Help me come to a decision on a 56mm OBJ Scope

[Harman117]

Need help deciding between the scopes listed above. Budget not to exceed $3k (USD). Or other options I may be missing with an explanation on why.

Rifle will be: Impact 737R, 22" M24 contour chambered in 6.5 Creed, McMillan A5, KMW DBM, Dead Air Nomad LT, MDT one piece scope mount. (34 mm main tube required)

Intended use: 80% target shooting, 20% long range rabbit/ground hog hunting.

My personal scope feature rankings in order of most important to least:

1) Tracking
2) Tracking
3) Tracking
4) Optical Quality (at this level all should not be an issue)

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

Based on your Info, NF is going to be hard to beat if tracking is all that matters. Steiner is a dumpster fire of inconsistency and massivley overpriced for the quality of the optic, the Minox is a great scope but warranty work takes months and your scope going back to Europe. The G3 razor is a great scope optically but they are having serious issues with turrets and it doesn't have the long term tracking record of the G2 razor that is proven. I doubt they will have tracking issues however.

If you can stretch your budget there are used ZCO for 32-3500. You could also get a used S&B with the reticle of your choice. If you can find a used Minox ZP5 with MR4 for under $2200, its the best value out there by far. Just keep in mind if it does go down, and every optic can go down, you are looking at a long (3-6 month) turn around time.

Once you look through the ZCO/TT/Minox glass, you will be ruined so just keep that in mind. I sold a couple ZCO at a match this weekend after guys got to play with mine.

Most scopes in that range will track well without issue. It comes down to reticle, features, glass quality and price you want to pay. The type of shooting you do maters too. A PRS shooter, ELR shooter, dirt shooter and hunter will all prioritize different things.

 

[hafejd30]

NF ATACR 7-35 from the px here for around $2800

 

[TangoSierra916]

NF ATACR 7-35 F1

 

[Denys]

If you can go to about $3200, you might consider the March-FX 5-40X56 Gen II with the PDKI reticle.

D40V56FML10-G2 (MIL, Tactical, 0.1MIL adj, Lock, Genll) | MARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design CorporationMARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design Corporation

MARCH Scopes Official Site

marchscopes.com

34mm tube with 4mm thick walls (indestructible). Lockable turrets, fast focus eyepiece and side focus down to 10 yards.

 

[Harman117]

Based on your Info, NF is going to be hard to beat if tracking is all that matters. Steiner is a dumpster fire of inconsistency and massivley overpriced for the quality of the optic, the Minox is a great scope but warranty work takes months and your scope going back to Europe. The G3 razor is a great scope optically but they are having serious issues with turrets and it doesn't have the long term tracking record of the G2 razor that is proven. I doubt they will have tracking issues however.

If you can stretch your budget there are used ZCO for 32-3500. You could also get a used S&B with the reticle of your choice. If you can find a used Minox ZP5 with MR4 for under $2200, its the best value out there by far. Just keep in mind if it does go down, and every optic can go down, you are looking at a long (3-6 month) turn around time.

Once you look through the ZCO/TT/Minox glass, you will be ruined so just keep that in mind. I sold a couple ZCO at a match this weekend after guys got to play with mine.

Most scopes in that range will track well without issue. It comes down to reticle, features, glass quality and price you want to pay. The type of shooting you do maters too. A PRS shooter, ELR shooter, dirt shooter and hunter will all prioritize different things.

Good note on the second hand market. I need to start regularly browsing the px.

I almost bought a ZP5 but I have seen/read of multiple examples that have "slop" or backlash in their turret adjustments. (Like a consistent 0.1mil backlash) Couple that with their crazy long warranty times like you mentioned, and I'm very hesitant to go that route now. Even though it does seem to have the best glass at this price point.

Most scopes in this price range should track well, but that's definitely not the case. Frank's scope tracking test data shows this well. I will definitely be testing tracking myself and I just want their to be no surprises.

 

[Harman117]

NF ATACR 7-35 from the px here for around $2800

NF ATACR 7-35 F1

Is the 7-35 really that much better than the 5-25?

 

[Harman117]

If you can go to about $3200, you might consider the March-FX 5-40X56 Gen II with the PDKI reticle.

D40V56FML10-G2 (MIL, Tactical, 0.1MIL adj, Lock, Genll) | MARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design CorporationMARCH Scopes | DEON Optical Design Corporation

MARCH Scopes Official Site

marchscopes.com

34mm tube with 4mm thick walls (indestructible). Lockable turrets, fast focus eyepiece and side focus down to 10 yards.

