I am completely addicted and dependent on having some sort of BDC reticle for my hunting rifle optic. To the point I would rather have a $200 scope with a BDC than a Swarovski with a standard duplex (or even #4) knowing damn good and well the Swaro is a WAY better scope.

For where I hunt, shots range from 50 to 500 yards, most being in the 200 to 300 yard range. For me, these scopes combined with real world ballistics of your ammo make 500 yards very doable (in calm wind) with most bullets with a .400 BC and better. Shots 400 and in are a chip shot, where 300 to 400 used to be a stretch.

My favorite is the Leupold long range duplex. Two simple dots below the cross hair.



Not the best pic in the world but I was able to watch this bedded herd of elk for over an hour. Range was 380. Rifle was a Browning A-bolt 30-06 with a lead tipped, flat based, 165 gr. junk assed Hornady SP with a lower end Nikon 3-9x40 with a BDC. When I finally got my shot, I put 3 right square in the lungs just as fast as I could work the bolt as easy as popping milk jugs off the bench at the range. That would have been a challenge for me with a duplex and getting in any tighter on those elk in the thick cedars wasn't going to happen.





Anymore, minus the lever guns, I like my hunting rifles to have a 200 yard zero then have good knowledge of my hash mark hits. I really like how 2nd focal plane scopes can change the MOA measurements of the hash marks.

I have used CDS scopes, but have gotten rid of all those in favor of some sort of BDC reticle. I wasn't having very good turret tracking back to zero luck.

Am I the only one?

Todd

With a little measuring out on the range you can accomplish something similar with a simple duplex reticle. My go-to hunting rifle is at the property right now so I cant reference the chart I figured out for it but... its sighted in 3" high at 100 yards, with the scope set on 9x the junction of the fine crosshair and the heavier post is dead on at 400 yards. I have it figured for different ranges on 3x 6x and 9x and fired at the range to confirm my math was correct.
You can also use the reticle for rough range estimation once you know how far apart they are.

Look at that sheath!! Got any better pics of that?Thanks

I sent you a P.M.

thanks!

Todd

I picked up a used Abolt chambered in 30-06 several years ago with the same laminated stock as the one in your photo. Your rifle is the only other one I have ever seen like it.

I picked it up off another forum classifieds. I used it for a couple of years, killed a couple more elk with it, then have it away to a youth who needed it worse than I did. They are fine rifles.

Todd

Nope, that's not uncommon. There are scopes out there that RTZ and track properly, and also have a "BDC reticle" (my preference is to have hash marks every 0.5 MRAD), giving the best of both worlds and opening up your options. Can't agree about the SFP "flexibility", though. Seen it bite people in the behind too many times. I'll take a bulletproof MRAD erector and FFP MRAD reticle every time, if given the choice.

I too like the Leupold LRD. It simply works!

I like the Leupold reticle also.

You have your favorite?
I think scope manufacturing companies could do very well, by making the right scope for the hunting person.

Yep, the SWFA 3-9x and LRHS 3-12x are my favourites.

Those two for variables (and the 4.5-18 LRHS). The reticles are still usable at low power in fairly low light. The NX8 1-8 is pretty good though I wish the reticle extended all the way across on the lower powers...I've not used the higher power NX8 but I'm guessing they may be tough to use on lower powers.

MOA vs MRAD really doesn't matter to me as long as the reticle matches the adjustments.

I spent a lot of time killing stuff with Leupolds LRD in several 6x scopes. Not much a fan of it in a variable.

I use Nightforce's Velocity 600 reticle on several rifles and like it, but mainly use it for dialing as it's about as close to a duplex as you can get in the NXS models. I only use it on 1 rifle with a 200 yard zero and no dials.....drops match well to 400 (as far as I've tested it) but I'd still prefer to dial but it's a capped model.

Some of those scopes can be too "busy", but if everything is kept pretty simple they are not a handicap and can be a big asset. I have some scopes set up for twisting dials, but only use them as range toys.

