while I am happy with my Sightron 10-60x, I am after a new high end scope for my new F class gun in 300 WSM. Does anyone here own one of each? Is there any difference in eye piece box size, ease of finding the picture, punching through, or reading mirage , clarity, brightness for those who regularly use both?
March 10-60 Vs NF Comp 15-55. Which do you prefer for F class and why.
- Thread starter maxpower
- Start date
I have both of these for short range, but in my opinion, your better off looking thru both of them and judging for yourself because no matter the opinion of others, it's your eyes that will be making up your mind for you, not other people's eyesight. We all see things different. All I can say to you about what I see thru both is that the NF is sharper image wise, but that seems to amplify mirage something terrible, no matter what power that I turn it to. My March is way better in heavy mirage than the NF. As far as holding POI, I never had an issue with the NF, but Marches are rock solid in that department. They might not be the clearest scope out there, but they are known for holding POI.
Last edited:
As Jim says, if you are going to spend that kind of money, look thru both of them. I've owned both the scopes you mention and used the for long-range f-class. They are more similar than different. In this price range, you will not find a scope with bad glass. People with clarity "problems" often need to get the eyepiece adjusted better. Other things are bigger differentiators: weight, reticles, turrets. Both NF and March are rock solid. Unlike most, I believe 1/4MOA turrets are better for 1K shooting, easier to keep track of where you are and to make adjustments in windy conditions. When you are making 4 minute+ adjustments and the wind is tossing elevation 9s, 1/8 click turrets add no value. I really like the (newer) March tactical scope turrets: 25MOA of travel per turn, very clearly marked, with the best zero-stop out there . That's my .02 and it's probably worth less than that!
PS. IMHO the very best of the March scopes is the 5-40x56 FFP. It only weighs 30oz has amazing glass with a capital A and has the awesome turrets previously mentioned. The thinner FMA-2 reticle is very popular for target shooting.
Last edited:
R.Morehouse
Gold $$ Contributor
I use the March 36-55x52 EPZ for long range BR. At 24.3oz it is an interesting option and worth a look. I use the fixed 50 on my LV ppc. I had the NF comp and the EPZ together and don't think you could go wrong with either. I prefer the EPZ & sold the Comp. to a friend. I think March just came out with an EPZ with 60 on the top end.....
I run a Vortex Golden Eagle, well two of them, for the money they're just about impossible to beat. Having said that, I recently had a play with the new March 10-60x56 Highmaster scope and that is hands down the best scope I have looked through, including the new S&B 5-45x56 ffp scope. The glass on the new March is simply spectacular and cuts through mirage like nothing I've ever seen. My Golden Eagle and some friends with NF Comps couldn't get close to resolving the same level of detail as the March. If you can afford the March, buy it, you will not be disappointed. Otherwise I'd try and take a look at the Golden Eagle.
Willow, I had a breif look through a March High Master but not against targets in mirage. Did you think this scope cuts through heavy mirage more or makes it easier to read? I am waiting to find out what the exact weight of them are but I think my budget is limited to the Vortex. It will be good to get the High Master next to a regular 10-60 and a Nightforce comp to see how the 3 compare.
llow
Turbulent Turtle
F-TR competitor
I'm just going to explore the highlighted statement above.
Beyond the bad grammar (go ahead, call me a grammar Nazi; you should have said "differently" not "different",) the concept is a non-sequitur. It does not follow. People do not see things differently through a riflescope. If they did, there would be no way to mass-produce riflescopes in the first place, since they would have to be fitted to the individual.
The purpose of a riflescope is to merge a magnified image of a reticle and an objective into the same focus plane. Recognizing that people have different focusing challenges with their eyes, the riflescope manufacturers provide an adjustment range to the ocular portion of their offerings, which ranges from about -2.0 to +2.0 in something called diopters. You can see the same thing at your nearest Walgreens or CVS drugstore in the display of something most people refer to as "cheaters". You know, the snappy little eyeglasses that allow you to read a book at less than arms length. It's the same thing with a riflescope; you need to adjust the ocular (the eyepiece) to make sure your eye (corrected or not) resolves the reticle perfectly. If you didn't adjust the eyepiece on the ocular, you're wasting an otherwise perfectly good scope.
Once the reticle is perfectly adjusted to your eye the way you use it on the rifle, the side focus or the AO is used to focus the objective perfectly on the same plane as the reticle. If you can't do that, you're once again wasting an otherwise perfectly good scope.
I would be shocked, yes shocked, if someone could differentiate the sharpness of an image between a properly adjusted March and a properly adjusted NF competition.
Shocked.
