over their 10-60 hm scope which is excellent.

This is one of the things I was also wondering about. I have a 48x fixed hm and was considering the 10-60 hm also.

the ten mile trijicon is very bright scope and a tank

I have the sister scope, 5-50 Delta Stryker, and have zero complaints with it. Pretty sure there’s not much difference between it and the 10-50 Sightron. Real question is whether the extra magnification is helpful.

 

[Ranger188]

I own a couple Trijicon 5-50x56, almost the same as the Stryker
and had a March 10-60x56 HM. Didn't see much difference and not $1000+ difference.
Everyones eyes see different things, but I'll never buy another March HM
Their are equal scopes for far less money. But you won't know it till you try.
That's what I had to do to see for myself.
If you shoot in mirage, then the extra mag. on the 8-80x56 isn't going to be of any good
to you. If you shoot for fun, in the morning or evening, then the extra mag. probably will
help.
You might have to wait for a good deal on a March and suck it up and buy one knowing
that if you don't like, you might lose a little money selling it.
They usually sell quickly here.

 

[Ccrider]

I own a couple Trijicon 5-50x56, almost the same as the Stryker
and had a March 10-60x56 HM. Didn't see much difference and not $1000+ difference.
Everyones eyes see different things, but I'll never buy another March HM
Their are equal scopes for far less money. But you won't know it till you try.
That's what I had to do to see for myself.

Thanks. You nailed the question in my mind. Is the hm worth the extra 1k. I will go with your answer as well, and hold off on the hm purchase unless I run across a deal on one that I can’t turn down.

I have yet to find a scope with what I thought has clearer glass than the S&B pmii I sold. This includes my NF Comp, March hm, Sightron 48x ED, and Delta Stryker among others.

 

[Ranger188]

Why don't you pickup one of the S&B with the 50x
I know they are a bit pricey.
Trying to buy the right scope is a PITA
Because, even if you have the best, you won't be happy unless
you have looked thru them all and can set your mind at ease.
But you almost have to do it or you will be questioning your self
on any purchase. Lucky I came out great with the resale of the scopes.
Some places with take them back within a short time, as long as you
don't mount it.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Thanks. You nailed the question in my mind. Is the hm worth the extra 1k. I will go with your answer as well, and hold off on the hm purchase unless I run across a deal on one that I can’t turn down.

I have yet to find a scope with what I thought has clearer glass than the S&B pmii I sold. This includes my NF Comp, March hm, Sightron 48x ED, and Delta Stryker among others.

Yeah, that comparison is a little sketchy. The S&B PMII has excellent glass, no one is saying differently, but you are now comparing riflescopes to a memory you have of the PMII and that's the sketchy part.

When comparing riflescopes you have to do that at the same time, in the same conditions, looking at the same target, at the same magnification. Anything else is sketchy. At best.

As I explained earlier the March-X 5-50X56 and its big brother, the 8-80X56 are about 8-10 year old in design and they use one ED glass element. As you may know. March is the pioneer in using ED glass in riflescopes, they were the first one to do that about 13 years ago. The March-X 10-60X56 HM uses two Super-ED elements and once again, March is the pioneer is using Super-ED glass elements.

I explained earlier how I now shoot at 50X consistently with my March-X 10-60X56 HM because to my eyes, the mirage degrades the image less with this scopes compared to what it does to my ED-glassed 5-50X56.

This is not a one-time occurrence, I have been shooting at 50X almost since I got my HM 18 months ago.

The PMII is a fine scope but is also a pig of a scope at 40 ounces. My HM is a svelte 33 ounce scope and I will use the half pound difference and put it in my barrel where it makes better sense for me.
Again, I restate that I know nothing of benchrest so I don't know weight limits and if mirage is a thing that you have to deal with; I'm just a poor F-TR shooter who prefers to shoot at 1000 yards and lives in south Texas.

 

[Ccrider]

I had the PMii, NF Comp, 48 hm Stryker and Sightron ED side by side. Sold the PMii a couple of weeks ago.

Youe comment about the 8-80 being 13 years old is why I have not purchased one. My understanding is that it has one ED lens and the hm has two.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I had the PMii, NF Comp, 48 hm Stryker and Sightron ED side by side. Sold the PMii a couple of weeks ago.

Youe comment about the 8-80 being 13 years old is why I have not purchased one. My understanding is that it has one ED lens and the hm has two.

That is almost correct. The 8-80X56 is 8-9 year old design, still better than any on ED riflescope and still the most powerful scope on the planet. Further, the 8-80X56 has one ED glass element. The 10-60X56 HM has two Super-ED lenses, they are the doublet at the objective, the biggest-ash lenses in the riflescope. My belief is that Super-ED handles mirage distortion better than ED and MUCH better than non-ED/Super ED lenses.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Oh, and I should add that Super ED glass is much more expensive than non-ED/Super ED glass.

 

[Ccrider]

That is almost correct. The 8-80X56 is 8-9 year old design, still better than any on ED riflescope and still the most powerful scope on the planet. Further, the 8-80X56 has one ED glass element. The 10-60X56 HM has two Super-ED lenses, they are the doublet at the objective, the biggest-ash lenses in the riflescope. My belief is that Super-ED handles mirage distortion better than ED and MUCH better than non-ED/Super ED lenses.

I was close. If I don’t like the SVSS, I will end up trying a 10-60 hm.