March 10-60 Vs NF Comp 15-55. Which do you prefer for F class and why.

[yukonal]

Im looking forward to that to. Thanks for doing it.

As am I.

 

[JimPag]

I have to wonder why kelbys is no longer involved Larry

Jimmy Kelbly told me that he wasn't making enough profit on them. He also told me that he had a deal with March that he had to purchase so many per month. If your selling 4 per month and you have to buy 10, it doesn't make much sense to try to keep selling them.

 

[JimPag]

Most of what I've heard has been pretty good. My concern is mainly , if they will be in business years from now, to fix my scope, even if it cost me money and a good bit of time. To be honest, they've already outlived what I thought they would. I have nothing bad to say about them and hope they are around for a long, long time.

Mike. March will probably always be around now that Shiraz has something to do with it. I don't give a rat's rear end about warranties. March scopes really hold up. Even with a 5 year warranty, if it goes wrong after that and it's wasn't something that you did that was catastrophic, Shiraz will cover it, he's mentioned that many times on this forum. Also Mike, I'm pretty sure March did away with the raised reticle option.

 

[dkhunt14]

I can't wait to see the hate mail you get. Don't open any strange looking packages!

Tom

Especially packages coming from companies. Matt

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I do not have an agenda or any brand loyalties. But if you market the scope as a Benchrest, Fclass or competition scope then they should expect this type of scrutiny. We pick apart barrels, stocks, actions, gunsmiths, rests, exc.

Found a 10-50 sightron to test as well.

 

[yukonal]

Alex, I believe you'll give us a thorough and fair/unbiased review. I'm looking forward to it, as I'm at a toss up between a NF Competition, and a new March.

 

[X-Caveman]

I do not have an agenda or any brand loyalties. But if you market the scope as a Benchrest, Fclass or competition scope then they should expect this type of scrutiny. We pick apart barrels, stocks, actions, gunsmiths, rests, exc.

Found a 10-50 sightron to test as well.

I see a budding business opportunity here. I would pay for peace of mind or confirmation of a suspected issue. Or pay a little more for a new scope that was tested good by the retailer (you)...

 

[JimPag]

I see a budding business opportunity here. I would pay for peace of mind or confirmation of a suspected issue. Or pay a little more for a new scope that was tested good by the retailer (you)...

Yes it's a good idea, just like having an independent laboratory tester, but even though say a NF comp that he is testing and has a POI shift, doesn't mean everyone is going to test that way. I think from what we have gathered on this site, some NFC are shifting and others have not. It just shows that any NFC could have a potential problem with it, whether it surfaces with your scope is just a gamble. Mine I have yet to encounter a problem with it. Not to say that it might fail next week is just a guess.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

The problem with the NF comp is two fold. Unless your either good enough to know the scope is moving (Im not that good) or you have a scope tester how do you know if your poi is shifting .125 moa? Second, if you do verify a small poi shift NF will not admit to it or even want to talk to you about it In my perfect world the comp would be rock solid, because the glass is so good. Which is why when I first started finding issues with them I called NF and asked if I could help in any way, testing, get them known problem scopes so they could figure it out, exc. This was a year ago. They stone walled me so bad, and lied their asses off about NEVER verifying an issue with the comp scope. Even after I gave them names of people who sent them in for repair, and were fixed they still wanted nothing to do with me. I gave them plenty of time to do something about this poi shift problem before I ever mentioned it in a public forum. But their treatment of guys with poi shift issues is the same now as it was then.

 

[JBO]

I believe NF does have a POI issue with the competition scopes, I sent both of my NF comp scopes down the road.
I can't imagine how many NF competition scopes that have been sold but I can tell you what would happen to the value of NF if they even hinted of POI issues

 

[X-Caveman]

What I am suggesting is that I would be willing to pay Alex to test my scopes periodically. Regardless of brand, model, etc. Peace of mind and confidence have value to me. A new March purchased thru and tested good by Alex is worth more to me than one that was not. How much more? That is the question. Similar to why I started shooting custom bullets. I think they are much more likely to be consistently good. Especially after having a real loser lot from a high end mass producer. I need every edge I can get.

 

[savagedasher]

I believe NF does have a POI issue with the competition scopes, I sent both of my NF comp scopes down the road.
I can't imagine how many NF competition scopes that have been sold but I can tell you what would happen to the value of NF if they even hinted of POI issues

My guess is they would be up front an have a warranty call back .
Nothing would effect there sales more then defective product . Larry

 

[Fred Bohl]

Alex Wheeler,

I'm delighted to here you will be doing some comparison and very much interested in hearing the results. Would you please post the protocols of the tests including which characteristics you will be testing for and the evaluation means and metrics?

