OzFclass

But Matt, even if scope "A" adjusted repeatedly during a test who's gonna assure us that same scope will still adjust repeatedly in say two years time ?

This thread raises a lot of questions and unfortunately gives us punters the opportunity to comment on a subject I suspect we know very little about.

I've not cut in half and done a thorough examination of any scopes internal mechanisms lately. That's the bottom line for me because if this forum can't get solid 'inside' real information about how scopes are built then this thread is essentially pointless to my mind. Regards Rob Kerridge.

Gyro wrote:But Matt, even if scope "A" adjusted repeatedly during a test who's gonna assure us that same scope will still adjust repeatedly in say two years time ?

This thread raises a lot of questions and unfortunately gives us punters the opportunity to comment on a subject I suspect we know very little about.

I've not cut in half and done a thorough examination of any scopes internal mechanisms lately. That's the bottom line for me because if this forum can't get solid 'inside' real information about how scopes are built then this thread is essentially pointless to my mind. Regards Rob Kerridge.

Rob
A scope could fail the next time it's used, it's mechanical and mechanical things break, stick etc.

There's a thread on accurate shooter about scope testing. I suggest anyone who has an interest in this have a look, I put a link up previously and the first question/comment was "You wouldn't happen to be a March user would you Matt?", I'm not trying to sell anything, people can use whatever scope they want, John asked for comment and I gave it.
I think I'll stay out of this thread from here on.
Regards
Matt Paroz

Matt P wrote:...There's a thread on accurate shooter about scope testing. I suggest anyone who has an interest in this have a look, I put a link up previously and the first question/comment was "You wouldn't happen to be a March user would you Matt?"..

And that was me Matt. As it turns out, the testing done on Accurate Shooter was done by someone who sells March scopes. Now you're saying you sell March as well. I'm sorry but your comments against NF Comp have to be taken in that context.

Matt P wrote:All I can say is, by all means say your scope (any scope any brand) is right because you can shoot a 60 with it, but the only way to be sure is by testing. With the testing I've done my statement stands I use and recommend March and NF BR series scopes, I also will only sell Marchand NF BR series scopes, just as I will only sell/supply Bartlien, Brux, Kreiger and Maddco barrels. If it's something I won't use myself, I don't sell it to my customers. I currently use a March 10-60 x 52, March 5-50 x 56 and 12-42 BR Nightforce. Is that enough disclosure !!!Matt P

This thread is going nowhere, and the longer it goes on the harder it is going to be for all those who have shifting/suspect NF comp scopes to sell.....
There have been two posted For Sale on this site alone in the last 10 days... I bet those scopes have a unique feature that there older BR and NXS scopes didn't...

Matt Paroz has been around long enough to be able to identify a problem with a scope, if anything he is doing everyone a favour who isn't aware of a possible issue and/or doesn't have the experience or capabilities to identify an issue..

Nobody has implied that all NF comp scopes are crook/ only that there are a high percentage of tracking failure scopes around.. so this needs to be kept in perspective..

Cheers
Alan

Have a look at the top 10 shooters in all F Classes umder rankings on this forum..... or the top 10 F Class for all F Class categories shooters on the NRAA website...... the majority run NF Comps..... these are the best shots in this country. Certainly these are individuals who know something about optics, shooting and repeatability?

Commemts “like sales number do not say that it is necessarily the best scope” just does not make sense? Why would someone blow 2.5-3k if it is not the best value in all round scope attributes?

If the other scopes were that good we would have seen the top shooters run them as a majority across all F Classes.....

Hello all.

This topic is, and needs to remain, a topic about informing F Class Open shooters about scope options. I say Open shooters because Open calibres are likely to impose more "abuse" on the scope than F/TR.

All opinions are biased. Let's give the punters credit that they can weigh the opinions proffered.

As Scott said," ......, I'm just interested in your opinion."

I'm pretty sure the punters have made up their minds, one way or another, about the "Competition". Am I allowed a parting observation? Many of us are baffled that Matt approves the "Benchrest" but not the "Competition", because of tracking issues. We would expect that they have the same internal mechanisms. If you read the Nightforce spiels, you will find this statement only in the "Benchrest" spiel.
"Both Precision Benchrest riflescopes are equipped with a coil spring plunger return system to maximize tracking accuracy."

No more about Nightforce, please.

So, what else could be on the shopping list?

