Rifle Scopes ZCO840 vs March FX 5-42

March are pushing the boundaries of whats possible with optic design, ZCO are producing competent designs well within the envelope of possibilities. March have been making high zoom scopes since they started business many years ago, so are very experienced with high power, wide zoom range optics.

Need to run them back to back to make any sort of valid judgement. To answer your question, yes March should be considered as a possibility. I have two of their 5-40 FFP
models, one of which is over 10 years old and had a beating. Its tracking is still flawless, and is capable of and has shot an F class match on Saturday, and shot and won a field competition on Sunday. Great do all optic.

"To be honest, until then, I had never looked at this March nor knew they even had PRS style FFP scopes".

Like you were, I think there are a lot of people out there that are unfamiliar with March at some level. That is something that can potentially have a negative effect on resale value, if that's important to you.

I am intentionally avoiding any comparison between the two based on IQ, ruggedness, repeatability, reliability, etc. I have never owned a March, so I'm not qualified to make the comparison. However, my ZCO's check all the boxes that are important to me, including retained value.

Drbobinmo said:

I have pretty much convinced myself that my next scope purchase will be the ZCO840. Mainly used for finally getting into to PRS but also interested in shooting the local 600 yard F-Class matches at my club. Prairie dog shooting also when possible.

Had a guy on another forum asking why in the world I’d choose the 840 when the March beats it in so many categories (on paper) in terms of size,weight, FOV, close focus, zoom range etc.

To be honest, until then, I had never looked at this March nor knew they even had PRS style FFP scopes.


I know this may not even a fair question since the 840 isn’t even released but I don’t think anyone here has any doubt that ZCO will knock it out of the park with this new release. And that MPCT3x reticle sure looks sweet.

So do I ignore what that guy says and stick with what I want or should I at least be considering the March as a possibility??

Click to expand...

Hard to compare scopes when one isn’t released and still a prototype, but ponder this. Is anyone actually using a March scope for PRS, NRL or a similar format? ZCO’s are consistently gaining in popularity in those type of matches while they do not really sponsor anyone. I do understand March has a presence in F class.

I’ve never seen a march optic at a prs match. That doesn’t mean they arnt out there though. I have seen a ton of tangents and Zco’s. I would love to see one some day though. I think a lot of what you see is just people following the trends and sponsors. Everybody wants to shoot what the winners are shooting. You don’t even see that many nightforce or Schmidt’s anymore. It’s tangents zcos vortex and kahles. I remember you used to see just a handful of tangents at a match, now it’s half your squad. I think there are some very good scopes out there that don’t really support the prs or make a big push for that market so no body shoots them. This would include March and even Minox.

You could just shoot what everyone else shoots because it obviously works. Or you can be the pioneer and try something different (from a proven company). I’m over here spending your money telling you to give the march a try lol. And if you do, be sure to let us know what you think.
Or you could just be like everyone else and shoot an impact action in a foundation stock with a tangent on top of it. But me, I couldn’t love my lone peak Fuzion in my manners Tcs anymore than I do. I do have tangents on my rifles though and have owned just about everything else and will not be changing that anytime soon.

Bottom line is if you want to give something a try than do it. There are plenty of zcos you can check out at matches before you make a decision. Go take a look through one and if it doesn’t blow your tits off give the march a try.

Speaking from a heavy bias towards ZCO….

March is well known in F class and such circles in the US. For whatever reason they just haven’t taken off for PRS type stuff. That could be just due to lack of involvement on their part or just how it shook out with US consumers.

I’d personally base my decision on the reticle. When talking quality of this level, you’re almost never going to get something “bad.” Just something that might not check off as many personal preferences.

The reticle is where you’ll spend most of your time interacting with the world while shooting. If you don’t like a turret feel as much, there’s a fair chance you’ll stick with something if the reticle and such works. But if you love everything about an optic, but not the reticle, eventually you will move to something else.

Lou Murdica trusts march and by default that means they work.

Also, paging @koshkin as he’s a march fan/affiliate and I’m sure more.

I think a reason March isn’t more popular in PRS is the warranty situation (Japanese law or something like that) as well as March notoriously having a smaller size eyebox. The ZCO 420 and 527 have a generous eyebox which is very useful for PRS positional shooting. Will have to wait and see how the 840 is. Also March has been around a long time. ZCO is new and let’s face it, people will buy shit simply because it’s something new to try.