I've considered March and I've heard those Gen II turrets are fantastic, but all tracking tests I've seen/read from March have been less than stellar.

I know you can account for any error % as long as it's consistent, but I don't want to do that this time around.

 

[hafejd30]

Is the 7-35 really that much better than the 5-25?

Do a search on sniperhide about the 7-35 atacr. Lots of threads on it. For sub $3k on the used market it shines. $3600 new many look into the ZCO 527

If you want tough and tracking the 7-35 NF ATACR is all about that

 

[StrayDog]

Nightforce ATACR 7-35x56mm F1 ZeroStop .1mrad DigIllum PTL Mil-XT Showroom Demo Riflescope C613

FREE SHIPPING on Nightforce ATACR 7-35x56mm F1 ZeroStop .1mrad DigIllum PTL Mil-XT C613

www.eurooptic.com

Do it!

 

[mrmarklin]

I’m a German scope slut. That being said, Kahles is the best tracker. Don’t know the price.

 

[308pirate]

Based on your Info, NF is going to be hard to beat if tracking is all that matters. Steiner is a dumpster fire of inconsistency and massivley overpriced for the quality of the optic, the Minox is a great scope but warranty work takes months and your scope going back to Europe. The G3 razor is a great scope optically but they are having serious issues with turrets and it doesn't have the long term tracking record of the G2 razor that is proven. I doubt they will have tracking issues however.

If you can stretch your budget there are used ZCO for 32-3500. You could also get a used S&B with the reticle of your choice. If you can find a used Minox ZP5 with MR4 for under $2200, its the best value out there by far. Just keep in mind if it does go down, and every optic can go down, you are looking at a long (3-6 month) turn around time.

Once you look through the ZCO/TT/Minox glass, you will be ruined so just keep that in mind. I sold a couple ZCO at a match this weekend after guys got to play with mine.

Most scopes in that range will track well without issue. It comes down to reticle, features, glass quality and price you want to pay. The type of shooting you do maters too. A PRS shooter, ELR shooter, dirt shooter and hunter will all prioritize different things.

I like massively overpriced dumpster fires of inconsistency

 

[TangoSierra916]

Is the 7-35 really that much better than the 5-25?

yes, IMO NF should just retire the ole 5-25 and drop the prices on the 4-16 and 4-20 (with the tunneling these are basically 5x-16/20 anyway) to be competitive and let the 7-35 just keep rolling. The 7-35 offers a much better parallax and to me, looks better optically.

 

[918v]

I think the Razor 6-36 is better than the NF 7-35.

 

[Harman117]

I think the Razor 6-36 is better than the NF 7-35.

You have both and have been able to compare side by side?

 

[918v]

You have both and have been able to compare side by side?

Have the Razor. People at the range have NF. The Razor is better. It has better turrets, ocular, illumination, glass too hard to tell apart other than the obvious lack of tunneling in the Razor.

 

[Denys]

I've considered March and I've heard those Gen II turrets are fantastic, but all tracking tests I've seen/read from March have been less than stellar.

I know you can account for any error % as long as it's consistent, but I don't want to do that this time around.

LOL. I love how you contradict yourself in the same sentence; fantastic turrets and bad tracking. Really?

The only bad tracking test of a March I have ever seen was a youtube video of some guy who tested the tracking of multiple scopes at 100 yards. He kept saying how so many scopes were failing his tests and he was surprised at that but took it in stride. Then he showed a tracking test of my current favorite F-class scope, the March-X 10-60X56 HM, aka "the shimmer killer" because of how it handles mirage. So he showed that the tracking was perfect, as expected from a March. Then in another video, he did the same test with another March scope, this time an FFP scope with a mil reticle. He was showing how it was starting great, then it started diverging and increasing and he was disappointed, but again said how many high-end scopes were failing his tracking test.

Of course, the reason was very simple; he was testing at 100 yards, when it should have been at 100 meters. The "shimmer killer" is SFP and MOA based and set to 100 yards and it was perfect. I think he was reminded of that discrepancy and posted about it, but I had lost interest by then.

I understand that you have made up your mind and there's nothing to change it. Good luck with your selection.

 

[hafejd30]

Our fclass team tested a March. I don’t remember what the model was but supposed to be the latest and greatest. It got sent back after failing a box test before seeing a match

 

[Harman117]

LOL. I love how you contradict yourself in the same sentence; fantastic turrets and bad tracking. Really?

Fantastic feeling/featured turrets does not mean they track well, there's not necessarily a correlation there. I did not contradict myself.

The only bad tracking test of a March I have ever seen was a youtube video of some guy...

