March vs NF

[Fire Dog]

To the vast majority of shooter's eyes the NF comp will come out on top. Im not going to pretend that that other scopes have just as good of an image. Im going to push the other manufactures to beat it. I don't and never will trust the NF comp. We had a LOT of reliability issues with them. Did they fix them on newer scopes? Who knows, they wont admit to a problem so they cant admit to a fix. I have zero time for that BS. So lets go March and Kahles. We are waiting for the best glass AND 100% reliability! At this time, there is no scope that has both. The hardest question to answer is when a customer asks what scope he should put on his BR or F Class rifle.

I have both March & Kahles as well as a Trijicon and all three perform well, if anything the Kahles is the brightest and a toss up between the March & Trijicon.
All mounted in SPUHR mounts with just enough clearance between the front bell and barrel to allow a flip cap.
For the money I think the Trijicon Ten Mile is good value and under appreciated.
It is the only illuminating scope that I can actually see the illumination in full daylight, unlike my March which costs lots more money.
A choice of red or green and I have found it helpful when a heavy mirage is running as it defines the cross hairs well against the target.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

For those that shoot March and Kahles and do not have a scope checker, how do they know their scope is holding point of impact any better than a NF ?

You don't know anything if you don't test it. But, had you been a Deep Creek when we were doing the tests I think you would have been convinced. Guys from around the country were sending us scopes. We tested a bunch. It was hard to deny that 100% of the Kahles scope didn't shift not one bit even on the first shot after mounting. It was kind of a common belief that a small movement on the first shot after mounting was ok, just the mounts settling in. The Kahles proved that wrong. We tested over 30 comps too. When they all did exactly the same thing that makes you a believer. The GE and NF BR all did the same thing as well. The movement that we saw was very consistent in each scope model. If they moved, they did it in the same direction and the same amount. The outliers came from scopes that were usually solid but when you found a bad one it was an odd ball. One really bad one moved a half minute. It was brand new, never mounted before. It was from a brand that in generally good. I wish I would have worked the turrets on it and re tested just to see if there was some debris or grease that could have been there from manufacturing. Other than that one odd ball the results were surprisingly consistent within each model.

 

[X-Caveman]

Well, you're in luck. You've just described the March-X 10-60X56 HM almost to a T. It has a 34mm tube because you want the stability. It's 32 oz. I'm not sure why you dislike 6X zoom, but it's sort of required for a high magnification scope that will meet your weight requirements.

That’s why have one! I never use it below about 20x. Are you saying a 20-60 would need to be heavier?

 

[Alex Wheeler]

20-60x50 or 60 without the bells and whistles and rock solid mechanics is all we need. No locking turrets, no zero stop, no illumination, no perfectly flat image with edge to edge perfectly corrected image. Just need an aiming device. The majesta is a great scope but its too heavy for the vast majority of long range BR and FTR rifles. Manufacturers need to reach out to top shooters and smiths because it seems like they don't know what we need. Makes no sense to build a scope that half of your customer base can't use because its too heavy.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

That’s why have one! I never use it below about 20x. Are you saying a 20-60 would need to be heavier?

The magnification of a riflescope is made up by dividing the focal length of the objective by the focal length of the eyepiece and then multiplying by the zoom factor of the erector tube.
This is why minimum power are usually 10x or less. Of course the design of the scope could be such that magnification is achieved differently but ultimately the overall length of the scope and its weight is a huge factor.

Have you ever wondered about the early scopes that had long tubes and minimal power? If you haven't, maybe you should now.

Zoom range is not a bad thing, we want high magnification and still be able to have a scope we can mount on a rifle and is solid enough not to shift on its own and we love one piece bodies for the durability and consistency.

 

[JFrank]

You don't know anything if you don't test it. But, had you been a Deep Creek when we were doing the tests I think you would have been convinced. Guys from around the country were sending us scopes. We tested a bunch. It was hard to deny that 100% of the Kahles scope didn't shift not one bit even on the first shot after mounting. It was kind of a common belief that a small movement on the first shot after mounting was ok, just the mounts settling in. The Kahles proved that wrong. We tested over 30 comps too. When they all did exactly the same thing that makes you a believer. The GE and NF BR all did the same thing as well. The movement that we saw was very consistent in each scope model. If they moved, they did it in the same direction and the same amount. The outliers came from scopes that were usually solid but when you found a bad one it was an odd ball. One really bad one moved a half minute. It was brand new, never mounted before. It was from a brand that in generally good. I wish I would have worked the turrets on it and re tested just to see if there was some debris or grease that could have been there from manufacturing. Other than that one odd ball the results were surprisingly consistent within each model.

I agree that a guy doesn’t know unless you test, you say even the outliers can have a problem, I believe that to be true as anything can have a problem.
Yes I did and regretfully missed that testing period at DC but I can’t go back only forward and I’m there full time now.
I mentioned earlier I don’t have a scope checker nor are they readily available these days. I’m not complaining about it just stating the facts but I am hopeful I’ll gain access one day and maybe I’ll sell my comps and buy a Kahles but in the meantime I just enjoy the shooting and visiting with the fellas.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

20-60x50 or 60 without the bells and whistles and rock solid mechanics is all we need. No locking turrets, no zero stop, no illumination, no perfectly flat image with edge to edge perfectly corrected image. Just need an aiming device. The majesta is a great scope but its too heavy for the vast majority of long range BR and FTR rifles. Manufacturers need to reach out to top shooters and smiths because it seems like they don't know what we need. Makes no sense to build a scope that half of your customer base can't use because its too heavy.

How about a 40-60X52 with an ironclad guarantee of absolutely no shifting of POA navigating the zoom. Plus it has a 30 tube so highly prized by some of you here. And to top it off, it weighs 24 ounces. No locking turrets, no zero stop, no illumination. Just an aiming device.