I had the 4.5-28 (I’m a March fan) but sold it because the reticle, FML-TR1, while much improved, is still too thick (IMO) for air rifle (or rimfire) precision shooting. Try to look through one if you can.

I have a March 5-42 and I'm very happy with it. I'm actually considering buying either a ZCO840 or March Genesis 6-60 for my other rifle (just because I do not want to have two identical scopes). If I only had to have one scope then I would definitely wait until someone posts a detailed comparison in this forum. Meanwhile you may read Glassaholic's review of March 5-42 here: https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...gh-master-fml-tr1-preliminary-review.6993171/ .

Is this thread really asking for a comparison March to ZCO….. Man what a slap in the face to ZCO

Sprayed99 said:

Man what a slap in the face to ZCO

Click to expand...

Not really.
I own and shoot both. If the March 5-40 had the MPCT2 reticle, I’d have two 5-40s.
(I don’t shoot PRS)

So is the eye-box on the March 5-42 pretty tight?

I have been able to look through a ZCO 5-27 and thought the eye-box was very forgiving.

Drbobinmo said:

I have pretty much convinced myself that my next scope purchase will be the ZCO840. Mainly used for finally getting into to PRS but also interested in shooting the local 600 yard F-Class matches at my club. Prairie dog shooting also when possible.

Had a guy on another forum asking why in the world I’d choose the 840 when the March beats it in so many categories (on paper) in terms of size,weight, FOV, close focus, zoom range etc.

To be honest, until then, I had never looked at this March nor knew they even had PRS style FFP scopes.


I know this may not even a fair question since the 840 isn’t even released but I don’t think anyone here has any doubt that ZCO will knock it out of the park with this new release. And that MPCT3x reticle sure looks sweet.

So do I ignore what that guy says and stick with what I want or should I at least be considering the March as a possibility??

Click to expand...

ZCO is just a prototype and not hear yet, that being said ZCO’s short history has proven that they deliver on the alpha class promise so I have no doubt the 8-40 will be phenomenal. That being said the March 5-42 has been out for a bit now and I’ve had one for a short period to do a review with a Schmidt 5-45.

I had a ZCO 4-20 for quite a while but was not a fan of the reticle (personal preference) and I had a friend with 5-27 so am pretty familiar with ZCO quality.

A few thoughts between the specs of the ZCO 8-50 and March 5-42.

• March 5-42 is shorter and lighter - initially you might think this is a good thing; however, anytime you shorten the focal length of a high magnification scope you introduce the possibility of shallow DOF and finicky parallax and eyebox. To be honest I was expecting the March to struggle more than it did in this area and while the Schmidt outperformed it by and large I was surprised to see how well the March did with such a short body.
• FOV - the March 5-42 uses one of the widest wide angle eyepieces on the market and has one of the largest FOV’s of all high mag scopes. Again, typically I would always give the nod to greater FOV; however, the March 5-42 does suffer from edge distortion (NF NX8 2.5-20 owners will be very familiar with this) and that bothers me - your eyes will almost always focus on the worst part of an image, may be more of a personal preference but I think it’s fair that you know. ZCO on the other hand has virtually no edge distortion and I predict the 8-40 will follow suit.
• Turrets - I like ZCO turrets, they are distinct with nice audible clicks and very little play, I am not a huge fan of the up/down locking mechanism but I think Kahles, Schmidt DT II+, TT and the March 5-42 turrets are “better” with regard to feel and feedback IMHO. People rave about TT being the “best” but the 5-42 locking turrets are some of my favorites ranking very close to TT and the March locking mechanism is superior to the up/down mechanism of ZCO because it is a lever on top and you can leave it locked or unlocked and not have to worry if you accidentally pulled up or pushed down.

Sprayed99 said:

Is this thread really asking for a comparison March to ZCO….. Man what a slap in the face to ZCO

Click to expand...

Have you seen a March 4.5-28x52? On what basis do you think it is a slap in the face to ZCO?

generalzip said:

I think a reason March isn’t more popular in PRS is the warranty situation (Japanese law or something like that) as well as March notoriously having a smaller size eyebox. The ZCO 420 and 527 have a generous eyebox which is very useful for PRS positional shooting. Will have to wait and see how the 840 is. Also March has been around a long time. ZCO is new and let’s face it, people will buy shit simply because it’s something new to try.

Click to expand...

