I didn’t say March is the only one doing it but we are the only one doing it on Windage, elevation and parallax for prs specific use. Sounds to me like Burris had a good idea.
Rifle Scopes March 5-42 Gen 2 PRS Edition
- Thread starter Shayne Ward
- Start date
Good point on windage and parallax.
Speaking of parallax - how easy is the knob to turn? My old Steiner and Maven were crazy stiff, and my Razor 3 is a tad stiffer than I prefer. My ATACR and USO are right where I like them. NRL22 with a stiff parallax knob sucks.
Speaking of parallax - how easy is the knob to turn? My old Steiner and Maven were crazy stiff, and my Razor 3 is a tad stiffer than I prefer. My ATACR and USO are right where I like them. NRL22 with a stiff parallax knob sucks.
I bet you would argue with yourself if you could figure out WTF you were even saying lmao
Some forget that the Tremor reticles were mainly developed for the military to engage human targets, yes it could be used for other things as well. - Richard
In match conditions, just that one match, and a stage in the match prior where I was having trust issues with my scope.
I did some practice with friends shortly after, and did a troop line. I shot well, but timed out pretty bad. I still think it's fun to do reticle stuff, but in match conditions, I just use dry erase on my turrets since it's so fast.
I dial elevation and wind now, because it's so much faster to find the dead center of your reticle instead of finding it and moving over so many hashes. Does it translate to 30 seconds of extra time? No. But it keeps me more mentally agile on the clock.
I have no dog in this fight but I like accurate information, in no order and just a sample:
ZCO MPCT1X
Tangent JTAC
Kahles SKMR+
Nightforce Mil-C
Richard
Huh. Your experience is exactly opposite from mine. I’m dealing with targets randomly popping up all day at random distances, at random angles to me. I almost never get lost in the tree, but that’s all I use 99.9% of the time. And only down to two mrads.
I think when I use some writable ballistic tape this summer, it’ll make it faster and easier to dial my S&B 5-25 (H2CMR ret) with my AIAT. I’m doing that to stretch my brain a little. That, and also to be able to see the little buggers better, as that is the primary weakness of the tree…uncluttered visibility.
If I practice enough, I’m sure I’ll get to be good at dialing. I bet if you shot with just your tree for months you’d get awfully good at using it too.
I think it’s helpful to not just think about PRS. After all, the shooting sports started with hunting, with killing things.
Pretend one is equally competent using both a tree and dialing. In what I’m calling field conditions (i.e. shooting multiple randomly appearing/distanced targets in a 100° wide FOV, DMR-style, 500yds max).
In those conditions, I can’t see how someone would be faster by adding a step in there (dialing both wind/elev).
I use a ColeTac range card affixed to my scope. It’s SPIN AROUND, FIND (LRF binos), RANGE, REFIND (in riflescope), CHECK RANGE CARD, CHECK WIND/CALC IN HEAD (wind calls change, 100° FOV), MOVE RETICLE, SHOOT.
EXCEPT if you’re shooting a long way out, past my ranges. I can see dialing would help because it becomes increasingly hard for me to hold lower and lower down on the tree, as the dots both start to blend together and really start obscuring stuff.
Hence my idea of forgoing the tree past some arbitrary number of mils.
I definitely agree that the time difference between dialing and holding would indeed shrink to near-nothing in barricade benchrest-type comps.
Because ahead of time, if you know where all of the targets are, their elevation AND wind calls, their ranges, and have time to calmly mark their exact ranges in different colors on your turret’s ballistic tape & your arm board, well shoot, yeah, that’s going to be pretty fast.
I’m not saying trees are the best in all cases, period. Nothing is.
It’s just good to have a friendly conversation about these things, no?
Last edited:
The great thing about riflescopes is the manufacturer can (and does) put different reticles in there, for different people and purposes. That doesn’t happen with a lot of products.
I use the tree all the time in matches. If the stage requires a lot of movement with 2 different targets at different ranges (so the intent being that movement and time are the stressors) I'll hold that stage all day everyday. Holding buys me a few extra seconds to make sure my position is solid instead of rushing into a position.
I think the dialing vs holding debate could be a difference in training. Ive been using the same reticle (Burris SCR2) for at least 3 years now and holding is second nature.
