The Nikon BDC Reticle...your thoughts?

Hunted with a buddy this past year and he made 3 1st shot connections using his VH reticle at 650, 535, and 470 yds. with an AR-10 243 (the 470-yarder was a couple shots since we couldn't determine range), and he doesn't take his reticle as far as he could. Mostly he is a committed turret twister, but he also has the VH reticle for the intermediate ranges...mostly. That was the only way he would've killed these dogs this last year. Turret wouldn't have worked.

This past year i killed 2 coyotes on 1st shots at 470 and 557 with my AR using this 3 MOA (4 MOA windage) reticle--
IMG_0778.jpg


...and placed in the middle of the pack on the one relay i had time to shoot at a (9"x4") steel prairie dog shoot (10 UKD targets) at our local range against some very high dollar optics and "sniper"-style rifles, and i couldn't even see 1 of the tgts. over a rise from my position. This was accomplished from ballistic program reticle calcs. only---no testing (not that i'm suggesting this approach for game).

This is the 2nd long-range coyote taken with this rig at 435 yards using reticle cald. to it's load. This reticle has an excellent (calibrated) windage system--

066_66.jpg


HUMRDiagram.jpg




This rig was a totally different story. The velocity was off some (and probably the bullet BC also) as they often are--

This rig required several trips to the range and some troubleshooting to get it right. Once i used a .375 BC and 3100 mv it is now ready for coyote season. I went between a G1 drag function to G7 and then G5 and then back to G1 to finally get it right...to 600 yds.--point being that the math doesn't always work. These are the 1st 3 shot connections at 325, 400 and 525. The 1st 2 were with reticle and 3rd was turretted, Nice thing about this reticle (NP-R1) is that it's the same as the turret so it allows me to use both without having to calculate 2 reference systems.

IMG_1023.jpg


Here's a buddy's rig using the Ball. Plex reticle calcd. only for his load at 425 yds. I've found interpolating between stadia lines actually quite accurate for both rangefinding as well as downrange zeroing--

028_28.jpg


One thing's for sure, as has been overstated here you have to test the system to ensure it works, and shoot in variable winds to find out just how well the "whole system" works.

When it comes to wind i calc. a system with reticle only, but only go to about 400 in ~10 mph winds and maybe ~500 in ~5mph or so.

After the experiences i've had in matches and hunting i'll take a 2nd focal plane tree reticle in a variable powered scope that's calibrated as close to the reticle for intuitive hundred yd. intervals to ~500-600 yds.
 
Yes, that's the way to go...IMO. The reticle's work...BUT the most accurate system of reference possible must be applied.

This means that the shooter should know the math inside and out, like the inversely proportional nature of 2nd FP reticle subtension vs. magnification that all these ballistic programs (like the Spot-On) are using now. This is something that Gerald Perry developed for Exbal and Jacob Gottfredson (PS Mag.) was writing about 10 years ago, and can actually be calcd. by hand with any std. ballistics program.

IMO, the shooter should completely understand the mil-dot mil-ranging formula and it's application for downrange zeroing and rangefinding with any reticle or turret system. There is at least one match that i know i would've dropped a point if i didn't know how to reverse mil a target to calculate a tgt. dimension then remil a similar tgt. size at an unknown range...because nobody could get their Swaro's or Leica's to work.

Besides that i just love the math anyways. I can honestly say that application of this math in the field, even improvised, has actually helped a kid i know choose his career, believe it or not.
 
I've never accused you of not liking your math
grin.gif


It is definitely nice to know. You can also calculate mil-dots to use for holdover points......
 
thumbup1.gif


What I have yet to figure out is why mfg.s make scopes with mil-dot reticles and moa adjustments. What's even more puzzling is that people buy them
confused.gif
 
Heck u would not believe the mistakes i've seen some of the optics companies make regarding reticles and their applications. Back in the '90's a cop sniper instructor wrote an article for one of the accuracy shooting magazines regarding approximating rangefinding using the mil-dot system with the plex reticle for police SWAT teams. The guy hadn't researched the mil-ranging formula enough to realize that no approximation was actually needed. He didn't realize that the mil-ranging formula wasn't specific to the mil-dot and can be used with any reticle subtension. But he wrote an entire article and missed it by just that much.
 
Yep. Some people, like yourself, get it. Some spend lots of money, rather than listen to others that do get it, and eventually get it. Others will never get it.

How's that for a philosophical optical dissertation?
grin.gif
 
Quote:A hunter making a conscious decision to take an animal at beyond point blank range of their rifle should employ the most precise tools & technique for delivering a lethal hit to that animal.
Not only that, the hunter should be well practiced in employing said tools & techniques to the point that he know's the limitaions of his gear, and himself as a shooter...