My request is based on my prior and current attempts to find an objective method to compare/characterize visual attributes objectively. In extensive attempts to use direct visual observations by experienced shooters I found that human visual interpretation varies widely within an individual observer and more so over many observers. There is also personal bias based on what the observers experience is with the scopes he /she has used. I started to get more consistent and objective results by photographing the scope images and having shooters compare the photos. I'm currently working to improve the quality of the photos (actually digital images not film).

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Alex Wheeler,

I'm delighted to here you will be doing some comparison and very much interested in hearing the results. Would you please post the protocols of the tests including which characteristics you will be testing for and the evaluation means and metrics?

My request is based on my prior and current attempts to find an objective method to compare/characterize visual attributes objectively. In extensive attempts to use direct visual observations by experienced shooters I found that human visual interpretation varies widely within an individual observer and more so over many observers. There is also personal bias based on what the observers experience is with the scopes he /she has used. I started to get more consistent and objective results by photographing the scope images and having shooters compare the photos. I'm currently working to improve the quality of the photos (actually digital images not film).

I am mainly focused on the scope poi holding abilities, not image quality. Thats what I will be testing. As far as image quality goes, thats easy, the comp by far wins the resolution contest. The new March HM series of scope very well may give the comp a run for its money. Resolution is pretty easy to determine, you have to have a perfect day and adjust the scope for your eye. I remember a day at Deep Creek where conditions were perfect. Overcast, no sun, no mirrage. It was easy to see a group on the white with a comp scope at 1000 yards. Multiple people sat behind the comps and easily saw the group. No other scope could resolve the holes. That included NF BR, March 10-60, 8-80. On another good day, I was looking though a 95mm swaro atx and was seeing individual holes in the white paper at 1k as Tom shot next to me. I could see them as they appeared and was telling him where they went. With those conditions testing optics becomes very definitive.

 

[hogan]

I was told the tubes are made here in their new plant with state of the art CNC machinery. That was from the Nightforce sales rep. at a match. Matt

Pretty much ALL CNC machinery is "state of the art". The "state of the art' more references the swiftness of production than quality. Quality has been there since the stepers and controllers became reilable. Doesn't take much to work an aluminum tube to spec. Really only matters what software is controlling the movements. Are raw materials bought sourced to certain specs? Sure. Might be just as easy to make chips as to buy sourced tubes that only have to be trued.

How much magnification do you need to "place" in F Class nationals? To get on the team? Clarity and color rendition, lack of aberation and distortion are more critical. Is a fine dot as good as a fine crosshair? no. Not unless the dot is isolated from the crosshair. Can any reticle beat a fine crosshair for group shooting at distance? Of course, probably not true under all sky conditions.

What about the 5-45mm S&B? At $6k, well that's the only stumbling block. If serious about your "game" what further discussion is there, except "what's almost as good?"???

I'm still gonna say that the high mag scopes don't have the quality of performance that the tactical mag range scopes deliver. Unertl (iirc) used 2" tubes (52mm) on his best grade. Essentially, once over 50x you're talking telescopes. At 34mm-40mm tube, the physics don't allow the quality, no matter how wonderful the lens, the grind, the coating or any other scope element. Does a high magnification scope serve the shooter with its compromises to "get a closer look"? If you can't see your aiming point at 1000yds with a 29x scope with better clarity, rendition, and way less aberration; maybe you have to work with what you've got...

I remember being amazed to see vivid detail in 100' tall Spruce trees at over 2mi distance. I do own state of the art lenses from Panasonic and Olympus, they are committed to the Micro 4/3 standard. Lenses are much smaller and lighter than the behemoths Nikon and Canon use. Great performance, but with a 16 or 20mp camera and great software, hard to tell. Nothing but light entering my Cronus BTR on that first fieldtrip about 2wks back. Amazing clarity to be able to see a 1' power line in sharp delineation at 1600+yds. Needed to put a bullet on that 1" dia line from a mile back? If you could dial, you could do it!

Probably YOUR Eyes are the biggest controlling factor here. I say that if you are not 20:20 to begin with, then adding any further degradation to your sight path works against you. Better 29x that maximizes what your eyes will deliver, than 60x that degrades what you otherwise might see.

