March glass vs Nightforce and Leupold

[BartsBullets]

Hey Scarab,
Regarding glass quality, any of the newer scopes with low-dispersion ED glass are going to look outstanding. NF Comp, March, etc. I've always found Leupold glass to be of very good quality. That said, the mechanical components of a scope are far more important than how the glass looks when competing for score or group. A good scope should track repeatably and precisely....every time. It should hold poi always. The only two companies I personally know meet this standard are Nightforce and March...and I have experience with a few of the other ones. Leupolds have good glass, but spend way too much time in the repair shop. I've heard great things about Sightron in terms of reliability, but have no experience with them.

Now, anything that is mechanical and made by man is going to fail eventually, so it's always a relative comparison. NF and March are top of the pile in my experience and the models with ED glass will be as clear as anything out there. Personally, I prefer the March tactical scopes because they are a little lighter than the NF and have superbly labeled windage turrets. They are clearly and simply labeled which really helps on the windy days at 1,000 yards when you have 9 or 10 minutes on your scope.

Another company I have experience with is IOR-Valdada: owned three of their scopes over the years. I don't own IOR scopes anymore: poor quality control in my experience. Beautiful glass though...

Also, I had to send a March scope in for service recently. The 1/4 MOA reticle dot was smaller than advertised. I'd like to commend Shiraz and his team for the outstanding service. It had to be sent to Japan so they could replace the reticle. Everything was handled promptly and professionally and I had the March folks contact me twice by email to ask how I wanted to handle certain details: their English was surprisingly good! They also replaced my magnification ring which I had originally sanded down for clearance. I did not need the extra clearance any more and the factory was kind enough to put a new ring on at no charge....great people.

Now, if the March or NF are out of your price range, the Weaver T-series are another brand that track flawlessly! They are a little less expensive.

Scott

What Valdada model did you have? My experience has been with the benchrest models primarily the straight 36 powers, the Crusader 5.8 X 40 and the 12 x 52 Terminator. All of those are rock solid and clearer then anything I've seen on the market.

The 36 power Valdada is catching on so fast in short range benchrest I can hardly keep them in stock. A lot of shooters have fixed thier scope problem by switching to a Valdada. Jackie Schidmt is a prime example.

Records get mentioned in this post a bit. I personally I have two short range records pending that I shot with the Valdada.

I've owned about every scope out there to include 8 or 9 March scopes. If I wasn't shooting Valdadas I'd have Marches on my guns.

Bart

 

[JRS]

I've never owned a March scope but have owned a few Nightforce BR's, a Leupold and a 10x50 sightron on my bench guns. Is the glass in the March better then the Leupold?
My dilemma is this: I had a new 30Br built at 13.5lbs with the Leupold 45 comp. The glass in the Leupold sucks compared to my Nightforce and even the Sightron. I want to get the Leupold off the gun but am hesitant to drop the coin on the March and I've heard the new fixed power Nightforce doesn't have great glass either. I need some real opinions from people that have used all of these scopes!

The scopes you have listed have equally good glass. The propriety coatings used by each maker can certainly make a difference in what each individual actually sees. Valdada uses the high end line of Schott glass. March and Nightforce are probably using O'Hara or Iida high end Japanese glass. Although Nightfore originally used Schott glass, it is more economically feasible for them to use the Japanese glass. Leupold uses Schott glass on certain scopes, and Japanese glass on others. Those 3 companies produce the best optical glass for scopes that money can buy. Don't get hung-up on the ED glass thing.

 

[Scarab]

I'm not hung up on anything other than I can't focus the image in the Leupold. I shot 4 targets 5shots each target with all group in the low 2's. That's respectable for my shooting. But the image being out of focus I can't deal with!

 

[JRS]

I'm not hung up on anything other than I can't focus the image in the Leupold. I shot 4 targets 5shots each target with all group in the low 2's. That's respectable for my shooting. But the image being out of focus I can't deal with!

Have you adjusted the ocular lens (eyepiece) correctly? If you haven't, you might, or might not have your reticle in focus.

 

[Scarab]

Yes, tried setting the parallax from both ends of its range. No luck, looked through another one a friend had and it didn't look any better. I don't wear glasses and have 20 20 vision knock on wood!

 

[Scott Harris]

Scott

What Valdada model did you have? My experience has been with the benchrest models primarily the straight 36 powers, the Crusader 5.8 X 40 and the 12 x 52 Terminator. All of those are rock solid and clearer then anything I've seen on the market.