BDC reticles allow for too much margin for error to precisely engage an animal in the field at non standardized distances. And they do little/nothing to account for wind corrections...

So unless your Coues deer or coyote is gonna stand & offer at the pre-determined yardage increment for your reticle, don't bother with using a BDC reticle for taking game animals.

Furthermore, If you can't afford the right 'tools' for the job, then don't take the job! Simply get closer & shoot within your rifles' point blank range, and your confident "comfort zone". A hunter owes at least that much to the animal they are chasing.

Thanks for the replies, but I think some of you are mis-understanding my question. I understand that whatever I go with will require trigger time. Range extension doesn't come overnight from santa-claus, I get that. Also I understand that if I'm not comfortable with the shot then I won't take it. If it's windy and I can't account for the wind then I'll have to get closer. I'm gonna practice guys.

Knockemdown, I gotta ask then what are the "right tools?" That was part of my question. And just because an animal doesn't sit exactly on a pre-determined yardage point doesn't mean you can't estimate accurately where to put the bullet; IF you have practiced. I appreciate the concern for the animal, I think too many animals get gut shot because people are just flinging bullets at 'em. I stated in my first post that I think it's unethical to "hold over and hope" which is why I shoot in point blank range currently. With a drop compensating reticle you get multiple point blank ranges. If it is ethical to set a point blank range at 300 yards, then it is ethical to shoot a dash that hits at ~300. Neither account for windage, it's the exact same principle.

My concern is the visibility of dashes compared to the circles on the Nikon BDC. Like I said I liked the way the Nikon BDC looked, but I'm afraid there is too much going on and the circles will be less accurate than dashes because it is harder to pinpoint exact shot placement. From what I can gather I think the Nikon BDC is not what I want, I'm leaning towards standard dashes or a standard duplex with hand-adjustable elevation knobs that I can mark for yardage. Still open to suggestions though.
 
I took one look through my brother's Nikon with BDC and knew I'd never own one. He was talking about how clear it was, but how the heck could I tell with all of that crap in there? Doesn't look to be very precise to me, but he's killed multiple deer with it and likes it. I have a Burris with ballistic-plex and would prefer this reticle if I actually tried to use it. Old habits die hard and I've never had a lot of time to think about most shots on game, so I hold-over accordingly.
Thanks,
 
Originally Posted By: Jack RobertsSince most SWAT teams think 100 yards is a max shot, why do they even think about range?

Jack

I don't know Jack. I'll have to go back and reread the article to see if he mentions it.
 
Don't you naturally center things up in a circle... so wouldn't that BDC reticle actually work well for accuracy.

It frames what you want to hit so you can still see the exact point you want to hit, it doesn't have a crosshair or mildot covering up your intended point of impact.

Doesn't that make sense... I'm not really looking at the reticle, but it doesn't seem as dumb as people are making it out to be.
 
Originally Posted By: calling4lifeDon't you naturally center things up in a circle... so wouldn't that BDC reticle actually work well for accuracy.

It frames what you want to hit so you can still see the exact point you want to hit, it doesn't have a crosshair or mildot covering up your intended point of impact.

Doesn't that make sense... I'm not really looking at the reticle, but it doesn't seem as dumb as people are making it out to be.



You must be thinking about the other POS reticle they make called the coyote special which has one big circle. The current question about the BDC is a completely different POS with several circles on the vertical which are too small to actually see anything through but big enough to cover the broad side of a barn. Two different reticles both being worthless IMHO.
 
So today I went out and sighted in my M223 3x12x42 BDC. It works as advertised and was accurate at 100,200, and 300 which is as far as I shot today. I did have an issue in using the BDC to determine range which I do not typically have with my MD scopes. I'm going to give it a shot for this season and shoot some coyotes and prairie dogs with it and see how it goes. You can do the same thing with a MD scope that you can with this scope, the only thing being that the yardages per mil-dot will not be exact at 100yd increments but that's where cheat sheets come in to play. I now have no plans to buy any BDC reticle scope and will definitely stick to MD's and spinning turrets.

I hate to admit it but 2Muchgun can say, "I told you so" on this one.
 
You can use a MD reticle for hold off points out to 700yds with a 223, if you know how. I do. I bet my old buddy SScoyote does also.....
 
I use my MD's for hold off points now on other rifles and use a cheat sheet on the inside of my flip-open cover. I can't ever remember the distances without a card. I don't have the time to shoot every day or every week so remembering the odd ranges is too hard for me but having a cheat sheet works. No more BDC's in my future!
 
Back
Top