Three years and nine days ago I wrote a review of the March 1-10x 2nd focal plane scope. It was only my third review, and the first that I ever did on a scope that I did not, myself, own. I would like to think that I have come a long way from that point. The question is, has March?
I think so. I know, that's not real satisfying. The big problem that the 1-10x had is that the eye box was really, really small and, ignoring the obvious problem comparing scopes across three years and 2,000 miles, this one seemed better. How much better? Well, it wasn't difficult to set up the photos through the scope on this one. With the 1-10x it took quite a lot of tries to get that one usable 10x photo that I posted and it was still just a little off center. The experience I had in using this one also did not seem to be hindered by constant unfriendly reminders that my head was off center. Now, to be fair, the 1-8x was nicely mounted in Kelbly's homemade tripod mounted scope comparator for Shot. So, I could be totally off base with this assessment. 'I think so' means just that. Given the data that I have, and my gut feelings on the matter, I think that the 1-8x is more usable than the 1-10x, and dramatically so.
Profile view of the March 1-8x24mm ffp:
With the important question of eye box at least addressed if not answered, lets look at some other features. Unlike the 1-10x, this one is ffp and has mil knobs and a mil reticle. This will no doubt appeal to the 70% of tactical shooters that prefer mil/mil setups and ffp. The FOV is generous, larger than my reference scope despite the greater power range of the March. Clarity is good, which would be expected on a March. The illumination, which is operated by a push button on the parallax knob, is not very bright, however. This is even true given the consideration that it utilizes reflected illumination technology rather than fiber or beam splitter. Not for illuminated daytime use.
View though the March 1-8x24mm at 1x with maximum illumination:
View through the March 1-8x24mm at 8x with maximum illumination:
I think that the most interesting features of the 1-8x are not to be found in the primarily close quarters aspects of the scopes design such as illumination and eye box, though. I think that this scope is much better characterized as a long range optic that will do CQB than as a close range optic that will do for an occasional long shot. The March 1-8x24mm has two important features that are common in high end long range scopes but not in CQB scopes. These are a 10 mil per turn zero stop elevation turret, and a side focus (10yds on) parallax adjustment. Few other scopes in the 1-
x genre have these features, both of which are acknowledged to be, if not vital for long range precision shooting, at least tremendously helpful.
Prices for the 1-8x24mm March will be $2,100 without illumination and a disproportionately higher $2,720 with illumination. Like all March optics, they are available only through Kelbly's in the States. While I don't think that these match up well to the needs of the well heeled AR shooter who is looking to occasionally take a long shot with his .223, I think that those shooting M110 type AR-10's or SCAR heavies primarily long distances should take a look.
I think so. I know, that's not real satisfying. The big problem that the 1-10x had is that the eye box was really, really small and, ignoring the obvious problem comparing scopes across three years and 2,000 miles, this one seemed better. How much better? Well, it wasn't difficult to set up the photos through the scope on this one. With the 1-10x it took quite a lot of tries to get that one usable 10x photo that I posted and it was still just a little off center. The experience I had in using this one also did not seem to be hindered by constant unfriendly reminders that my head was off center. Now, to be fair, the 1-8x was nicely mounted in Kelbly's homemade tripod mounted scope comparator for Shot. So, I could be totally off base with this assessment. 'I think so' means just that. Given the data that I have, and my gut feelings on the matter, I think that the 1-8x is more usable than the 1-10x, and dramatically so.
Profile view of the March 1-8x24mm ffp:
With the important question of eye box at least addressed if not answered, lets look at some other features. Unlike the 1-10x, this one is ffp and has mil knobs and a mil reticle. This will no doubt appeal to the 70% of tactical shooters that prefer mil/mil setups and ffp. The FOV is generous, larger than my reference scope despite the greater power range of the March. Clarity is good, which would be expected on a March. The illumination, which is operated by a push button on the parallax knob, is not very bright, however. This is even true given the consideration that it utilizes reflected illumination technology rather than fiber or beam splitter. Not for illuminated daytime use.
View though the March 1-8x24mm at 1x with maximum illumination:
View through the March 1-8x24mm at 8x with maximum illumination:
I think that the most interesting features of the 1-8x are not to be found in the primarily close quarters aspects of the scopes design such as illumination and eye box, though. I think that this scope is much better characterized as a long range optic that will do CQB than as a close range optic that will do for an occasional long shot. The March 1-8x24mm has two important features that are common in high end long range scopes but not in CQB scopes. These are a 10 mil per turn zero stop elevation turret, and a side focus (10yds on) parallax adjustment. Few other scopes in the 1-
x genre have these features, both of which are acknowledged to be, if not vital for long range precision shooting, at least tremendously helpful. Prices for the 1-8x24mm March will be $2,100 without illumination and a disproportionately higher $2,720 with illumination. Like all March optics, they are available only through Kelbly's in the States. While I don't think that these match up well to the needs of the well heeled AR shooter who is looking to occasionally take a long shot with his .223, I think that those shooting M110 type AR-10's or SCAR heavies primarily long distances should take a look.