The 36 power Valdada is catching on so fast in short range benchrest I can hardly keep them in stock. A lot of shooters have fixed thier scope problem by switching to a Valdada. Jackie Schidmt is a prime example.

Records get mentioned in this post a bit. I personally I have two short range records pending that I shot with the Valdada.

I've owned about every scope out there to include 8 or 9 March scopes. If I wasn't shooting Valdadas I'd have Marches on my guns.

Bart

Hi Bart,

The IOR models I used were the 2.5-10x42 and the 3-18x42 tactical. The first problem I had was paint flaking off the inside of the tube and getting on the lens. Val could not repair it easily and simply sent me a new scope. Unfortunately, the replacement had the exact same problem. The 3-18 had windage and other problems. IOR problems are well-documented on the inter-web, so no need to be-labor the point.

Sounds like you are using newer scopes and I hope they are more reliable than the ones I used. It's always great to have more competition in the market.

 

[JRS]

Yes, tried setting the parallax from both ends of its range. No luck, looked through another one a friend had and it didn't look any better. I don't wear glasses and have 20 20 vision knock on wood!

Parallax is a completely different thing. You have to get the ocular in focus for your individual eyesight! With your "parallax" response, you clearly don't understand what the ocular is. If the scope is faulty, LEUPOLD will either repair it, or, replace it. Their warranty is second to none. They can't fix a problem without having the opportunity to evaluate it. Send it to them with a note explaining the problem. Usually, they can repair it via a phone call. Its often times operator error.

Edit: I added "eyepiece" to my above post. 20-20 vision or not, the eyepiece has to be focused. No two people have equal eyesight. The eyepiece has to be focused to your eyesight. It works the same way it does with binoculars or a microscope. The individual eyepieces have to be focused for each eye. One might be +, the other -. Getting the eyepiece in focus is one of the first things you have to do. Its possible your friend didn't have his in focus either. Unfortunately, too many people overlook, or aren't aware of the importance of having the eyepiece in focus. You have to do the same thing with the viewfinder on a SLR camera!
"Focus, Danielson, Focus".

 

[BartsBullets]

Hi Bart,

The IOR models I used were the 2.5-10x42 and the 3-18x42 tactical. The first problem I had was paint flaking off the inside of the tube and getting on the lens. Val could not repair it easily and simply sent me a new scope. Unfortunately, the replacement had the exact same problem. The 3-18 had windage and other problems. IOR problems are well-documented on the inter-web, so no need to be-labor the point.

Sounds like you are using newer scopes and I hope they are more reliable than the ones I used. It's always great to have more competition in the market.

Scott,

Like I said I've only used the benchrest models. They have been awesome in every respect. I had over 20,000 dollars of scopes in my safe that would not hold point of aim When I switched.

Now the tactical stuff I have had zero experience with. But the 36s are tearing up short range benchrest.

Bart

 

[Scarab]

Parallax is a completely different thing. You have to get the eyepiece in focus for your individual eyesight!

Edit: I added "eyepiece" to my above post. 20-20 vision or not, the eyepiece has to be focused. No two people have equal eyesight. The eyepiece has to be focused to your eyesight. It works the same way it does with binoculars or a microscope. The individual eyepieces have to be focused for each eye. One might be +, the other -. Getting the eyepiece in focus is one of the first things you have to do. Its possible your friend didn't have his in focus either. Unfortunately, too many people overlook, or aren't aware of the importance of having the eyepiece in focus. You have to do the same thing with the viewfinder on a SLR camera!
"Focus, Danielson, Focus".

Eye piece was focused on both scopes!

 

[LHSmith]

Eye piece was focused on both scopes!

Did you turn the eyepiece looking at the sky until the reticle is sharp as can be? This must be done in a manner that the instant you snap the scope up, the reticle is immediately sharp. Lastly, make sure that eyepiece lock ring is tightened.
Also, are you shooting both eyes open?

 

[LHSmith]

FWIW, check out the results from the Cactus ( see Daily Bulletin). Look at what scopes are currently being used by top shooters. Don't discount your LCS.....get it repaired then decide if it's sub-par in holding POA or resolution.