I would agree with your assessment, ZCO has repair facilities right here in the good ol’ USA and they’ve proven to be very responsive to customers with extremely quick turn around time for the rare occurrence that a repair was needed. March has to be shipped to Japan for repair but outside of shipping time has had a good customer service record.

Regarding eyebox- that is very much model specific. The March 5-42 eyebox is not horrible by any means but I will say ZCO definitely has an edge.

Personally, for PRS style shooting I think the March 4.5-28x52 is a much better choice than the 5-42. The 4.5-28 is more forgiving in eyebox, DOF and parallax. Glass is superb and turrets are excellent. If optical quality is of utmost importance then I think ZCO still has an edge but the fact that March 4.5-28 covers the full range of both the ZCO 4-20 and 5-27 put together and hangs in there so well is impressive indeed.

Glassaholic said:

Have you seen a March 4.5-28x52? On what basis do you think it is a slap in the face to ZCO?

Click to expand...

This

Personally, I'd probably wait for the zco, but to say the March in question is a slouch and isn't relevant in this comparison is absolutely silly. That March is a bad mofo but with all things considered, I would still opt for the zco for reasons that don't have a lot to do with shortcomings of the March, just preferences.

I have March 5-42 and Zco 527. 542 is not designed for PRS shooting in my perspective.

The ultra short design of 542 makes the parallax too finicky. And the edge clarity is suffered from wide angle eye piece. It is more like a ELR scope than prs scope. And I don’t really like the reticle design for prs using.

Glassaholic said:

Have you seen a March 4.5-28x52? On what basis do you think it is a slap in the face to ZCO?

Click to expand...

Seen? I have already had one, won’t buy another.

Sprayed99 said:

Seen? I have already had one, won’t buy another.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. But if you were not happy with optical performance you got a dud and should have spoken with March. My 4.5-28 performed close to my Tangent, I’ve had ZCO and while I’d say the TT and ZCO has the edge overall the fact that March even comes close is impressive given the design parameters. But I get not all scopes are for everyone, it was just your “slap in the face” comment I found surprising. March is no Tangent or ZCO but they aren’t trying to be, they are a boutique manufacturer that specializes in pushing optical engineering boundaries with high magnification erectors and short body designs, most of these designs come with some shortcomings due to pushing the 8x and higher mag range. That being said, I have not seen another Japanese scope that performs as well as the March 4.5-28 optically. Obviously this is my opinion and you had a different experience but it sounds like your experience was pretty horrible so that’s why it sounds like something was wrong with your scope.

March prioritizes high erector ratios and short scope lengths. If you don't need those features I think the ZCO 8-40 or S&B 6-36 or maybe even a Razor G3 might be able to offer more of what you are looking for (forgiving parallax, better DOF, good eyebox, etc.).

The good news is that the ZCO and the S&B will be reviewed by our resident optics gurus but we will just have to wait a bit.

After years on this forum, I shouldn't be surprised people are still using the term"eyebox"
Exit pupil size may be more appropriate, and can be calculated by dividing the size of
the front lens, by the maximum zoom power. More zoom ,smaller exit pupil.

I have an 80x scope with a 56 front end; exit pupil is 0.7 millimeters.....

Clearlight said:

After years on this forum, I shouldn't be surprised people are still using the term"eyebox"
Exit pupil size may be more appropriate, and can be calculated by dividing the size of
the front lens, by the maximum zoom power. More zoom ,smaller exit pupil.

I have an 80x scope with a 56 front end; exit pupil is 0.7 millimeters.....

Click to expand...

Exit pupil does not a good eyebox make - my Shakespeare for the day . Seriously though, take a “cheap” 5-25x56 scope and compare to a Tangent Theta 5-25x56 - both have same exit pupil but have very different eyebox experience. I think @koshkin has a video on this I’ll try to dig up.

BLKWLFK9 said:

This

Personally, I'd probably wait for the zco, but to say the March in question is a slouch and isn't relevant in this comparison is absolutely silly. That March is a bad mofo but with all things considered, I would still opt for the zco for reasons that don't have a lot to do with shortcomings of the March, just preferences.

Click to expand...

March is definitely in the same conversation as ZCO, TT, S&B and other high end brands. They do go about things differently, so the application where they are at their best are usually different. Between ZCO 5-27x56 and March 5-42x56, ZCO is probably a better scope for PRS-type shooting, while I would lean toward March for shooting paper and for ELR (don't tell ZCO I said something nice about their scope, they are not particularly happy with me right now and I plan to poke fun at them about that for a while).