I think the dialing vs holding debate could be a difference in training. Ive been using the same reticle (Burris SCR2) for at least 3 years now and holding is second nature.
Holdovers are a skill set. If it's not a skill being practiced, it's not a skill that you will necessarily feel comfortable utilizing.
Yeah, that’s my point.
I’m then implying that if you don’t practice the skill and get good at it, it’s not the best thing to state that this unpracticed skill is no good. (maybe that’s what you’re saying too)
So can any of you math geniuses figure out the relative FOV gains one gets with the newer alpha wide-FOV scopes when compared side by side with some of the usual suspects..?
Like, if the FOV of a ZCO 527 = x
Would the March be like: x + 20% more FOV? (or more?)
As I get older (and closer to blind) I do see the usefulness of being able to run higher magnification because of more available FOV… it’s just hard to quantify what a wide-FOV scope would actually deliver. Being able to crank up to 20x and still have the same FOV as one is used to at like 15x would definitely be a plus, but if the difference isn’t that significant then IDK if it’s even that big of a deal?
Like, if the FOV of a ZCO 527 = x
Would the March be like: x + 20% more FOV? (or more?)
As I get older (and closer to blind) I do see the usefulness of being able to run higher magnification because of more available FOV… it’s just hard to quantify what a wide-FOV scope would actually deliver. Being able to crank up to 20x and still have the same FOV as one is used to at like 15x would definitely be a plus, but if the difference isn’t that significant then IDK if it’s even that big of a deal?
I’ll add one more point to the folks who don’t hunt. It’s so basic to me I forget to mention it.
Most animals move. Pdogs move A LOT more than most. They disappear down holes. Reappear. Stand straight up like a pole. Slink around low like a cat. Turn so there is only like 1”-4” to shoot at. Or only show a sliver of their head out of their hole. They are often scampering around, disappearing in the grass or behind mounds. Often you have very, very little time to shoot.
There’s tiny, tiny ones too.
In the regular course of fire, one is constantly disengaging from one disappeared target and reengaging another at a significant range difference. I found that I was damn near wearing my wrist out turning those knobs. Sounded like this lol:
Now, if you take a more leisurely pace at it, yeah, dialing is fine. Wait for those sunbather pdogs to just stand there.
I’m trying to kill as many as I can.
Most animals move. Pdogs move A LOT more than most. They disappear down holes. Reappear. Stand straight up like a pole. Slink around low like a cat. Turn so there is only like 1”-4” to shoot at. Or only show a sliver of their head out of their hole. They are often scampering around, disappearing in the grass or behind mounds. Often you have very, very little time to shoot.
There’s tiny, tiny ones too.
In the regular course of fire, one is constantly disengaging from one disappeared target and reengaging another at a significant range difference. I found that I was damn near wearing my wrist out turning those knobs. Sounded like this lol:
Now, if you take a more leisurely pace at it, yeah, dialing is fine. Wait for those sunbather pdogs to just stand there.
I’m trying to kill as many as I can.
Last edited:
I would not pay $4-5K for a scope that did not have a tree reticle..In PRS22, you have 90 seconds at lot of matches, You might have 5 targets and 10 movements..Good Luck on the dialing.. I am friends with most of the Top Shooters here on the East Coast, not one shoots a straight reticle.. Justin in the NE is probably the only person I seen that dials 98 percent of stages, He is a BA and I am sure we will see it at Worlds. He however offsets that dialing by running attached maybe 99 percent of the time.. I do not see in the rimfire game how you can not have the tree with the games we are asked to play and the wind we are asked to play it in sometimes.. Actually...I HOPE YOU ALL buy scopes with the straight reticles, it MIGHT help my finishes.. maybe not but i know the tree is something I have to have.
I do not shoot centerfire, and it may very well be the case there that a straight will work just fine there.
I do think in Rimfire 1/4'' mils are enough on the tree, and a faster read when you are holding over, gives you a bit more open space to see your splashes.
I prefer dialing, will always choose it if the time allows, most matches here dont allow.. I bet 80 percent is 90...but is sure does make the 105 matches seem like forever when you get to shoot them.
I do not shoot centerfire, and it may very well be the case there that a straight will work just fine there.
