They did not need to go so far as 34mm on the whole tube. Keep the 30mm rear, step up to 34mm on the objective, and then you can combine any 34mm mount with a pair of these:
They did not need to go so far as 34mm on the whole tube. Keep the 30mm rear, step up to 34mm on the objective, and then you can combine any 34mm mount with a pair of these:
Problem solved, with a large number of available mounts. I don't understand why this path was not chosen.
I have used mine a decent amount. Do you have specific area you want to know about?
My thoughts on it have not changed. To summarize for those late to the party:
I have some feedback on that as well. I will give it tomorrow.
Excellent summary! This is exactly what I was looking for after reading so much about it. Thank you for taking the time to type all of this out. I can't wait to read the rest of your thoughts.
There aren’t a lot of them going around. I have one and absolutely love it but I’ll be selling mine since there are other projects that need attention right now…but for the short while I had it up until this point (since February) it’s near perfect. 17.7 oz 1-10x scope that has illumination and a parallax wheel is rare if there are any others out there I’m not aware of it. Clarity bests the nightforce NX8 1-8 and id say is up there with the nightforce ATACR in image quality. The previous poster NC Libertarian summed it up best really. But for me I’d add that I would have rather gotten the capped model (wasn’t available at the time) since I don’t dial much at all on this scope and mainly use the reticle so that’s something to consider. I will purchase the capped 1-8x model since that one has all the features I’d prefer for the shooting you’re talking about.
When you say run and gun, do you mean for run and gun events? In my experience, exposed non-locking or uncapped turrets suck for that.
March makes the scope with either "tactical" exposed turrets or capped turrets. Mine is capped.
Perfect. Forgot that was an option.
It has a lot more pros than cons over most of the LPVO’s in my opinion. Keep in mind March also makes a 1-8 with capped with no parallax wheel and a similar reticle to the one on the 1-8 NX8 for your purpose as you stated.
100% agreed. I would only get it with capped turrets.
Of the LPVOs I’ve had, the March only bested by the Schmidt. As I prefer the Schmidt, I’ll get around to listing the full package March w/ mount soon.I have had both the 1-8 ATACR and the March, and was looking to put them on a fix, so same(ish) concept.
I went with the march first, used the burris rings combo, and it really didn't work for me, so I returned the March and got the ATACR. Trading the ATACR, as it wasn't (for me!) as clear as the March, and harder to pick up on the lower end.
Really regret returning the March, and wish I had just spent the extra money and gotten the adure (sp?) unimount made for it, I think that would have solved all/most of my issues with the scope
While the March isn't perfect, it really is pretty damn versatile and lightweight, and NC did a great job with his review!
I still have mine If you’re interested. It’s listed on eBay but I can just as easily pull it off and let you take it with the ARMS mount. There’s also this option. https://www.americanrifle.com/shop/mb-r-3033-28-m-brace-scope-rings-for-march-1-10x24-1768#attr=I have had both the 1-8 ATACR and the March, and was looking to put them on a fix, so same(ish) concept.
I went with the march first, used the burris rings combo, and it really didn't work for me, so I returned the March and got the ATACR. Trading the ATACR, as it wasn't (for me!) as clear as the March, and harder to pick up on the lower end.
Really regret returning the March, and wish I had just spent the extra money and gotten the adure (sp?) unimount made for it, I think that would have solved all/most of my issues with the scope
While the March isn't perfect, it really is pretty damn versatile and lightweight, and NC did a great job with his review!
Just the sort of feedback I was trying to get since you had the atacr and MarchI have had both the 1-8 ATACR and the March, and was looking to put them on a fix, so same(ish) concept.
I went with the march first, used the burris rings combo, and it really didn't work for me, so I returned the March and got the ATACR. Trading the ATACR, as it wasn't (for me!) as clear as the March, and harder to pick up on the lower end.
Really regret returning the March, and wish I had just spent the extra money and gotten the adure (sp?) unimount made for it, I think that would have solved all/most of my issues with the scope
While the March isn't perfect, it really is pretty damn versatile and lightweight, and NC did a great job with his review!
What all lpvos have you tried? The Schmidt does look amazing. I hate it is so much $$$ though....
Totally understand and for that short of a 556 I think you made the right call. I had thought about putting a March on a lightweight colt 6960 or bcm elw rifle, but decided to just stick with my kahles k16i for a 556.