Most of my rifles have BDC scopes. The ones that don't, with maybe one exception, are lever guns. A few have BDC reticles and knobs. I practice practice out to 600 with the BDC scopes and don't feel much need for the knobs inside that range.

That said, when shooting clay pigeons at 600, knobs allow more precision. Still, t I've hit 8 of 12 with the BDC scope on my .6.5-06AI at 14x and don't feel particularly hampered with the 9x most of my rifles wear as they allow me to dance around the edges, even if actual hits are fewer. More than good enough for elk or mulie sized kill zones, especially since my longed shot on big game has been 487 yards.

I have a Leupold VX-R 3-9x40 with the Ballistic Firedot reticle (Item #111236). It's one of the most practical pieces of glass I've ever used because the reticle is illuminated and it has a BDC.

Most experienced shooters would want something else for routine use in open country, especially where wind is an issue, but as a general-purpose hunting scope it’s hard to beat.

This is a hunting scope—not ideal for making tiny groups on paper—with good reticle dimensions for low-light use. The illuminated part is a short vertical line, not a circle or square. It appears to be 1 MOA at 9x and 2.5 MOA at 3x. It’s bright enough to see in daylight without going to the highest setting. My astigmatism makes the dot flare on the higher settings, but reducing the brightness fixes it. It’s hard to find truly dark situations around here since I’m near a major West Coast city, but the dimmest settings would probably be fine in very low light.

Leupold marketing materials imply that from a 200-yard zero, the bottom of the circle is your 300-yard POI, the middle hash mark is your 400-yard POI, and bottom hash mark is your 500-yard POI. They don’t tell you is that this is only true for muzzle velocities north (in some cases far north) of 2,900 fps with very high BC bullets. Fortunately, you can tweak your zero and shoot some tests to figure out which distances the aiming marks actually indicate.

These figures are for a .308” 180-grain Nosler Partition (BC = .474) at 2,750 fps.
50 yards: +0.6”
100 yards: +1.8”
200 yards: Zero
250 yards: -3.3”
285 yards: -6.8", or the bottom of the circle
320 yards: -11.0”
355 yards: -16.7”, or the middle hash mark
400 yards: -25.5”
450 yards: -38.0”, or bottom hash mark

This dope is only correct with the scope on 9x, but if you’re making long shots in low light then you have time to adjust the scope. Whether it’s wise to attempt long shots in low light is another issue, but it might be OK in some situations. Game animals don’t stand around in 50-yard increments so I don’t get too worked up that the POIs aren’t in neat 50-yard increments.

All in all, it’s a useful piece of gear. Once I figured out how to use the reticle, it was easy to ring 8" steel at 425 yards with it. In the last 20 years, my longest shot on game has been about 120 yards. My average is about 30, but it’s nice to know that I have a piece of gear that will take me out beyond 400 if I want. I also like the fact that the turrets are capped and that there are no other external adjustments.

I’d buy another one, but of course Leupold has quit making it.


Okie John

Which hash mark do you use for 476 yds?

That's beyond my limit on game. I'd use a different rig if I wanted to really stretch the range on steel or paper.


Okie John

You can also borrow a little trick from the crossbow boys and use the power selector to fine tune the extra aiming points to the range and your load. I futzed around last night with the Burris Reticle Analysis tool and got some useful looking results for my Grendel, which has an E1 4.5-14 mounted. Gonna take the PDFs I captured to the range and try it out when I get a cool, still day. This is for SFP scopes, of course.

Never thought about fine tuning it that way. Will have to give it a try at 600 next time I'm at the range.

Depends on accurate velocity and BC numbers of course, so needs actual shooting to verify. Should certainly put deer hunters in the money, anyway.