That's the March 40-60X52 EPZ.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Nope, tried it. 40s is too high for the bottom end.

 

[Janeau]

So for the NF owners... ca you run these scopes at full power all the time? Or do you find yourself dialing back to say 40x?

Thank you.

I run my Competition 15-55 at it’s max power 55 all the time.No issues great scope. I own a Marsh High Master 48X52 because of it’s lightweight for a Benchrest Kelby 6 ppc but if it was not for the weight would have stayed with NF. Own some Leupold scope too..the only ones that needed a trip back for repair over the years. Not bashing..just saying.

The other brand I had good luck with is the Vortex Golden Eagle Gen 1 and the HD 15-60x52 on my fun guns - they have great fine reticles and are very clear and use them 99% of the time at 60.

 

[Gman]

How about a 40-60X52 with an ironclad guarantee of no parallax issue and absolutely no shifting of POA navigating the zoom. Plus it has a 30 tube so highly prized by some of you here. And to top it off, it weighs 24 ounces. No locking turrets, no zero stop, no illumination. Just an aiming device.

That's the March 40-60X52 EPZ.

I'd be all over this model of scope if it was available with a laser etched W-Dot reticle. (not a dot on top of a crosshair) It's perfect for score shooting.

 

[jimmymac]

It would be nice to have access to all that old scope checker information that was done at Deep Creek.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I agree that a guy doesn’t know unless you test, you say even the outliers can have a problem, I believe that to be true as anything can have a problem.
Yes I did and regretfully missed that testing period at DC but I can’t go back only forward and I’m there full time now.
I mentioned earlier I don’t have a scope checker nor are they readily available these days. I’m not complaining about it just stating the facts but I am hopeful I’ll gain access one day and maybe I’ll sell my comps and buy a Kahles but in the meantime I just enjoy the shooting and visiting with the fellas.

Just get with Tom and ask him to bring his to DC.

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

I run my Competition 15-55 at it’s max power 55. No issues great scope. I own a Marsh and do not see the hipe they are getting on the web. I stick with NF.

Bof. Y'a pas beaucoup de mirage à Montréal.

 

[JFrank]

Just get with Tom and ask him to bring his to DC.

Yeah I’ll do that~ It’s only 15* this morning in Lolo, we don’t start tuning until it’s closer to 0* in Montana

 

[Turbulent Turtle]

Nope, tried it. 40s is too high for the bottom end.

There's just no pleasing you, is there? Remember the rules of magnification. If you go 20-60X on an eyepiece zoom? That's a 3X zoom and that eyepiece is going to shrink quite a bit as the magnification grows. Then you'll complain about that.
I do see another way, but that would require a brand new design which takes years. I suggest people who are interested contact March directly at their website and let them know your thoughts. The more people the better.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

There's just no pleasing you, is there? Remember the rules of magnification. If you go 20-60X on an eyepiece zoom? That's a 3X zoom and that eyepiece is going to shrink quite a bit as the magnification grows. Then you'll complain about that.
I do see another way, but that would require a brand new design which takes years. I suggest people who are interested contact March directly at their website and let them know your thoughts. The more people the better.

We already have a 15x55 and I have zero complaints on that glass. But your right, Im not happy with anything we use. Thats why it keeps getting better and we are not shooting the same equipment we did 10 years ago.

 

[rwj]

Is a scope checker a fixture that allows two scopes to be mounted on a rifle, one inline with the barrel and the other offset? If yes, how does one establish that the offset one is good (no internal movement) and doesn’t move relative to the one being tested during recoil?

 

[jackieschmidt]

Is a scope checker a fixture that allows two scopes to be mounted on a rifle, one inline with the barrel and the other offset? If yes, how does one establish that the offset one is good (no internal movement) and doesn’t move relative to the one being tested during recoil?

Here is one.
I had access to a Hood scope checker years ago, I actually froze several scopes for shooters to use with the Hood Checker, as you have to be 100% sure that the “good” scope is rock solid.

 

[Appalachian]

How about a 40-60X52 with an ironclad guarantee of absolutely no shifting of POA navigating the zoom. Plus it has a 30 tube so highly prized by some of you here. And to top it off, it weighs 24 ounces. No locking turrets, no zero stop, no illumination. Just an aiming device.

That's the March 40-60X52 EPZ.

I’ve been shooting one all year. Shot a match last night with it. It’s not the brightest scope I have, but for shooting at a white background at 50 yards it’s fine.I wish it could be had with the MTR-4 reticle. That’s my favorite reticle of all for shooting the round bulls. I don’t care for how the eyepiece is so far away when zoomed in, but it’s worth it knowing POA won’t shift if I need to zoom out which Is what several guys warned me about when I showed up with my 8-80 the first time. They weren’t warning me about the March in particular, but in general.

I recently bought a NF Comp. I’ve only shot one match with it, but boy is it bright.

 

[FTR_Mojo]

I’ve been shooting one all year. Shot a match last night with it. It’s not the brightest scope I have or even the clearest, but for shooting at a white background at 50 yards it’s fine.I wish it could be had with the MTR-4 reticle. That’s my favorite reticle of all for shooting the round bulls. I don’t care for how the eyepiece is so far away when zoomed in, but it’s worth it knowing POA won’t shift if I need to zoom out which Is what several guys warned me about when I showed up with my 8-80 the first time. They weren’t warning me about the March in particular, but in general.

I recently bought a NF Comp. I’ve only shot one match with it, but boy is it bright.

Ive not seen this discussed before. Is POI shift a widely known issue with 8-80 scopes when changing zoom?
I use a 8-80 march, and I thought i was seeing this happen. But wasnt entirely sure.