ATACR (FC-DMx reticle), Vortex Gen 3, March, Schmidt. Skipped Kahles and Swarovski nor have I played with the SFP 1-6 class of scopes (Vortex Gen 2) though I had a K16i and Nightforce 1-4x years ago.
Yeah, you can’t resolve images at varying distances without messing with the parallax. It’s absolutely a factor of the optical formula, otherwise the scope could be longer with less touchy or no parallax at all like the fixed parallax LPVOs out there.
What was your plan for using the scalar mount? I assume one of those in the rear, but what about the 33mm?They did not need to go so far as 34mm on the whole tube. Keep the 30mm rear, step up to 34mm on the objective, and then you can combine any 34mm mount with a pair of these:
Problem solved, with a large number of available mounts. I don't understand why this path was not chosen.
Shim stock.
I bought 1mm aluminum shim stock and have access to a laser cutter. We’re trying it out and if it goes as we hope I will see if there’s any interest on here and I can sell them to any interested parties.
I can already tell you it won't work out well. You need 0.5mm shim stock.
Based off what scope rings? From 34mm to 33mm is 1mm difference with aluminum being slightly compressible at that thinness I’d say its more than likely going to work. Also the finished shim stock inserts will be media blasted and anodized so it will lose a couple thousands after finish blasting. This has been my experience with shim stock work. But if it doesn’t then I guess I’ll go to the next step down in thickness and repeat.
What he’s saying is if you wrap the tube in 1 mm stock, you have 2 mm of aluminum. There would be one layer on each side of the 34 mm rings (top and bottom), so you’d have 32 mm of room. You need 0.5 mm stock to wrap it to move from 34 to 33.
Bingo
I see what you’re saying but that’s not how it actually adds up. So several of the 34mm rings I measured were at 34.10mm with some even as high as 34.20mm. The rings themselves are typically not undersized to allow for compression over a scope body if they’re aluminum rings if I’m not mistaken. The 1mm stock I have is not exactly 1mm. It’s more like .97mm and after finish blasting it’s further reduced .01mm - .02mm possibly more dependent on how aggressive the blasting is because I also don’t want them to be glass smooth for the obvious reason, I’ve tried this before with a thinner shim stock, maybe closer to what you were taking about and under recoil the scope moved forward and aft. Also aluminum shim stock compressed fairly easily…how much I don’t know. Scalarworks Leap 07 and 08 do it with some of the Vortex Scopes and anything else with a smooth finish even when torqued to spec. So it’s a trial and error thing. I’ll just have to test and if I need to I’ll scale down like I said before but exactly .05mm I believe is slightly undersized.
You haven't had any issues with holding zero? I think this option is 3 or 4 ounces lighter than the March stock mount, so it is appealing.
They’re garbage stay away. I’ve had two break at the hinges and the Leap 08 requires you to torque to 20 inch lbs but the scope would move under recoil. The customer service was good but that doesn’t take care of the damaged scopes that were mounted in the mounts. I sent the scope in with the mount and they pretty much put aluminum black on the scope and sent me a new mount that’s been torqued to 25 inch lbs instead of the spec listed on the side. I’ve since gotten rid of it and went back to Spuhr, ADM, Badger Ordnance COM’s and Larues. For the Aimpoint CompM5 they’re gtg though.
Thank you very much! I looked at the listed weight and was curious how it could be reliable. I guess the answer is it is not. I tend to use badger mounts anyway, and I think they only weigh an oz more than the March mount.
Yeah I hate to bash a product but I’ve had a bad relationship with their products. A reputable gun manufacturer that I work with has since gotten rid of all of theirs they had customers complain about the same reasons with the Leap 07’s. A really good YouTuber compared these mounts for zero reset too and it did poorly. I really wanted them to do well because on paper they just sound so good and they look well made and contoured nicely but the mounts we had from them just weren’t holding up.
Yeah, I guess it is too good to be true. A mount that light would have been perfect for the March, but it doesn't do much good if it doesn't hold zero. Maybe someone else will come along and make a light weight mount for the March lpvo.
I have a Scalarworks on my first competition gun:
I have never put the Scalarworks/March setup on a rifle. I am currently using the original March Shorty single ring mount (#MAR2037), now discontinued. I don't have a picture of it on my rifle, but you can find pictures of the mount on the web with a search.