I like the RZ reticles, the older type that was offered on the Zeiss Conquest MC and HD5 models that had numbers next to the stadia. I have more than a few Zeiss scopes with RZ600 and RZ800 reticles. You simply zero at 200 yards then enter load details into an app and it tells you what magnification the scope needs to be on for the holdovers to be accurate. With the 3-9x Zeiss Conquest MC on my .375 H&H I need to have the magnification set on 7.5x and it works great out to 600 yards. Here's the view inside the scope looking at a 10" steel target 400 yards away. There are stadia for 200, 300, 350, 400, 450, 500, 525, 550, 575 and 600 yards. 5 and 10 mph wind holds are also provided.

I watched a buddy sail one right over "his" elk with that exact scope and reticle. He didn't think to check his magnification setting when the moment of truth came at ~475 yards, and he didn't get another shot opportunity. He had spent a lot of time during the summers practicing on steel and milk jugs out to 600 yards with his rifle, but stress and adrenaline have a way of giving a guy tunnel vision, and muscle memory/instinct take over. That's why I'm an advocate for the KISS principle with scopes and rifles that will be used in high-pressure situations. The subtensions in FFP scopes are correct regardless of magnification setting, which is one less thing to worry about when the pressure is on. An FFP reticle would have prevented a few similar scenarios that I've witnessed involving hunting companions missing shots on game because the magnification on their SFP scopes wasn't on the correct setting.

That issue can be mitigated to some degree by continuous and extensive training with one's equipment, which tends to help a guy keep a cool head when under pressure, but for the vast majority of hunters and shooters that want to extend their effective range in the field, an FFP reticle leads to a more effective game shot, IME.

I have FFP scopes from Nightforce (2), Premier Reticles (2), Leupold (1) and Vortex (5) and I've thought about using a Viper PST FFP on my latest Proof build in .308 Win which is intended to be a hunting rifle. That said, I've seen a number of turret turners miss a shot because they forget to rotate the dial back to the correct setting, sometimes one or two revolutions off. If you get all riled up hunting then no system is fool proof. I'm much more of a steel/paper shooter than a hunter so I don't get too excited about shooting at an animal. I walk around with my Zeiss scopes set at the correct magnification and use a silver colored permanent marker to put a dot on the tube to remind me where it needs to be in order for the reticle to work. I shot a mule deer a couple of years ago at 465 yards using the .375 H&H and 3-9x Zeiss with RZ600 reticle. If an animal is that far out, you typically have some time to get it right and I certainly did. I was leaning over the bed of a pickup resting my left arm and rifle on a tonneau cover, shot at him twice, and hit him twice. The first shot was fatal but the second dropped him on the spot. Based on the hits, the reticle worked great.

Another fan of the Leupold LRD here, I prefer the 2-7 on my hunting rifles. It pairs up very well with a 210 Partition out of my 338-06. Good to 500 yds.

How you guys getting good pics through the scope,tried dozens of times and always look like do-do

I strongly prefer SFP scopes. It's important though, the operator knows what he is doing. The scope didn't bite your buddies in the butt with their misses. . They did it to themselves. As stated earlier, I like being able to change the MOA measurements of the hash marks by turning the scope power up and down. It certainly isn't for everyone though.

Todd

I'm glad that the RZ600 has worked for you. I spent many years using that and other reticles of similar design. I am well-versed in their use, but there is a better and simpler way to use a reticle to hit things. Of course if a person wanted to start dialing for elevation then they should practice enough to be proficient. A zero stop helps with the ele turret being left on the wrong setting. But when it comes to using subtended hash marks on a reticle, there is a way to simplify things and reduce the likelihood of missing without sacrificing flexibility/effectiveness.

Doesn’t matter how much someone “practices” or “knows what they’re doing”. In the field people make mistakes and SFP scopes and holdovers will result in misses.

Consider the military—when there’s something important to do it’s a team of no less than 2 people responsible for thinking about the operation.

For one person to be responsible for an operation in a excitable/stressed environment the equipment has to be so simple it’s painful. Holdovers need to be either FFP or fixed power. No way to [bleep] up a setting that way.

