Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics BDC, mildots or Turrets.....?

Bullet drop compensating reticles (ie. LRD, Ballistic Plex, Ziess Rapid-Z, etc.), dialing using turrets, or less frequently using a mil based (or MOA based) reticle to compensate on long range shots.

This comes up in the majority of threads anytime there is a discussion beyond MPBR, with many people stating their preference, though usually with no reason or background as to why... They'll state that one is more accurate, one is "faster", etc, yet when queried as to define "accurate" or "fast" they generally have no answer, or state something that borders on the ridiculous. Now this isn't to say that people's experiences are not valid, but to point out that when discussing the merits of anything one needs to have a depth of knowledge and actual use putting it in to practice.


I've discussed this many times, stating my experience with all of them, using timers, hit rates, target size, etc. I get questioned often about it and thought I would take some pictures to give a visual....

Scopes used are a Burris FF II 3-9x40 with Ballistic Plex, and a SWFA SS 3-9x4mm with Mil-Quad reticle. The rifle "used" is a 308Win with a 168gr bullet at around 2,700fps. It doesn't really matter what reticle, or "rifle" is used as the principles are the same.


Up first is BDC with the Burris. Target is a 12in square plate at 470 yards. The center cross hair is "zeroed" for 200 yards, with the first hash mark being 300, the second 400, and so on. The hold is somewhere between the 400 and 500 yard hashes about 3/4ths the way down.

This isn't real hard as its a no wind, center hold situation. The only guessing is in the elevation correction.



Here is the same target but with a 10mph full value wind-


That's approximately 19-20 inches of drift shown, which is correct for the situation. That's a whole lot of guessing.....



Here is the same sequence but with the SWFA and dialing-


Zero wind and 3 mils elevation dialed.




10mph full value wind correction of 1.1 mils.




Same as the other two but using a mil based reticle for correction-

3 Mils held, center hold-





10mph full value, elevation and windage held 1.1 mil-







As targets get smaller and/or farther away, the harder it is to "guess" especially with BDC reticles and misses go WAY up.

The Burris again but this time on a 5in square turned as a diamond at 475 yards. Zero wind-

[img]http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx87/Vereor1/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps5c672f83.jpg[/img]


10mph full value wind hold-

[img]http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx87/Vereor1/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsf0f31976.jpg[/img]




Same as above but SWFA-

Zero wind, center hold-
[img]http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx87/Vereor1/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps92051453.jpg[/img]


10mph full value with 1.1 mil correction-

[img]http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx87/Vereor1/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsc19fac03.jpg[/img]

Milquad on a fixed power, or FFP scope is working well for me.

Dialing with the SWFA looks easiest (most precise, too) to me.....

As above but using a mil based reticle

Zero wind, 3 mils elevation-





10mph full value wind, elevation and 1.1 mil for wind-








These are just simple targets. They have good presentation (ie. you can see them), are painted white against a dark background, and are stationary. The simulated wind is the easiest for most to hit in. But it should be obvious to even the casual observer that one way is going to result in more hits, especially with any wind. Some will try to claim that BDC are "faster", however that is only true at exact ranges (300, 400, etc) and really doesn't play out that way regardless due to wind, target size Etc.

In order of hit rates-

Dialing elevation/holing wind with reticle
Holding using a mil based reticle (or MOA)
Hiding using a BDC reticle


The middle is always the middle, and any deviation from that is a compromise. Wind had to be dealt with and accounted for and we want to eliminate as many variables as possible. Having a "ruler" in the reticle to account for wind can only be an asset. A mil based reticle can easily be setup and used like a BDC.

There are multiple factors that determine speed of hits- distance, target size, shooter position, target movement, wind, shooter fatigue, excitement, heart rate, etc... Long range shooting on animals is not about speed. Those that talk about needing to take rushed shots on animals past 300 yards or so, are also generally the first ones to condemn long range shooting at all.

What I can state unequivocally is that BDC reticles never have higher hit rates than dialing. They can only hope to match it in the easiest of situations. As well due to the aforementioned variables, when actually timed when tired, excited, from less than ideal positions dialing is almost always faster to HIT.

They are a solid way to go, of not the smartest for most circumstances.






Indeed Bob. It's not that BDC's can't work, as you are more than aware, it's that there is no upside, to their downside.

I can hear millions of bubbles bursting.




Travis

Some can never see the truth.

MM

I have both, or better said, I have a few of each. If I'm deer/pig/coyote hunting inside 400 yards i'd rather have the BDC. Out past that more precision is needed, so I'd go for the Vortex FFP With turrets or the Leupold SFP with the TMR reticle. But that's just my opinion, based on what I have today, and it's subject to change.

That said, I used to do just fine with my old 270 and the basic Leupold duplex reticle. On at 200, down 7 inches at 300 and down 20 inches at 400. Easily adjusted for and very quick.

Would like to see the NF velocity reticle and zeiss rapid z reticle (calibrated Christmas trees) thrown in the mix. These have windage references so probably shouldnt be lumped in with the reticles pictured.

Nothing trumps the bullet going where those to silly crosshairs intersect.

I can like mil-dots on the horizontal line.