I do think in Rimfire 1/4'' mils are enough on the tree, and a faster read when you are holding over, gives you a bit more open space to see your splashes.
I prefer dialing, will always choose it if the time allows, most matches here dont allow.. I bet 80 percent is 90...but is sure does make the 105 matches seem like forever when you get to shoot them.
Ah, a bag attached? So he saves a little time because he can flop the whole rig down vs. bag, and then gun, right?
What your talking about is a single hold over when you’ve dialed wind on the first target your not talking about holding pigs in space never dialing anything at all that’s a different thing entirely.
I bet the golden bullet winner last year for prs rimfire doesn’t think he needs a tree. He probably doesn’t know much about 22 rifle prs though…
That's not what I'm talking about. The only time I ever dial wind is for a mover. Just this past weekend I was holding .4-.8 in wind while also holding over. Funny enough the targets were pigs too.
For most stages that I holdover there are 2 targets, sometimes 3, at different distances. In those stages the primary stressor is movement so match directors typically don't put more than 2 targets at different distances. Not to say it doesn't happen though as I've also held over for 5 different targets in a single stage.
And I bet the World Champ uses a TT Gen 3 XR.. He, probably like the golden bullet dude doesn’t know much either..
we going to cut to the chase and just show our dicks next? I just threw out the world champ, kind of the highest.. where do we go from here? Maybe we can find out who’s dad’s bigger? Get them to meet and kick up some dirt? That should settle it..
If you were to make a prs scope, and it only had one reticle, having a straight is not a good choice if you want to sell more scopes.
The March-FX 5-42X56 Gen 2 is available with tree reticles such as the FML-TR1.
If trees are so incredibly necessary but he doesn’t use one how did he win the prs 22 golden bullet though…. I guess maybe not EVERYONE uses them like you so adamantly claim.
Just as an aside, I don’t actually think all this childish bickering reflects well on the brand anyway… and im saying this as someone with a pair of 4.5-28s and a 5-42g2.
I am not the one saying “most” top prs people use straights.. I personally don’t care what a person uses. When people come here they are looking for good info. Saying most use straights is incorrect.
I agree, but this bickering does motivate me to avoid a reticle that might give someone a kickback, avoid a vendor whose attitude I don’t like, and provided me two more users for my ignore list.
-Stan
Last edited:
I love it when people have no idea they are arguing with a golden bullet winner.
Totally agree. I almost bought one after playing with their reticle simulator on their site. It’s pretty cool. I think David Tubbs made a similar reticle, only angled down, left to right, to also simulate aerodynamic jump.
Anyway. Then I calculated out the T3’s .2 mil big dot size, in inches, at 100-1100 yds. I’m not shooting a pdog past 5-600 hundo, but I was just curious.
| Range in yds | More exact T3 big dot coverage (inches) | Approx size T3 big dot coverage (inches) |
| 100 | 0.72” | 3/4” |
| 200 | 1.44” | 1.5” |
| 300 | 2.16” | 2” |
| 400 | 2.88” | 3” |
| 500 | 3.60” | 3.5” |
| 600 | 4.32” | 4.25” |
| 700 | 5.04” | 5” |
| 800 | 5.76” | 5.75” |
| 900 | 6.48” | 6.5” |
| 1000 | 7.20” | 7.25” |
| 1100 | 7.92” | 8” |
Around, say, 350yds the big dot size will become too big and cover too much of some pdog targets.
But the biggest problem, I think, would be that the flyscreen effect of the damn thing would hinder one from finding the dogs in the first place.
Some might be arguing with him. I’m not.
Wait. I’m not completely sure.
To the guys that love a simple reticle, are you saying the simple ret is best in all possible shooting situations? For everybody?
That I’d have a beef with. I don’t think you guys are saying that, but you’re also not engaging with my hunting scenarios
I think this post went totally in the wrong direction from the beginning. As most things do that get discussed here unfortunately. I gave my insight on what I believe is a fantastic optic. I for one love the reticle and its well thought out design. I admit I poked a little fun back at a few people, but at the end of the day I feel most of yall are missing the forest because of the trees.... ( pun intended ) You can dislike Rudge's attitude on this situation but judging him from a few snide comments on this forum that is known for this behavior is selling him short. The dude is funny as hell and super knowledgeable in these optics. Him and March both worked super hard to bring something to PRS that was missing. I said PRS!!! Will other reticles be implemented?? You bet! Was that the intent of this post? It is now lol.
