• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

One scope for PRS and F-Class?

ATACR 7-35 could work for both. But sometimes 35x magnification is not enough for f-class. But when lots of mirage in the way 35x will work fine.

Burris XTR II 8-40 ?
Valdada Crusader 5.8-40 ?

FFP scopes don't go much above 40x magnification.
SFP scopes can go up to 80x magnification.
That's the quagmire here.
 
Last edited:
I’m now convinced that I will get the new 8-40 ZCO after it’s released. Have to work some OT and sell a couple things but it will make a great PRS scope and the open center/dot of the MPCT3x reticle at the upper power should be sufficient for my local 600 yard F-Class match.
If I get deeper into F-class I will build a dedicated rig/scope specifically for it then.
 
Look at the Kahles scopes with left side windage and parallax adjustment under the elevation knob...... :cool:

Regards
Rick
 
I’m now convinced that I will get the new 8-40 ZCO after it’s released. Have to work some OT and sell a couple things but it will make a great PRS scope and the open center/dot of the MPCT3x reticle at the upper power should be sufficient for my local 600 yard F-Class match.
If I get deeper into F-class I will build a dedicated rig/scope specifically for it then.
I applaud the fact you have made a decision.

May I be so bold as to ask what feature(s) made you decide to get the ZCO 8-40X56 instead of the March-FX 5-42X56? They are both at the same $4200 price point.

Was it the smaller zoom range of the 8-40 ZCO compared to the 5-42 March?

Was it the shorter range of adjustments of the 8-40 ZCO (28mil elevation) compared to the 5-42 March (40mil elevation)?

Was it the heavier weight of the 8-40 ZCO at 40.5 ounces compared to the 5-42 March at 33 ounces?

Was it the longer length of the ZCO at 17.3 inches compared to the March at 14.1 inches?

Was it the reduced field of view of the ZCO (13.8 ft- 3 ft @ 100 yards) compared to the March with its wide-angle eyepiece (26.2ft - 3.25ft @ 100 yards)?

Was it the fact the ZCO focuses down to 15 yards compared to 10 yards for the March?

Was it the larger tube diameter of the ZCO at 36mm compared to the March at 34mm and the ease of finding rings of that diameter?

Just curious.
 
The same comparison could be made between the ZCO 8-40X56 and the March 5-40X56 Gen II, but it's a little unfair since the March 5-40X56 is about $3,200, a whole $1000 less than the two models discussed earlier depending on features.

The March-FX 5-40X56 Gen II has a 34mm tube, lockable turrets, illumination, and has a wider range of magnification than the ZCO (5-40 Vs. 8-40). It is a little shorter at 15.2 inches Vs 17.3. It is lighter at 33.5 ounces Vs 40.5 ounces. It does have a smaller field of view (21ft-2.6ft at 100 yards) and a smaller adjustment range of 22mil compared to 28mil. The March-FX 5-40X56 does focus down to 10 yards.
 
ATACR 7-35 could work for both. But sometimes 35x magnification is not enough for f-class. But when lots of mirage in the way 35x will work fine.

Burris XTR II 8-40 ?
Valdada Crusader 5.8-40 ?

FFP scopes don't go much above 40x magnification.
SFP scopes can go up to 80x magnification.
That's the quagmire here.
the atacr 7-35 was a complete disappointment to me. i still own 7 night force scopes BUT NOT a 7-35x,
valdada 40x yes
 
I just got the new Razor 7x36. I got it to compare to my Schmidt, and 7x35 ATCAR because the reticle is finer and I like the floating dot. At 25 power, it's a wash between them. At 35 power, at least to my eyes, the Razor is considerably brighter and I'm able to resolve more detail. I think the glass is really good.The Elevation turret is stiff, but not too bad. The zeroing feature is fantastic! I'll do a tracking test tomorrow and see. I have a Gen 2 Razor that is currently on one of my 22s that tracks great. Impressed so far.
 