Chuck,

I get what you're saying when referring to the examples you used, but I have been using the Rapid Z enough to say it is far superior to most of the ballistic reticles. This is due to it having wind references (5 and 10 mph values) and because of the Zeiss calculator which aids in picking the correct magnification to align the sub tensions with the load being used. Is it as precise as dialing? Absolutely not. Is it accurate enough to put one in the vitals of a Whitetail out to the limits of the reticle? Absolutely. After using the Zeiss software, I EASILY made hits on my plates, 8" out to 500, 12" at 600. In fact, I never missed a plate with winds coming from about 4:30, gusting to 13 mph.

This is gonna sound bad, but the beauty of the Rapid Z is not having to memorize my come ups. I simply use the labeled lines. For the 'tweener ranges, it's very easy to bracket. Still plenty precise enough to put one in the vitals. For me, it is much quicker than referencing my dope chart and dialing. If using the Zeiss, I do still keep a wind value chart taped to my stock, but it is still less material to reference than when dialing. Admittedly, if I would simply settle on one load, then memorizing my dope would be much easier, but I like to experiment with different loads�

Wanted to emphasize that not all ballistic reticles are the same. I have not seen one that begins to approach the intuitiveness or effectiveness of the Rapid Z. If using a basic ballistic reticle like the LRD or Burris Ballistic Plex, dialing definitely has the edge. If shooting beyond the limits of the Rapid Z, dialing, again has the edge. But, up to the limits of a Rapid Z Reticle, it is a better mousetrap for most hunting.

I'll try and get some pictures up through the Rapid Z in a few days.

John

A much better BDC reticle for your comparison would have been the Zeiss rapid Z with its built in 5 and 10 mph wind holds and 25 and 50 yard increments, otherwise great comparison. I have no use for the ballistic plex or the Nikon BDC.

I also like the Swarovski BRH.

"Dial elevation, hold wind."

Do not recall, who wrote or said that, but it has been working for me.

Christmas trees are seasonal item and green. I

My experiences mirror yours, FormD.

I'll submit this anecdote:

This summer, I competed in a tactical shoot. The course of fire was meant to push you on speed, a typical stage would be 8 minutes to engage 10-12 targets ranging from point blank to ~1200 yards. All targets were at different distances, some would require alternative (non-prone) positions, and if you missed a target on the first shot you could take up to three more for lesser points.

It was an individual competition, but we shot in pairs. The shooter I was paired with was using a Bushnell HDMR with some type of Horus reticle. During the first half of the shoot, he held both windage and elevation using his reticle. I started to feel bad for him because he wasn't having time to engage many of the targets, and was struggling to get hits as well.

After a fourth poor stage result, he switched to dialing elevation, as I had been the whole time. He started connecting better that I was! Up til then I had thought he was either a poor shooter or his gun wasn't shooting well. At the end of the day, I beat him by a few points due to getting many more hits on the earlier stages, but I'm certain he was the better shooter. When it came time for the prize table, it meant the difference between a Bushnell ERS scope and an air rifle!

I've been told there are situations where the Horus is a good choice, and it certainly gives you lots of elevation AND windage hold references. With small targets and lots of time pressure, it wasn't an advantage for that shooter that day.

I'll take two turrets and a side of reticle gravy to go please.

Thanks.



Travis

Distance, target size, and wind....F is spot on. Dialing rules, nothing can touch it, and marked reticles help with sliding for the wind.

That said, for less than 400 yards in hunting I'm really liking simple dots in a lightweight fixed scope. Not because hits are easier, but nothing moves and the need for all the advantages given by dialing isn't a major factor...shorter distance, large kill zone, less windage.

...but I'm still addicted to dialing.

I rarely shoot game past 350 yards, but practice to be capable out to 450. For targets the size of a basketball, dots/bars in a medium-powered scope work fine for me. If hunting an open area, I just dial up to max power of 9-10x and leave it there. If hunting closer-range spots, I leave it at 5x or so and don't sweat the dots. Fun guns get turrets.

Rapid Z, Nightforce Velocity, etc.

Yes, they are better for windage than "plain" BDC's, however you are still holding in air at anything other than whole distances. Most take these scopes, go to a bench and then proceed to shoot them at targets that are exactly 300, 400, 500, or 600 yards. This does not show you the deficiencies, or attributes of any of them. I'll try to take some pictures through a NF Velocity 600 for reference.

Think about this- if I posted a one inch dot at 100 yards, had you run 100 yards and back under time while I dialed your scope to hit where 470 yards should be (in air) and where a 12 mph half value wind would be (in air) would you really believe that using the reticle as such is the best way to hit that dot...?

This goes along with what Carl posted. Re- Horus Reticles. It is important to note that we have Horus reticles in every new military sniper optic because the issued Leupold scopes didn't adjust correctly.


In any case the is what it looks like-




It is the ultimate Christmas tree reticle. Every military sniper knows it and the vast majority use only the reticle instead of dialing. However, given the same drill as above NO ONE chooses to hold to hit that 1 inch dot. Not to get into the psychological and physiological aspects of shooting ( they are important), but intuitively (visually) we understand that the middle is the middle and under stress we WANT to put those crosshairs on the target.

Exactly.... grin