 

[X-Caveman]

Yes the March has ED (Extra Low Dispersion) glass that's why they cost much more than a Leup, Sightron, or a BR model NF. Why do you think the NF Comp sells for $900+ more than the BR model. It's the same ED glass. Same glass used in high dollar camera's, microscopes, and telescopes. The new fixed 42X NF has the same glass as the 15-55 Comp. Never heard anything bad said about that new scope. I currently have 5 March, 1 NF Comp, and 2 IOR Valdada's. I've owned and sold, 7 Weaver T36's , 1 Weaver T36XR, 1 Leup Comp 45 that was Tuckerized, and a 10-50 Sightron. My honest opinion, The March scopes remind me of the Weaver T36's. Some are clearer than others, but they hold their POI better than almost anything else. The Valdada's hold POI just as well. The NF Comps have had issues. I know 2 guy's from PA, One builds stocks, the other is a bulletmaker and Gunsmith, who between them sold 3 NF Comps and bought March's because they weren't holding POI. Since Shiraz got the March deal, his prices have made owning a March more affordable.

Do you know if your PA buddies sent any of these three scopes back to NF for inspection/ repair? If so, what were the results?
Thanks

 

[JimPag]

Do you know if your PA buddies sent any of these three scopes back to NF for inspection/ repair? If so, what were the results?
Thanks

No I don't and I didn't ask.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Yes it would of been a hell of a deal. The only thing I would of done is change the dot. I don't think he had a 3/32 which is my favorite.

Got a 40x with 3/32dot ill sell you for $1500

 

[Scarab]

Did you turn the eyepiece looking at the sky until the reticle is sharp as can be? This must be done in a manner that the instant you snap the scope up, the reticle is immediately sharp. Lastly, make sure that eyepiece lock ring is tightened.
Also, are you shooting both eyes open?

Scope was adjusted correctly and yes I do shoot with both eyes open. But one eye two eyes made no difference. I know that the Leupolds are competitive, that's why I bought it and the weight. Maybe I need to send it back, but I just bought it and now really isn't the time to be screwing with scopes.

 

[LHSmith]

Scope was adjusted correctly and yes I do shoot with both eyes open. But one eye two eyes made no difference. I know that the Leupolds are competitive, that's why I bought it and the weight. Maybe I need to send it back, but I just bought it and now really isn't the time to be screwing with scopes.

Failing to shoot two eyes open results in greater eye fatigue = headaches....which I thought was one of your complaints. I always send my Leupolds back for service during the off-season. I have had to do this a total of 1x ( I have 3 -all +7 years old.) If clarity and color rendition are your main requirement....best to buy one over the counter (at least take them outside) where you can judge first-hand and buy THAT particular scope. I have heard guys say brand "X" is clearer than brand "Y", and his buddy looks through both and claims the opposite. Also, guys claim they have 2 of the same model and one has far better glass than the other.

 

[Marksman63]

Looks like 1 vote for the March, and Mr Stevens seems to like the Valdada. I'm not familiar with the Valdada but I'll check them out. I think I remember seeing one on Bart's website.

IOR Valdada mounts Schott Germany lenses, same as S&B and top quality as Zeiss/Hensoldt ones.

 

[JRS]

IOR Valdada mounts Schott Germany lenses, same as S&B and top quality as Zeiss/Hensoldt ones.

S&B produces their own lenses, and don't sell to any other makers.

 

[BartsBullets]

Failing to shoot two eyes open results in greater eye fatigue = headaches....which I thought was one of your complaints. I always send my Leupolds back for service during the off-season. I have had to do this a total of 1x ( I have 3 -all +7 years old.) If clarity and color rendition are your main requirement....best to buy one over the counter (at least take them outside) where you can judge first-hand and buy THAT particular scope. I have heard guys say brand "X" is clearer than brand "Y", and his buddy looks through both and claims the opposite. Also, guys claim they have 2 of the same model and one has far better glass than the other.

LH,

You really need to look through one of the 36 Valdadas to understand just exactly how much brighter and clearer they are then a March or Leupold. That isn't antidotal. It's been every person that's look through one with me and has said the same thing. There is no comparison.

FWIW...March, particularly at their price point, could have never gotten off the ground if the Leupold Competition series didn't have so many problems. Gene Bukys had a small cottage industry locking them and putting them in his TSI mounts.

You can send them back all you want. The majority of them will start shifting point of aim shortly there after. The old Leupold 36s are a different story. They can fix and repair them. The last competition series that graced one of my rifles was a week old when I took it to the Super Shoot. It shot great at the house. The match started and I shot like crap. It took two yardages for me to accept it could be the scope. Placing in the 140th range. Changed it out for my old 36 and in 4th and 6th for the next two yardages.

March exists because it filled a need. A solid scope when solid scopes were rare.

 

[Jason Boersma]

I will be selling a leupold comp this summer so I can get a valdada. They sound great!