I dont pretend to be something I am not. I love all things shooting and work hard to better myself and others in this sport every weekend. I truly love this shit. I knew this post and content would stir up a storm I dont have time for lol.
All in all this Scope Checks a lot of boxes and is simply put- AMAZING
side note... March listened and built something that was missing from the market with this optic. Thank them for that and more (Missing) pieces will follow
I dont pretend to be something I am not. I love all things shooting and work hard to better myself and others in this sport every weekend. I truly love this shit. I knew this post and content would stir up a storm I dont have time for lol.
All in all this Scope Checks a lot of boxes and is simply put- AMAZING
side note... March listened and built something that was missing from the market with this optic. Thank them for that and more (Missing) pieces will follow
It does look like a really nice reticle, well thought out design. And it's nice that March is willing to work with groups like PRS shooters to accommodate this side of the arena.
Thanks for sharing, I'll be keeping my eye on March.
I have been long interested in March. Definitely a cool company. @Denys reports on the magic mirage-dissolving 8-80 jive well with your mirage experience with the 5-42. Not sure if I could get along with the FML-TR1…I probably could.
The scope should be judged separately from the reticle; in this case the FML-WBR.
Rudge, like a lot of designers, can be a bit, shall we say, prickly lol. He’s too close to the reticle’s design to probably have an easy conversation about it. Maybe not. But I get it. Been there.
His response (post #25) kicked off the reticle debate. He should probably just work in the background until the rough edges smooth out (again, I’ve been that guy, I get it, it’s his design, it can become personal).
I wonder if I could order a custom model, a Shuriken lock with a writable surface?
I…didn’t like the FML-TR1 above 30x. It may be also that the reticle was the wrong choice for a .22LR, but I digress.
It's funny how things change over time. I've been out of the Precision rifle games for years but back then more than a decade ago I mostly used holdovers/offs and it was the guys that dialed that would time out, which I rarely did, and I'd do well finishing higher up the roster including a few 2nd places at some two day matches.
Oh and used H59 reticles.
You are wise indeed, @carbonbased . Indeed, I have been reporting and talking about the mirage degradation retardation qualities of ED and then Super-ED glass for several years on another forum, Accurate Shooter. I reported it many times to DEON and 2-3 years ago, they confirmed my observations. It was very serendipitous and they kept that in mind when the created the March-X Majesta 8-80X56. The lineage carries on with the 5-42X56, which uses the same objective elements as the Majesta on the "High Master". I was going to prompt more comments from @Shayne Ward in this respect, and I'm sure others will report on it in time. Just as a quick observation, I shoot my Majesta at 80X, virtually all the time, as do the majority of Majesta owners. I am based in South Texas, we know mirage. When the mirage is VERY bad, we may wind down the mag to 60X or (gasp) 40X. I wrote extensively on AS about this pehnomenon and my hypotheses as to how this occurs, so I won't repeat this here. Let me just say, that at 80X in heavy mirage, the IQ is horrid, but the aiming black is round, and you can see the rings. It's a different discipline than what we are discussing here.
Shayne did mention the increased FOV of the March PRS edition, it's a 26° AOV. This usually runs from 17-18° to about 22°. I have also been writing about the wide-angle eyepieces and increased FOV at AS, and I won't repeat it here, but there's a lot involved in this and DEON has it down in what I call the Goldilocks Zone of FOV. I will let other users of the PRS scope talk about it in their own time, and terms, but it is an important feature.
The reason I mentioned the other reticles is that as CB stated, you should judge the scope independently from the reticle. (I told you he was wise.)
Designing a reticle is something else and I speak from experience. (I designed the MTR-WFD reticle for the Majesta, and a few others.) It's a labor of love, there's no money in it. It took a year to design the WFD and I know Brandon designed his carefully and it was not created overnight. It's always a gratifying watching people shoot and win competitions using your reticle.
