Have We Come Full Circle
Ever since the first shooter sat down at the bench and decidedto shoot small groups, Scopes have been a problem.
Here is a little history.
All through the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's,and part of the 2000's, shooters put up with scopes that might be good,or might not be good. By good, I mean it would hold absolute POA, shot after shot after shot.
Through the years, shooters attempted various fixes, the most popular being the Tucker Conversion for the 36x Leupold. This did prove to be a viable fix, or, as best any one could tell.
Sometime in early 2000, Arnald Jewel designed a rather neat external adjustable mount. It required a internally frozen scope, or a scope with no adjusments to move around.
Nobody was interested in making these for Arnald, so I figured out a way to freeze the internals of a 36x Leupold and Weaver. Quite a few shooters went to this set-up, with good success. Jim Foster started manufacturing the mounts, but gave up on it. I suspect there are about 200 or so floating around.
Then, Gene Bukys came up with the TSI System and his frozen 45x Leupold. This system is absolutly rock solid, although as has been mentioned, is a tad difficult to adjust. But that is a small price to pay for a system that WILL hold POA shot, after shot, after shot. Afterall, that is the primary requirement of a sighting system sitting atop a Benchrest Rifle.
As a note, Gene just won the Benchrest World 2-Gun Championship using his system. That is hard to top.
Bob Brackney then developed a system that is similiar to the originol Jewell, but could use a 30mm tube scope. It has also beconme quite popular. And it works.
For years, shooters petitioned Leupold, and other high end manufacturers, to bring out a scope that would hold POA. I can remember talking to the Leupold Rep at the last Crawfish held in Louisianna. He promised the World, but delivered something else when the 45x Leupold hit the market. The fact was , some Comp Series Leupolds moved. Shooters were not happy.
For years, many of us made statements that we would pay what ever the manufacturers wanted if the would give us a scope that would be worthy of sitting atop a Benchrest Rifle. $1500, $2000, who knew.
March took up the Gauntlet. They said, "hey, these guys say they are willing to pay. Let's do it". (I am paraphrasing).
I have four 50x Marches, I went with them because I wanted the higher magnification, with the guarantee of holding POA, (although my frozen 36x Leupolds in my Jewell mounts did that). I think the 50x March leaves a little on the table when it come to the glass, it sure isn't as good as the 45x Leupold, or the 40x March. But I live with it. If March would trade my four 50x scopes for 40's, I would do it right now.
My good friend Gene Bukys reminds me on occasion that I am yet to have as good a season shooting the Marches as I did my frozen 36x Leupold and Jewell Mounts.
But at least March has given us what we demanded. A high end scope that makes its number one priority holding POA. It even says so in their advertisments. As far as I know, they are the only manufacturer that states specifically in their ads that the primary reason fo owning a March is the faith that it will do just that. HOLD POA.
I have taken apart every popular scope intended for Benchrest. I know the internal flaws with each brand, and I know what goes wrong.
I have not taken a March apart. They say you can't because every thing is "glued", and you would have to destroy a lot of parts in the proccess.. And, I have no reason to. I will let someone else do that.
Have there been any provable failings of the March Scope?? I have no first hand knowledge of it, (only second hand), so, untill I do, I will not comment..........jackie