MARCH. Some good comments.
SIGHTRON. More good comments.
VORTEX. Good and bad.
SCHMIDT & BENDER. I want to know more about this favourite of the US Military!
OTHERS???

On what we have so, I have leaned away from the Competition and toward the Sightron.

Regards,
John T.
27.1.18

John, all good if you want to stick to Open only...... pretty sure that a 308 FTR rifle at almost 2kg lighter than a Open rifle with full blown 200gr bullets will impart as much impulse (abuse) into a scope as most 7 SAUM’s......

I will leave it there..... let’s focus on the Open rifles as requested.....

Since we talking the best.... What about Hensoldt?

Redhawk wrote:John, all good if you want to stick to Open only...... pretty sure that a 308 FTR rifle at almost 2kg lighter than a Open rifle with full blown 200gr bullets will impart as much impulse (abuse) into a scope as most 7 SAUM’s......

I will leave it there..... let’s focus on the Open rifles as requested.....

Since we talking the best.... What about Hensoldt?

Hensoldt lack the magnification range to be considered effective for F-class in my opinion. I've never seen one in the wild for that matter either.

Redhawk wrote:John, all good if you want to stick to Open only...... pretty sure that a 308 FTR rifle at almost 2kg lighter than a Open rifle with full blown 200gr bullets will impart as much impulse (abuse) into a scope as most 7 SAUM’s......

I will leave it there..... let’s focus on the Open rifles as requested.....

Since we talking the best.... What about Hensoldt?

You would be correct in that assumption!!!!!
Oh and even though I am not allowed to mention them.............Nightforce BR for me!!!!!!!
Keith H.

I like the Nightforce but I think the colour transmission is better on the March. Warmer, richer colours. (less chromatic aberration or different coatings) But I dont think that makes much difference, most of the time. I like the reticles and everything about the NF comp, so its a solid choice. I wont be changing. I have not tried the others except the sightrons which are not in the same league. I also have an NXS 8-32 its a good all round scope but the comp is clearer, and the march is clearer with warmer colours.
Chromatic aberration is when different frequencies (colours) are refracted differently by the lenses that make up the scope. The NF Comp and the March balance the glass used with slightly different mineral content in different lenses inside the scope so the colours in the light end up back together.like an expensive refracting telescope.I cannot speak for the S&B, maybe they do that too i dont know. Also remember that most targets are black and white but white is made up of all those frequencies that you want to focus together ...

My 2 cents worth as S&B fanboy. I own 2 S&B PMII 12-50x56, one on 6.5x47 and another on the 284W. But also own NF NXS and Sightron SIII FFP 6-24x50 for tactical rifle setup.
I have looked through and shot club mate’s rifles with NF Comp and March scope.

In my eyes:

S&B vs NF comp
• Glass – NF are touch clearer and brighter. Feel like the lack of anti-reflective coating.
• FOV – S&B so much more compare to NF at 50x.
• Eye relief – NF
• Eye box – S&B so much easier to find and look through. Wrong cheek rest setting on NF will have me seeing black hole.

S&B vs March
• Glass – Same in the very bright sun and heavy mirage day maybe a touch clearer for March. Not looked through March on cloudy or overcast day.
• FOV – S&B more picture in the view at about 45x
• Eye relief – March
• Eye box - S&B so much easier to find and look through

The reason I got the S&B was I am used to shooting in mils instead of MOA. S&B offer it in 0.025 mils. So I get 12 clicks to 1 Moa compare to 1/8 MOA clicks.
Here an article comparing the S&B, March and Sightron SV a few years back. Which was also a deciding factor for me to get the S&B.
http://mysticprecision.com/2015/05/comp ... -tactical/

Thanks Valk.

Terrific article.

Great article Valk. It did confirm my experience of both the Sightron and the March optical qualities in different light conditions. I have not used a S&B but the clarity as advocated sounds great.

The article made the point it was not focusing on the mechanicals, "In this review, I am not interested in the mechanicals and tracking of the scopes as we know they work. What I am looking at is pure optical qualities over a range of ambient lighting conditions and distances."

Unfortunately, it is the mechanicals over the investment life of the scope which should influence whether they should be purchased. I had a great picture through my Nightforce but it won't work at present due to mechanical failure. We do expect all scopes to suffer at some point, but when? What are the signs the scope is really going off? How easily can they be fixed? How long will you be without the scope? Will you trust it again?