Ordered it Friday to go on my secondary rifle. I'm pretty much been a Nightforce user for several years and my main gun carries a 7-35x56 F1 ATACR but the wide angle on the March interested me so I switched. I shoot prairie dogs out in South Dakota and Texas under some pretty harsh conditions so it will be interesting to see how the two compare. I'm hoping its super ED glass will cut the mirage a little better and the wide angle helps with follow up shots. Looking forward to trying it out.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: low8option,

I was looking through their line up the other day.
All I have is lower end stuff and would love to take a peek through one of these high end scopes.

This is the riflescope for which another member here and I designed two reticles; the FML-PDK and the FML-LDK models. This is not available with illumination because of the design of the optical path and the reticle itself. It was made for pure competition. The illuminated model comes with the FML-TR1 or the FML-3 reticle but they are quite a bit thicker.

We tested the first pre-production models and fed back the information to Deon (the makers of March scopes.) Deon made adjustments to the riflescope following our findings and those of other testers and recently started shipping out the definitve version with these adjustments.

On snipershide, some guy who does a lot of in-depth reviews of high-end (Alpha) glass posted an in-depth review of the production model of this riflescope comparing head-on with tn read the review here:he Tangent Theta 5-25X56. I thought it was an unfair comparison because the March-FX is a short design with a 52mm objective and the TT is a long design with a 56mm objective. The reviewer (Glassoholic) completely agreed with that but he wanted to see if the March-FX would even measure up anywhere near the TT.

You can read the review here:

https://www.snipershide.com/sh...eta-5-25x56.7080602/

The reviewer was quite thorough.

The production model comes with several accessories such as the flip-caps, a middle wheel for the side focus knob, a modifier disk for the objective lens when you wish for greated depth of field and a large know insert for the elevation knob with BIG numbers for old geezers like me. There are a few other goodies.

I look forward to you impressions of the riflescope and how it works out for you. I have been reading many reports on other discussion boards of people really liking their production model of the March-FX 4.5-28X52 HW WA. They REALLY like and rave about the wide field of view in the wide angle eyepiece. Some bozo even refers to is as shooting in IMAX.

Well I finally got to try out the March in the field and compare it to my current Nightforce. The reticle I got in my March was the FML-LDK which is very similar to the Nightforce MOAR with exception the LDK is mils and MOAR is moa which was a little problem on the 100 yard range when I was zeroing the scope but created no problems in field as I rely mostly on holdovers on the rapidly changing target distances and I generally only use the elevation when I need to shift more than 400 or 500 yards.

Note: All comparisons between scopes were made at max magnification of 28X as that was max for March and the Nightforce went to 35X.

Temperatures were mild this year and barely reach 82 degrees the first day so mirage was mild and proved no problem for either scope although the sun was bright and both scopes benefited from their sunshades. The wind was typical for South Dakota and measured around 20 MPH with occasional gust up to 28 MPH. The windage knob moved easily and the scope had enough adjustment that shooting in 90 degree crosswinds was no problem. In fact, both windage and elevation turrets operated with a crisp click and always returned accurately back to basic settings. The biggest difference noted the first day was the March wide angle made seeing bullet hits and adjusting for follow up shots much easier, and as I had no one spotting for me that made a big difference. In addition, I use my rifle scope to scan the field looking for new targets and the wide angle allowed me to user higher power setting in my search.

Second day we ran into bad overcast weather. Prairie Dog's biggest threat are Hawks, Owls, and Eagles so they rarely come out when they cannot see shadows. Today was no exception and we did not see a dog all day. Not to waste an opportunity we found a field where we had a good 1000 yard range (measured by both GPS and Range finder) and set up some improvised targets (coke cans, aluminum beer bottles and a plastic 32oz oil bottle) on top of some Prairie Dog mounds. We set up our tables and took alternating shots and spotted for one another. Wind was mild only 5-10 MPH at about 30 degrees but overcast greatly lowered the light quality. Had a ball shooting at the Prairie Dog sized targets. I shot about 30 rounds out of my 6CR with the March and got 4 hits and 7 shots with my 260 Remy with the Nightforce (already set for this range so only required finding wind setting) and got 1 hit. Biggest differences noted were the marks on the LDK reticle were finer than on the MOAR and proved to work better on seeing distant small targets as both scopes are FFP and the lines got bigger at higher magnifications on the MOAR right at same time targets got smaller. The second thing noted was the March seemed to be a little clearer in the low light conditions.

Initial Conclusions: With both scopes including good rings and mount costing around the $4K mark one had better know exactly what he wants from his scope. For me it is all the usual things a good quality scope should have such as, good mechanics that stand up to hard use, accurate turrets that retain setting and when changed return, good glass, a reticle that's easy to understand and use, ruggedness that can withstand abuse, good eye relief, good warranty and longevity(provide good service for years to come). Both scopes certainly deliver on these. But these things can be found in scopes costing a lot less and the thing that would make me pay for a scope in this price range is the advantage the newer ED glass gives and the potential it has for me to see better in heavy mirage conditions. During this hunt we had one of those rare occasions where the mirage was negligible to the shooting so I was unable to determine which had the better glass. Under the conditions we had this year the only real advantage between the scopes went to the March's wide angle and finer lines on the LDK reticle. I'm going to have to wait till next year to find out which works better with my eyes in the mirage. Both are great scopes and so far I certainly like both and one can't go wrong getting either one.

low8option I read your review with great interest. You did a super job; you listed your parameters and graded accordingly.

The remainder of this post needs to stay between us; I don't want it to get out.

I have a special affinity for the FML-LDK reticle. Unlike my partner-in criminal-reticle-deesign, I prefer the LDK reticle for its clean unobtrusive design, I thought it would make an awesome hunting and target reticle, where the PDK was targeted to the PRS shooters. We wanted the reticle to be clean and thin and you confirmed that thought big time. The ATACR is a very good scope but the March-FX 4.5-28X52 has excellent glass and that wide angle eyepiece, which I think is just a giant killer and you also proved that.

Thank you for the excellent and well thought-out review. Your conclusions are spot on, neither scope is a bad choice, you make an informed decision on the features that are important to you.

(Did I mention that I love the LDK reticle?)

NikonUser, I appreciate the comments. By the way, how do you like the LDK reticle?

quote:

Originally posted by low8option:
NikonUser, I appreciate the comments. By the way, how do you like the LDK reticle?

This morning, March posted this excellent review with pictures and expanded text at their site:

https://marchscopes.com/news/10372/

quote:

Originally posted by NikonUser:
this excellent review

Thanks for that; interesting and informative.