 

[swd]

Pretty much ALL CNC machinery is "state of the art". The "state of the art' more references the swiftness of production than quality. Quality has been there since the stepers and controllers became reilable. Doesn't take much to work an aluminum tube to spec. Really only matters what software is controlling the movements. Are raw materials bought sourced to certain specs? Sure. Might be just as easy to make chips as to buy sourced tubes that only have to be trued.

How much magnification do you need to "place" in F Class nationals? To get on the team? Clarity and color rendition, lack of aberation and distortion are more critical. Is a fine dot as good as a fine crosshair? no. Not unless the dot is isolated from the crosshair. Can any reticle beat a fine crosshair for group shooting at distance? Of course, probably not true under all sky conditions.

What about the 5-45mm S&B? At $6k, well that's the only stumbling block. If serious about your "game" what further discussion is there, except "what's almost as good?"???

I'm still gonna say that the high mag scopes don't have the quality of performance that the tactical mag range scopes deliver. Unertl (iirc) used 2" tubes (52mm) on his best grade. Essentially, once over 50x you're talking telescopes. At 34mm-40mm tube, the physics don't allow the quality, no matter how wonderful the lens, the grind, the coating or any other scope element. Does a high magnification scope serve the shooter with its compromises to "get a closer look"? If you can't see your aiming point at 1000yds with a 29x scope with better clarity, rendition, and way less aberration; maybe you have to work with what you've got...

I remember being amazed to see vivid detail in 100' tall Spruce trees at over 2mi distance. I do own state of the art lenses from Panasonic and Olympus, they are committed to the Micro 4/3 standard. Lenses are much smaller and lighter than the behemoths Nikon and Canon use. Great performance, but with a 16 or 20mp camera and great software, hard to tell. Nothing but light entering my Cronus BTR on that first fieldtrip about 2wks back. Amazing clarity to be able to see a 1' power line in sharp delineation at 1600+yds. Needed to put a bullet on that 1" dia line from a mile back? If you could dial, you could do it!

Probably YOUR Eyes are the biggest controlling factor here. I say that if you are not 20:20 to begin with, then adding any further degradation to your sight path works against you. Better 29x that maximizes what your eyes will deliver.

Pretty much ALL CNC machinery is "state of the art". The "state of the art' more references the swiftness of production than quality. Quality has been there since the stepers and controllers became reilable. Doesn't take much to work an aluminum tube to spec. Really only matters what software is controlling the movements. Are raw materials bought sourced to certain specs? Sure. Might be just as easy to make chips as to buy sourced tubes that only have to be trued.

How much magnification do you need to "place" in F Class nationals? To get on the team? Clarity and color rendition, lack of aberation and distortion are more critical. Is a fine dot as good as a fine crosshair? no. Not unless the dot is isolated from the crosshair. Can any reticle beat a fine crosshair for group shooting at distance? Of course, probably not true under all sky conditions.

What about the 5-45mm S&B? At $6k, well that's the only stumbling block. If serious about your "game" what further discussion is there, except "what's almost as good?"???

I'm still gonna say that the high mag scopes don't have the quality of performance that the tactical mag range scopes deliver. Unertl (iirc) used 2" tubes (52mm) on his best grade. Essentially, once over 50x you're talking telescopes. At 34mm-40mm tube, the physics don't allow the quality, no matter how wonderful the lens, the grind, the coating or any other scope element. Does a high magnification scope serve the shooter with its compromises to "get a closer look"? If you can't see your aiming point at 1000yds with a 29x scope with better clarity, rendition, and way less aberration; maybe you have to work with what you've got...

I remember being amazed to see vivid detail in 100' tall Spruce trees at over 2mi distance. I do own state of the art lenses from Panasonic and Olympus, they are committed to the Micro 4/3 standard. Lenses are much smaller and lighter than the behemoths Nikon and Canon use. Great performance, but with a 16 or 20mp camera and great software, hard to tell. Nothing but light entering my Cronus BTR on that first fieldtrip about 2wks back. Amazing clarity to be able to see a 1' power line in sharp delineation at 1600+yds. Needed to put a bullet on that 1" dia line from a mile back? If you could dial, you could do it!

Probably YOUR Eyes are the biggest controlling factor here. I say that if you are not 20:20 to begin with, then adding any further degradation to your sight path works against you. Better 29x that maximizes what your eyes will deliver, than 60x that degrades what you otherwise might see.