Precision Rifle Blog Tested 2x March's, both had some error

Googling March tracking test turns up a few discrepancies with tracking that other individuals had as well.

Something even more interesting is that someone mentioned March is using 6400 (MRAD per circle) value for adjustments instead of the more mathematically accurate 6283. Not sure if this is true or not? I'd be interested to know.

I mean overall, yeah it's some random people on the internet and a small sample size so it's hard to put real weight behind it, but it doesn't appear to be tracking as well compared to some of the others. (Some models may be different?)

I understand that you have made up your mind and there's nothing to change it. Good luck with your selection.

My mind is not made up yet. March is obviously very successful in benchrest circles, I will look into the FX 5-40 Gen II. Do you actually have this scope?

 

[Denys]

The MRAD thing was long ago.

I have been testing a March-FX 5-40X56 for the last several months. I have taken it to the range to monitor the effects of mirage and comparing it to my March-X 10-60X56 HM. I really like the knobs and the IQ is excellent, but it's really not as suited for F-class as my 10-60X56 HM, which I run at 50X all the time, regardless of conditions. I like the 5-40X56 as a medium magnification riflescope; with a wide zoom range.

I have been using March scopes for 8+ years and never had any issues with tracking or otherwise. I'm just an F-Class shooter, too old to do much PRS. I'm sure you know F-class is all about high precision and tracking is very important.

 

[A.Redd]

I’d just snag a used 5-25 pmii. They can be had between 2-2300k, and win the glass battle. Plus you will get your money back if you decide to go a different direction. I personally enjoy the pmii more than my minox zp5.

 

[Harman117]

I’d just snag a used 5-25 pmii. They can be had between 2-2300k, and win the glass battle. Plus you will get your money back if you decide to go a different direction. I personally enjoy the pmii more than my minox zp5.

I've had a PMII 5-25 already (P4 Fine, Regular DT turrets) glass was good, but everything else about it felt kind of dated. Because it is.

Had a Bushnell XRS II and actually preferred it over the Schmidt and Bender (for everything except glass)

Anything that S&B makes now that I would want is like +4k unfortunately

 

[ma smith]

If you think PM2 is "dated", despite its great glass, then def. look at ATACR 7-35 (with mil-xt or mil-c).

 

[A.Redd]

I've had a PMII 5-25 already (P4 Fine, Regular DT turrets) glass was good, but everything else about it felt kind of dated. Because it is.

Had a Bushnell XRS II and actually preferred it over the Schmidt and Bender (for everything except glass)

Anything that S&B makes now that I would want is like +4k unfortunately

Not trying to be argumentative, just curious what is dated about it other than tunneling? I avoided the scope for the longest time because I held the tunneling against it for some reason, but realized the error in my way once I handled and shot it.

 

[Harman117]

Not trying to be argumentative, just curious what is dated about it other than tunneling? I avoided the scope for the longest time because I held the tunneling against it for some reason, but realized the error in my way once I handled and shot it.

Aside from the tunneling (which didn't bother me that much) it was the 14 mil per-rev turrets, the reticle choices at the time, and the extra illumination turret off of the main tube.

They've fixed a lot of that now but like I said prices are much higher now

 

[FuhQ]

Kahles K525i...

 

[Denys]

Fantastic feeling/featured turrets does not mean they track well, there's not necessarily a correlation there. I did not contradict myself.



Precision Rifle Blog Tested 2x March's, both had some error

Googling March tracking test turns up a few discrepancies with tracking that other individuals had as well.

Something even more interesting is that someone mentioned March is using 6400 (MRAD per circle) value for adjustments instead of the more mathematically accurate 6283. Not sure if this is true or not? I'd be interested to know.

I mean overall, yeah it's some random people on the internet and a small sample size so it's hard to put real weight behind it, but it doesn't appear to be tracking as well compared to some of the others. (Some models may be different?)



My mind is not made up yet. March is obviously very successful in benchrest circles, I will look into the FX 5-40 Gen II. Do you actually have this scope?

I really like that you listed at least one of the sources from which you got your information. Kudos.

I sent to PRB and did some searching, because I had this strange deja vu feeling about this. I did find the review. It's from 2014 and they tested a March 3-24X42 FFP, in which they measured a 2% deviation in tracking compared to what it should have been. They reported this to Kelbly, who hat the time was the distributor for March in the US and the latter sent them another March of the same model. PRN found that this one also had the same 2%. The 2% was what triggered my memory. The riflescopes that Kelbly had sent to PRB were prototypes with the 1/6400 MRAD issue. The difference between 6283 and 6400 is about 2%.