I could write a whole chapter on reticle design and the whole setup around it, but this is not the time and place. Suffice it to say, that the reticle is the reticle. You can't change it on a whim, you have to get it right from the start. It takes months and $$$ for etched glass reticles to be produced. Perhaps in time, the reticles will be programmable, and you can download a new one for your riflescope and the reticle glass projects or displays the new design. But for now, the reticle design is etched permanently on the reticle glass.
Also remember than a reticle design is DC, not AC. Reticles by committee are not a serious thing.
Now about the turrets. The Shuriken design has been around for about 2 years now and they have been very well received. My Majesta has them and they are great. During the run-up to the PRS edition of the 5-42X56, DEON reworked the design, at Brandon's urging and insistence, to provide the writable surfaces, the removal of the locking mechanism, deemed out of place for PRS, and touched up the already great tactile experience to a new level. I was hoping that Shayne would comment on this aspect. The feel of the writeable turrets is beyond words. You will understand when you try them out. Deon did go all out on the PRS scope, and Brandon had a lot to do with it. I believe the PRS shooters will benefit from these advances and qualities.
@carbonbased is indeed very wise. And @Shayne Ward wrote a great first report.
I hear what you are saying. I would urge you to make your thoughts known DEON (marchsopes.com) directly. Just got to the site, click on About Us and then Contact Us and fill in the form. We know DEON reads every message; it's been reported hon this forum countless times.
I’m very open to designing a tree and never once have said it couldn’t be done in fact quite the opposite. I didn’t just design the reticle but virtually every part of this optic for the prs model outside of the actual optics I had a huge part in and of course those who have spent literally hundreds of hours on something will defend it as anyone would. However I am actually hugely open to criticism and evolution of design but the reality is… there is in fact a large portion of shooters who are actually going away from tree reticles and will not shoot one specifically in prs competition, that being said there will always be those who want different flavors and items. We had one reticle option to do what the majority of prs shooters had asked for and that ultimately was a no tree option, it doesn’t mean there can’t be a WBR tree variant if March wants one. I’ll help March every step of the way get products to market that shooters believe in.
With that being said, this reticle and model was build specifically for PRS usage which we have said several times over now and it by that very definition may not check all the boxes in every other discipline or application. What I challenge everyone here to do is send me a message or post what you want to see and well work at it. March builds some of the highest optically performing scopes on the planet with some of the most passionate people behind them, every single person involved at March wants fantastic offerings to be created and available. Shayne is the 2024 Rimfire PRS Champion and just having someone of his caliber instantly determine he wanted to shoot the March is an indicator it is a very good offering. Having the foundation for the offering will allow us to build upon that with more reticle offerings later should March determine they want to do so.
As it often does, forums breed miscommunication and words often become something they were never intended to be taken as. SNIPERS HIDE is the GOLD medalist for this to occur this post is no different.
Last edited:
This thread has given me an idea: has anyone ever put out a tree-reticle where the tree is made up of all fine lines so it’s easier to “see through” but still usable? …save the thicker lines just for the main elevation/windage “T” or crosshairs?
Seems like it might be cool.
Seems like it might be cool.
That thought process has been tried and unfortunately you can’t really do transparency in reticles, it often becomes line work that ends up too thin to use or still ends up in the sight picture.
Issue with tree reticles that guys hand indicated to me personally are below… take it as what it is my experiences and what I’ve been told. Doesn’t mean it’s right or wrong… it’s the reason why there’s different triggers, chassis, muzzle brakes, cartridges, scopes. We don’t all like mint chocolate chip ice cream.
1. Trees are never where I need them to be.. we confirmed that at show show with guys trying to use them on an iPad with random distances they selected using my rifle ballistics and realizing they always ended up with a “eh it’s this” which often led to dispersion in the same hold over multiple times as they picked the point. We actually had them mark trees on a screen and then showed them how often they didn’t use the same exact hold even with the same target engagement.
2. The tree is in the way of me seeing splash… well yea it’s reticle that you can’t see through so it does interfere with where the linework is seeing shots of that impact happens to land on the tree potion of the reticle.
3. I can dial this faster then trying to actually go into the tree and figure out the tree hold… hugely personal on how that person shoots but with writable turrets it was quite difficult for people who came to the shot show booth to find holds faster than they could dial them with marked turrets. Obviously based on prs style predetermined target distances.
Similar threads