Hogan, I'm going to strongly recommend that if you want to sell scopes and know what your talking about in regards to the disciplines we play here that you spend a year shooting F Class or LR Bench Rest. Then you'll understand and be able to talk the talk as far as what our needs really are.

 

[Raythemanroe]

Lot of opinion, I have one to.. Imagine that!!

All the clarity in the world means squat to me, give me a scope that repeats and holds all day long..

Ray

 

[hogan]

Hi Ray,

in 1999 or 2000, I bought a 6x Mk4 Leupold with target dot. Ordered Badger Ord base and rings for Rem 700 I had installed a used .308 PST barrel on and put into an H-S police stock and went to the range. Precision Reticles was out of Badger ords standard 30mm rings and told me Leupold mk4 were "as good". Went shooting with 168 match kings and using the Sierra accuracy load in R-P cases (heresy, I know!). The rifle shot like crap. The rings would not hold... I got Badger rings from Brownells and went back 2wks later, My junk rifle delivered constant sub .4" 5rd grps at 100 and sub .7" at 200 all day long at Dietz gun range down in TX. Groups measured with a Mitutoyo dial micrometer.

It's not 1000yds, but point of story is Scope mount has to be solid. It don't "go without saying"... But once you got that tended to, it is one less item on your variables list.

How many scopes aren't fully correct or fully functional? Probably more than a few. Your comment is CORRECT! Without dependability there is no known value for dialing and no confidence. Magnification doesn't matter. Being able to hold hard, guage the wind, and achieve release on same exact aiming point time after time delivers tight groups if all the variables are eliminated.

Some competitors won't dial wind, they say they hold-off. Not that big a deal when using an HD Bipod system though, but I'm guessing. If F-Class were about shooting prone and sitting with only a sling and a mat, it would interest me. I am interested in longrange scopesights, handloading, and gunsmithing though.

Optical quality only is disregarded until you experience it. If spending $1800 or more, what would be wrong with getting $3500 level optical performance along with top notch reticle design and dependable turret movements? If my vision were impaired or corrected, I would look for a scope that delivered all the optical quality I could get. Now, this means I wouldn't have to spend thousands more to get it.

 

[Raythemanroe]

You sound like a salesman not a shooter, no offense intended..

Personally I feel the Golden Eagle is the value leader with optic/magnification.. I don't just take folk's word for it, so before this poor country boy slaps down $1.5k I will observe a bit..

I would love to see Alex test one, along with the salesman's scope..

I observe a lot of times when a record is set, that old NF BR scope sits on top of the rifle..

Trust but verify my friends..

Ray

 

[swd]

Hi Ray,

in 1999 or 2000, I bought a 6x Mk4 Leupold with target dot. Ordered Badger Ord base and rings for Rem 700 I had installed a used .308 PST barrel on and put into an H-S police stock and went to the range. Precision Reticles was out of Badger ords standard 30mm rings and told me Leupold mk4 were "as good". Went shooting with 168 match kings and using the Sierra accuracy load in R-P cases (heresy, I know!). The rifle shot like crap. The rings would not hold... I got Badger rings from Brownells and went back 2wks later, My junk rifle delivered constant sub .4" 5rd grps at 100 and sub .7" at 200 all day long at Dietz gun range down in TX. Groups measured with a Mitutoyo dial micrometer.

It's not 1000yds, but point of story is Scope mount has to be solid. It don't "go without saying"... But once you got that tended to, it is one less item on your variables list.

How many scopes aren't fully correct or fully functional? Probably more than a few. Your comment is CORRECT! Without dependability there is no known value for dialing and no confidence. Magnification doesn't matter. Being able to hold hard, guage the wind, and achieve release on same exact aiming point time after time delivers tight groups if all the variables are eliminated.

Some competitors won't dial wind, they say they hold-off. Not that big a deal when using an HD Bipod system though, but I'm guessing. If F-Class were about shooting prone and sitting with only a sling and a mat, it would interest me. I am interested in longrange scopesights, handloading, and gunsmithing though.

Optical quality only is disregarded until you experience it. If spending $1800 or more, what would be wrong with getting $3500 level optical performance along with top notch reticle design and dependable turret movements? If my vision were impaired or corrected, I would look for a scope that delivered all the optical quality I could get. Now, this means I wouldn't have to spend thousands more to get it.

Please dazzle us with more BS...

I bought a new truck a couple months ago. They proceeded to tell me what I needed before they even knew what I wanted. This sounds very similar....
I special ordered the exact truck I wanted.