March 2.5-25X42 or 52?

[Shagbark]

I just found this forum & signed up. This may be a subject your tired of discussing, but hopefully you can discuss it one more time. Ok, I have had some experience with a March 5-32, so I know how good their optics are. I am going to purchase another scope & want to keep it as compact as possible. I am going to purchase a March 2.5-25X42 or 52. I like the extra compactness of the 42. , but will go with the 52 if needed. Ok, I will be shooting non-formal target 10-100 yards, hunting small game in forest, again 10-100 yards. Mostly , just after sunrise-dusk. Actually probably more like 7am-6pm. Mostly 4-16 power. Ok, will the 42 perform as well in these conditions as the 52? Thanks for any input.

 

[Willow]

The 52 has better lowlight performance for obvious reasons and it's an easier scope to get behind. Finicky parallax adjustment though.

 

[nakneker]

Hey Shag,

I have two of the 42mms. I bought the first and used it on my 7saum dedicated for big game and liked so much I bought another. I’ve used many different types of optics and IMO the 3-24x42 (mine are FFP) are the epitome of the perfect hunting scope. Light, compact with a very usable power range and reticle. The turrets are praise and repeatable.

I have never used the bigger objective March scopes. I have used the 42s in all kinds of conditions and lighting, I’ve never felt handicapped by the 42mm objective.

 

[Shagbark]

I know it is only an inch shorter & maybe an ounce or two lighter. For my purpose I have been leaning to the 42. Just has so much grace. Almost reminds me of a 3-9 EFR Leupold body. But if I ever need to resell, I would guess the 52 would have more interest. Still undecided. Both of your opinions are appreciated.

 

[Zero333]

Scope companies have plenty of tricks up their sleeves to deal with light transmission besides objective size.

You want the 42mm then get the 42mm.

 

[Shagbark]

Thanks Zero, if I had not read more than one place that some people thought getting behind the 52 was easier than the 42, there would be no debate in my mind. I would get the 42 as I like the appearance of it more. That may not be the best way to choose a scope, but to me it means a little. Plus I think the 42 may be pennies less. I have 60 year old eyes & only had one scope that I could not get behind with out searching & that was a Burris , bought it new tried it a week, took it off and gave it away. Thanks again.

 

[Scott Harris]

I just found this forum & signed up. This may be a subject your tired of discussing, but hopefully you can discuss it one more time. Ok, I have had some experience with a March 5-32, so I know how good their optics are. I am going to purchase another scope & want to keep it as compact as possible. I am going to purchase a March 2.5-25X42 or 52. I like the extra compactness of the 42. , but will go with the 52 if needed. Ok, I will be shooting non-formal target 10-100 yards, hunting small game in forest, again 10-100 yards. Mostly , just after sunrise-dusk. Actually probably more like 7am-6pm. Mostly 4-16 power. Ok, will the 42 perform as well in these conditions as the 52? Thanks for any input.

We use the 3-24x42 for F-class and I thought maybe the 3-24x52 would have some benefits. wasn't impressed after trying the 52mm. you won't go wrong with the 42mm.

 

[Shagbark]

Thanks, good info.

 

[waverly]

I love my 42. I have it on a custom 308 hunting rifle. Never any problems getting down on the scope. I almost never hunt early, but am prone to getting in the stand late morning and staying till dark. When I get out of the stand it's dark. Never felt like I had to leave early because scope was inferior in low light. Took this rifle to Alberta last month and scope was still good when outfitter showed up to get me. In Alberta I did go early and stayed till dark.

Waverly

 

[6fatrat]

I put the 42 on my match rifle last year, great scope.
Steve Bair

 

[Shagbark]

Thanks , there seems to a lot of positive opinions for the 42 & that is the one I really wanted anyway. As soon as I sell my March 5-32, think I will go with the 2.5-25X42 MTR-3. If it is close to the performance of the 5-32, I should be happy.

 

[Shagbark]

Lucked out today & sold my 5-32 & went ahead and ordered the 2.5-25x42 with MTR-3. I will let you know how I like it, when it arrives. Thanks for the advice.

 

[nakneker]

I think you’ll be very happy with your choice.

 

[wedgy]

I have a couple of each and the 42 get a bit dark in the higher powers as would be expected. Both track well, dial great, and return to zero. I prefer the 52mm for my hunting scopes as they are used in low light. The zero stop is as easy as it gets, no fumbling, you can set it with a car key or coin. Clicks are very crisp and positive, parallax is a bit touchy compared to some. It is the ideal hunting scope with the low profile tactical turrets.

 

[hammerjack]

The 52MM is the ticket for hunting just look left there is one on my little 6BR killing machine.