March 2.5x25x52mm SFP scopes?

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by drespecki, Jun 6, 2018.

  1. drespecki

    drespecki Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    187
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Looking to build up a long range 6.5 creedmoor hunting rifle and am looking at the March 2.5x25x52mm SFP illuminated scope with the MTR-3 reticle..
    Anyone with experience/ownership of a March 2.5/25/52 scope? Likes? Dislikes?
    How is the 'eyebox' so to speak? Easy to get on target and forgiving or hard to acquire?
    Thanks!
     
  2. Blkz06

    Blkz06 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    124
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2013
    I have been looking at the March myself, but in reading some reviews there have been some complaints on these scopes. One is the actual mil turret "measurement" is not a mil... It basically doesn't track true. For hunting, I'm not sure that really matters...I know it doesn't to me.

    The other thing that keeps popping up is that the focus or sharpness of the glass is a bit lacking around 100 yards. From 100 yards out, its razor sharp.

    Eyebox is a bit tight...at least on the one I demoed and had on my rifle. I noticed a little curvature to the glass but it wasn't terrible. The parallax is very finicky however. I didn't notice any percieved focus issues, but I also didn't spend more than an hour with it.

    For the money I'm looking at Kahles, Tangent and Nightforce.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018
  3. Ed AO

    Ed AO Active Member

    Messages:
    41
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2017
    Went from a 5.5-22x50 nxs NF to this scope. I like the march, i think for hunting, its a perfect scope. once you set it up for your eyes, the eye box isn’t really an issue. A little tight yes but doesn’t bother me. I have mine on a 28 nosler.
     
    highplains likes this.
  4. Greyfox

    Greyfox Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,383
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    The March is my preferred scope on my weight, 10-12# LRH rifles. March initially used a different Radian standard(6400R) in their scopes which was incorrectly interpreted as poor tracking accuracy in an early comparison test. Turret precision which was actually quite good. March has long since switched to the standard(6283.2R). My March 2.5x25X52 SFP has glass that, IMO, is superior to my Nightforce ATACR/NXS and at least comparable to my S&B. I handles low sun glare better the any scope I’ve used. I personally have no issues with the eye box, and prefer its fast ratio parallax/focus control. Aside from these attributes, I think greatest attribute of the March is the lighter weight, and more compact size.
     
    MTSLW, HARPERC and brentc like this.
  5. SDMOL

    SDMOL Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2017
    does March offer a 1 MOA reticle in a SFP scope? the ones i have seen all have 2 MOA
     
  6. Greyfox

    Greyfox Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,383
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    I don’t believe so. I have the MP3 reticle which has 2 MOA divisions.
     
  7. SDMOL

    SDMOL Member

    Messages:
    21
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2017
    How do you like the 2 MOA divisions? I have been looking at the March to maybe shave a little weight from the NF scoped rifles I have but I am very used to 1 MOA reticles
     
  8. Greyfox

    Greyfox Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,383
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    I personally find that it makes very little difference for making fast/accurate wind/elevation holds with .5MOA precision. They subtend at 20X, with 20x and 10x numbered in red on the power ring. I really like the weight of the crosshair,, fine enough for precision work at long range shots on coyotes to 1200+ yards, heavy enough to not get lost in shadows/low light.
     
  9. Wedgy

    Wedgy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,093
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    I have not found any negatives to my March scopes. As mentioned the glass to me also exceeds the NF glass up the ATACR.
    Why are you building a 6.5 Creed long range ? Unless you are calling ~650 yards long range. I think there are much better cartridges to choose from.
     
  10. drespecki

    drespecki Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    187
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    My shooting is all about deer and elk hunting out here in the west.... I think the furthest that I am good for is about 600 yards and I do not want the recoil/twitch factor hindering me.. I am getting a bit older and those days of 7mm mag/300 win mag/etc.. are behind me..
     
    HARPERC likes this.
  11. Rich Coyle

    Rich Coyle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,858
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2013
    Has anyone compared side by side a March 2 1/2-25X52 with a Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50?

    I think I want one but have been disappointed with every one except VX-6 4-24X52.
     
    HARPERC likes this.
  12. Wedgy

    Wedgy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,093
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    I have had two of the 4-30x and both were mediocre glass at best, fuzzy at anything over 22x, and ~50MOA vertical really kills them. I loved the 2.5-16x zoom but again poor glass, no ZS. Not even in the same ballpark as March. You are the only person who raves about the Bushy 6500, I wish I found them as useful because I could save a ton of money.
     
    HARPERC likes this.
  13. tuscan

    tuscan Active Member

    Messages:
    44
    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    No experience with SFP, but really like my 3-25x42 FFP. Bought it for mountain hunts, and because I wanted FFP. It's the lightest FFP scope I could find, and saves considerable weight from NF. For fun I did a box test, and it was flawless. Great experience in marginal light too.
     
    MTSLW likes this.
  14. Rich Coyle

    Rich Coyle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,858
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2013
    Why would you keep something that is now working?! That sounds like the first one I got. I sent in it for service. When it came back it was as clear as the ones I have now, but only above 10X. I sent it back for a refund. You need to send them in for service. The next three were what I expected. Not that I expected them to be better than the more expensive scopes, but am delighted they are. So far everyone who as compared theirs at my optics chart and deer antlers, except the Swarovski z8i and higher costing Nightforces, have agreed the Bushnells are equal or better.

    I'm not necessarily a Bushnell fan boy. In fact I still think Tasco World Class is the best scope value on the market. They just can't keep up in low light. I keep buying and returning scopes in hopes of beating my 4 1/2-30X50s. My most recent purchase was the new Track scope. I purchased four of the Bushnell 6500 2 1/2-16X both 44mm and 50mm for my .375-.416 Rem Mag and all are gone. None of them have glass as good as the three 4 1/2-30X50s I have.

    Again I will repeat the first sentence: Why would you keep something that is now working?!