ILya

koshkin said:

March is definitely in the same conversation as ZCO, TT, S&B and other high end brands. They do go about things differently, so the application where they are at their best are usually different. Between ZCO 5-27x56 and March 5-42x56, ZCO is probably a better scope for PRS-type shooting, while I would lean toward March for shooting paper and for ELR (don't tell ZCO I said something nice about their scope, they are not particularly happy with me right now and I plan to poke fun at them about that for a while).

ILya

Click to expand...

Whut, ZCO didnt send you a fanboy patch yet? Keep doing what you do Ilya. Looking forward to your
thoughts on the upcomIng 8-40.

Clearlight said:

Whut, ZCO didnt send you a fanboy patch yet? Keep doing what you do Ilya. Looking forward to your
thoughts on the upcomIng 8-40.

Click to expand...

The prototypes at SHOT looked perfectly reasonable, i.e. very similar to their other scopes except with more magnification and less turret adjustment.

We'll see what happens when it comes out. I doubt, I'll be able to borrow one from ZCO, but there are other ways to get my hands on it. As far as I am concerned, the product stands on its own merits regardless of what the manufacturer thinks of me. If there is enough interest in a review, I'll get my hands on it.

ILya

koshkin said:

The prototypes at SHOT looked perfectly reasonable, i.e. very similar to their other scopes except with more magnification and less turret adjustment.

We'll see what happens when it comes out. I doubt, I'll be able to borrow one from ZCO, but there are other ways to get my hands on it. As far as I am concerned, the product stands on its own merits regardless of what the manufacturer thinks of me. If there is enough interest in a review, I'll get my hands on it.

ILya

Click to expand...

There is enough interest so please - get your hands on one and while you’re at it get your hands on a ATACR 7-35 from another company who doesn’t appreciate your honest feedback, but I would like to see that comparison, and oh, you might as well grab a Schmidt 6-36 and Vortex 6-36 while you’re at it.

I agree -- I would love to see how Ilya feels they stack up.

Particularly where the ATACR 7-35 would end up in the mix.

koshkin said:

The prototypes at SHOT looked perfectly reasonable, i.e. very similar to their other scopes except with more magnification and less turret adjustment.

We'll see what happens when it comes out. I doubt, I'll be able to borrow one from ZCO, but there are other ways to get my hands on it. As far as I am concerned, the product stands on its own merits regardless of what the manufacturer thinks of me. If there is enough interest in a review, I'll get my hands on it.

ILya

Click to expand...

How long would you need an optic for a proper review?

Feniks Technologies said:

How long would you need an optic for a proper review?

Click to expand...

That depends on what I am looking to cover. Optics only is not too long. Full work-up can take a while depending on what else I ahve going on. Given all the production timelines, I do not think I would start assembling this line up together until the S&B 6-36 gets here which is unlikely to happen before Q4. S&B is planning its availability for earlier, I think, but I have to assume that supply chain nonsense will continue for a while delaying everything.

ILya

koshkin said:

That depends on what I am looking to cover. Optics only is not too long. Full work-up can take a while depending on what else I ahve going on. Given all the production timelines, I do not think I would start assembling this line up together until the S&B 6-36 gets here which is unlikely to happen before Q4. S&B is planning its availability for earlier, I think, but I have to assume that supply chain nonsense will continue for a while delaying everything.

ILya

Click to expand...

Schmidt is also notoriously late in delivering on timelines, and that was before 2020

Why are these companies upset with our dark lord?

DangerRanger said:

Why are these companies upset with our dark lord?

Click to expand...

Think about that for a minute, I think the answer is in the question - he is the "dark" lord

Sprayed99 said:

Seen? I have already had one, won’t buy another.

Click to expand...

Let me guess, you using a ZCO?

RRW said:

Let me guess, you using a ZCO?

Click to expand...

Yes, and several other brands.

Anyone have a hands on comparison yet? I’m on the waiting list for the ZCO, but still intrigued by the March. I still prefer the smaller dot size on the MPCTs, but I do like my March 5-40, even with a .05 center dot.

DellaDog said:

Anyone have a hands on comparison yet? I’m on the waiting list for the ZCO, but still intrigued by the March. I still prefer the smaller dot size on the MPCTs, but I do like my March 5-40, even with a .05 center dot.

Click to expand...

I have both. These two scopes are not comparable IMO. March 542 for ELR and Zco 840 for PRS.