I just got the new Razor 7x36. I got it to compare to my Schmidt, and 7x35 ATCAR because the reticle is finer and I like the floating dot. At 25 power, it's a wash between them. At 35 power, at least to my eyes, the Razor is considerably brighter and I'm able to resolve more detail. I think the glass is really good.The Elevation turret is stiff, but not too bad. The zeroing feature is fantastic! I'll do a tracking test tomorrow and see. I have a Gen 2 Razor that is currently on one of my 22s that tracks great. Impressed so far.
I’m really liking mine too. The resolution and brightness up high is very impressive
 
I sure wish the March had a smaller center dot on the reticle like the ZCO. Would definitely be better for the times I used it in F-Class shooting.

The MPCT3X reticle has that dot in the middle that is 0.036MIL. Ok, let's look at the reticles that are available in the March scopes I listed above. In the March-FX 5-42X56, the one with the large adjustment range and the ultra-wide eyepiece, that make you think you're viewing the target in IMAX due to the huge FOV, the TR1 reticle has a dot in the center that is 0.06MIL. The March-FX 5-40X56, the one that compares more equally with the ZCO for FOV and adjustment range but is $1,000 less, can be had with the PDKI reticle. This reticle has a center dot that is .075MIL. (I'm very familiar with the reticle since I was one of its designers; I'm the D in "pDKi".)

So, the sizes are as follows:
MPCT3X: .036MIL or .125 MOA dot.
TR1: .060MIL or .200 MOA dot.
PDKI: .075MIL or .260 MOA dot.

We know what the size of the rings are on F-class target, the X-ring is 0.5MOA. So any of those reticles will allow you to hold anywhere inside the X-ring.

I've shot a bit of PRS, but a whole lot of F-Class. What I find interesting when discussing riflescopes is how people talk about them looking at the target in superb conditions. Unfortunately, the conditions rarely stay superb where I shoot most of the time; South Texas. We have something called "conditions" which refers to mirage.

This phenomenon has as its mission to screw up your sight picture. The scope which presented a super clear and crisp picture of the target early in the morning, is now showing a blackish amoeba. You can't even identify the target itself, let alone the rings and the X-ring is simply not there. So, you back off on the magnification until the amoeba settles down and at that point, surgical placement of the shot is more like crap shoot.

When I upgrade from Nightforce to March-X 5-50X56, I slowly realized that I was able to stay at 40X (my then favorite magnification), regardless of mirage conditions. When people around me were backing off into the low 30s or 20sX, I stayed at 40X. A few years ago, I discussed this observation here in a thread, in which I hypothesized that mirage was degrading the IQ produced by ED glass less quickly and severely compared to non-ED glass. A that time, I upgraded from the March-X 5-50X56 HM to the March-X 10-60X56HM, the one with Super ED glass. I had compared the two side by side and I could actually see the difference the Super ED glass was capable of producing. On the range, I found that I could go to 50X and stay there regardless of conditions. In fact, my riflescope has been a 50X only for the last 2 years.

The March-FX 5-40X56 has ED glass, the same as in my March-X 5-50X56 that I always ran at 40X.

The March-FX 5-42X56 has the High Master lens system that uses Super ED glass elements. The same as in my March-X 10-60X56 HM. The doublet lenses at the front that compose the objective lens group are Super ED glass, which is very close to pure fluorite crystal without the latter's inherent fragility and issues with changing temperatures.

March scopes were the first ones to incorporate ED glass, starting 14 years ago. March scopes are the first and still the only ones that have Super ED glass, in a few select models. The 5-42X56 HM is one of those. The others are the March-FX 4.5-28X52, the two Genesis models, and the March-X 10-60X56 HM, the one that I run at 50X regardless of mirage conditions.

Before everyone goes all nuts, when the mirage is running, the IQ is degraded but the target is still round, I still see the rings and the X-ring, but the image is fuzzy; it's actually quite impressive to see. I can still observe the mirage and that's important. When I look at the target line with a 5-42X56, I am in awe of the field of view its eyepiece produces, but I want 50X.

Anyway, good luck with your decision and I hope it works out well for you.
 

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.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,231
Messages
2,213,910
Members
79,448
Latest member
tornado-technologies
Back
Top