Baloney. You don't know what you are talking about. There is a big difference in image quality between a NF and a March properly adjusted. I have 5 different Marches, 2 NF Comps, and 2 IOR Valdada's. There are a bunch of people out there that will tell you the same thing. None and repeat none of my March scopes properly adjusted to my eyes, have the same image quality, and sharpness that my 2 Comps have. Ask people on this forum who have both scopes and I bet my bottom dollar they will tell you the same thing. Even both of my Valdada's have a better image quality than any March that I have ever owned. I got rid of a straight March 50 3 years ago because it just wasn't clear. March had an issue with those straight 50's and I talked to Jim Kelbly about it. He told me that March was using 2 different coatings on their lenses, and it was obvious that 1 was superior to the other. They stopped using that other coating.
Last edited:
R.Morehouse
Gold $$ Contributor
Doesn't it also matter the quality of the shooting glasses you are supposed to be wearing at matches while looking through the scope? When i bought March it was for the reputation of staying put from shot to shot. I am not hunting game in the brush at low light. I am looking at paper targets......They seem real easy to see through the glasses through the glass in the March scopes.....
I do not wear shooting glasses when shooting. I wear contacts, but when I go to the line to shoot I take off the contacts and use my distant glasses. Yes holding POI is Marches strongest point.Doesn't it also matter the quality of the shooting glasses you are supposed to be wearing at matches while looking through the scope? When i bought March it was for the reputation of staying put from shot to shot. I am not hunting game in the brush at low light. I am looking at paper targets......They seem real easy to see through the glasses through the glass in the March scopes.....
The March cuts through the mirage more. Easier to read? Maybe but the super centre is definitely easier to see and focus on. Weightwise this new March is a bit heavier as the tube is now 34mm and a beefy 4 thick which may be a consideration for an FTR shooter, but given the money, I'd drop it on an F-Open gun in a heartbeat.
I don't think it was a High Master scope you looked through, I asked and have been told they are not in the country yet.
I am sorry but i dont believe this statememt. Mirage is an an atmospheric condition. While one scope may be brighter or clearer then another, I don't believe you will see through it any better then another. A clearer scope may allow you to see it better. Also usually the higher the power the more mirage you see. Matt
Well that would depend on what country you are in.
I have seen my friends one in Australia. It was 34mm tube and bigger objective, no not just a paint job.
I have a regular March 10-60x which I am more than happy with, cant fault the optics, but was thinking of trying a NF Comp for my next one as I had heard some people say they are even clearer than a (original model) March. Not sure if the extra optical quality of the High Master is worth all the extra $$$$$ and weight, but I would like to get out to the range with him to do a comparison. Since I am aiming at a big clear target, I am not sure how much the extra clarity will help if I am looking at big spotting discs, but if it help in mirage then????????
DK, I would guess you of all people would have looked through your share of high end scopes. What is your choice? March (current model) 10-60x or NF Comp?
Well You better believe it. I have 2 friends who live in PA. One is Jim Eazor who is a gunsmith and makes EPS bullets and who shoots in all different deciples, SR score, 600 & 1000 yard stuff and the other is Roy Hunter, a well know stock maker who shoots SR Group & score, and 600 yard stuff. They both had 3 NF 55 Comps between them. They both got rid of them and bought March 10-60's. They both told me the exact scenario that the NF's were so clear, it would amplify mirage. The March buffered the mirage to where it was more readable. Roy told me that he was at a match and he brought both scopes on 2 different rifles and when the mirage was bad, he said he was able to shoot in that condition with the March and not with the NF, so he sold both of his.
Last edited:
That is want I said one may be clearer then another allowing you to see it better. I shoot long range BR and when mirage gets bad I turn the power down. I know both and just saw Jim last Saturday. You can ask Jim anything about me and I am sure he will know. ROY hunter is also a big sprint car fanatic. Two different games and you can't compare. I could tell you what mirage at some ranges do to you. But you would never believe it. Matt
Last edited:
I have not looked through the current March. I can tell you the Nightforce
Competition is a very clear scope. As good as Swarovski or Schmidt and Bender. In fact I just bought a Schmidt and Bender 12x50x56. On the comp. the eyebox is not as big as some others and some people have said they don't hold POA as good as some others. I have it on a heavy gun and have not had those problems. Mine is also a 2013 model and the following year they were supposed to have changed them some and dealt with those issues. My buddy loves his and just shot the two smallest group aggregates at Williamsport that were ever fired in light gun. Matt
From what I have heard that new Super ED glass in the March's are second to none as far as clarity goes, but I'm done shelling out over 2 grand for scopes. Got 2 rifles at Sid's waiting to be bedded, one with a stock that I have over 3300+ into it so far. Another 300 bucks to have it glued and screwed. This shit has got to end. Way too much money tied up in this game since I got into it. But that's me. Go way overboard in everything that I do.
Tell Sid I said hello. I didn't get to the IBS meeting so I didn't get to see him for awhile. With my wife's medical problems I didn't get around last summer. Matt
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.