What makes it even funnier is that you had the answer in the same post. This was long ago (8 years, which in an eternity these days,) and I as I have never been this old, I'm still learning about memory issues, which I keep forgetting about.

At any rate, the March 3-24X42 is a solid scope and is also available in with a 52mm objective, but that's not the model we are discussing here. The March-FX 5-40X56 Gen II is available with the PDKI reticle, illuminated or not. It has a 34mm tube, which is immensely strong and incorporates ED glass. The lockable turrets are phenomenal and the fast focus eyepiece is superb.

Yeah, that kefrfuffle with 6400 vs 6263 cause some consternation and confusion that, as we can see here, still echoes 8+ years later.

 

[Harman117]

I really like that you listed at least one of the sources from which you got your information. Kudos.

I sent to PRB and did some searching, because I had this strange deja vu feeling about this. I did find the review. It's from 2014 and they tested a March 3-24X42 FFP, in which they measured a 2% deviation in tracking compared to what it should have been. They reported this to Kelbly, who hat the time was the distributor for March in the US and the latter sent them another March of the same model. PRN found that this one also had the same 2%. The 2% was what triggered my memory. The riflescopes that Kelbly had sent to PRB were prototypes with the 1/6400 MRAD issue. The difference between 6283 and 6400 is about 2%.

What makes it even funnier is that you had the answer in the same post. This was long ago (8 years, which in an eternity these days,) and I as I have never been this old, I'm still learning about memory issues, which I keep forgetting about.

At any rate, the March 3-24X42 is a solid scope and is also available in with a 52mm objective, but that's not the model we are discussing here. The March-FX 5-40X56 Gen II is available with the PDKI reticle, illuminated or not. It has a 34mm tube, which is immensely strong and incorporates ED glass. The lockable turrets are phenomenal and the fast focus eyepiece is superb.

Yeah, that kefrfuffle with 6400 vs 6263 cause some consternation and confusion that, as we can see here, still echoes 8+ years later.

You associated with March at all? Doesn't change anything at this point but just curious.

I wonder why more people don't use March in PRS/ELR? (Genuine question) They should sponsor some shooters if they aren't already as it looks like the reticle designs and other scope features are there.

I would really like to mess around with a Mini Genesis, looks pretty sweet. But in reality at 5k range I would probably just get a TT.

 

[Denys]

You associated with March at all? Doesn't change anything at this point but just curious.

I wonder why more people don't use March in PRS/ELR? (Genuine question) They should sponsor some shooters if they aren't already as it looks like the reticle designs and other scope features are there.

I would really like to mess around with a Mini Genesis, looks pretty sweet. But in reality at 5k range I would probably just get a TT.

I do not work for March, nor do I sell riflescopes or anything else. I am a long time rifle competitor who bought his first March scope in 2013 and I still have it. I'm very much into optics and I like to think I understand a little bit how a riflescope works. I was invited by March to be in their booth at recent SHOT shows because of my above "credentials", that I could talk riflescopes with competitors and shooters, as a long time user of optics and March scopes in particular. They sometimes send me stuff to test and I write a little report and send it back to them.

I have come to learn a great deal about March, the engineers and their products and I have gained tremendous respect for their riflescopes the more I find out about how they are made and the materials and techniques they use. I am sure other top tiers optics have similar of equivalent manufacturing techniques.

What impressed me the most about March is the attention to detail for the longevity of the riflescope. When I spend $3000+ for a scope, I like to know it was built for the long run. I used my first March, a March-X 5-50X56 for 7 years on my F-TR rifle. It has seen over 25,000 rounds and countless matches, car travel, hotels, drops, etc. At the end of 7 years it still looked perfect. I sent it back to Deon to swap out the reticle for another one as my eyesight has changed in that time and I'm creeping up on 70. The new reticle they put in is perfect for me and that scope is going on strong, approaching 10 years and it still looks pristine.

From what I gather, Deon is a small company and they do sponsor some shooters in other countries, but there is only so much they can do at any one time.

I have played with a Mini Genesis; it is an awesome scope, completely designed for ELR, something that I do not do and will probably not get involved in. My main focus is F-Class, thought I have done some PRS. I'm just too old and have some challenges that prevent me from doing more PRS. But I will try again soon.

Back to the Mini Genesis, it's a very different concept compared to traditional riflescopes, and I can assure you that for ELR, it has everything else beat because of its design; you are always looking through the middle of the Super ED lenses and thus always getting the best IQ, regardless of the adjustment on the riflescope. Nothing else comes close. Well except for the Genesis 6-60X56 HM. I played with one of those at a SHOT show but never in real life.