I guess all those animals I've killed since 2004 (which has been a bunch) when Burris mainstreamed the hunting ballistic plex in the Fulfield 2 rifle scope were all an accident. I've been using hash marks since then and there hasn't been a miss that was my scopes fault... Weird. If you need to use a FFP because you can't teach yourself to check the power of your scope before you shoot then you should use a FFP scope. This isn't a battle field. Its hunting. And I ALWAYS carry my guns with the scope on close to the lowest setting. There is always time to turn it up, never time to turn it down.

Todd

I agree it’s no battlefield. But wounding an animal is a significant act.

And it may never happen to you. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen to others.

No offense meant btw. Burris makes a good scope and I’m glad it works for you.

Actually, I personally think the Burris Fullfield scopes are junk, but they were the first to offer a mainstream ballistic plex or BDC type reticle. Everybody has followed since. I just mostly disagree that you are pretty much saying if you use a SFP scope you are going to miss and wound animals. I strongly disagree with that. Strongly. Again, the only difference is disciplining yourself to check the power of your scope. That is very easy to do. In fact, most people I know have two different charts for the reticle. One for max power, and one for mid power. Apps like "strelok pro" really help in this and its very accurate data if you have accurate ballistic information.

Disagree as strongly as you like, but facts are facts. I’ve never seen anyone miss or lose an opportunity because they were using a well-designed FFP scope, but I have seen it happen to hunting companions and clients multiple times with even very well-designed SFP reticles. And yes, I’ve been using BDC reticles since Burris first released the BP, as well.

True, but field shooting under pressure can test the ‘discipline’ that a person thinks he’s developed. A good way to practice field shooting under pressure and seeing how well you do is to try shooting a PRS match or two. Let me tell you, even the most experienced and trained shooters make the odd silly mistake when under pressure, and the more complex the shooting system and process, the more often mistakes happen.

I'll say it again... If you can't find the mental fortitude or don't have the mental fortitude to check what power your scope is on before you shoot at an animal, you need to use a FFP scope...….. I have no interest in shooting a match to see if I can kill an elk at 380 yards with my ought six. I'll just use my SFP scope and kill an elk at 380 with my ought six. Then there are at least a dozen other elk and umpteen other species dead that I've killed between 350 and 450 yards, where I really find the hash marks handy.... How many of those people shoot those matches with a 165 gr. Hornady intlerlock flat base soft point? I didn't think so.... And how many of those matches hold their shooting to 500 and under like I do?.... I'm not talking about long range hunting here.... At which point, if you don't have the mental fortitude to run a SFP scope, how can somebody be an ethical long range hunter? how does a FFP make the person smarter?

Todd

My progression over the years has evolved from scopes with standard duplex type reticles (fixed and variable) to SFP BDCs to FFP mil quad reticles. I never had issue killing game with any of them. But after trying the FFP mil reticle scopes, I am sold and have no desire to go back to the others. This system certainly makes things a lot simpler and takes much of the thinking and gotchas out of the equation when you only have precious seconds to evaluate, decide if you are going to shoot, take aim and pull the trigger before your buck goes over the ridgeline.

I stayed away from those scopes for years because I had a stigma for putting a 20oz scope on my lightweight rifles. After I took the plunge and learned how to use mils, I felt like an idiot for not trying them 5 years sooner. Speaking of that, I wish I could find one of the earlier discontinued SWFA 3-9 mil-dot scopes. I have a rifle begging for one.

I just hold my phone up to my binos and tap the button when I get a clear sight picture. Takes some playing with it. Helps to have a steady position, but this one was hand held. And you can tell because the image edges aren’t crisp.

This one is better but tough to see the elk because it took me too long fumbling around with the camera. There’s a good 6x6 in this image.

Dang! That's a cool picture Joel. When was that?

It was the bull you were there for! I don’t think I would have taken that shot if you hadn’t been there.

I’ll never not have tire chains again.

Thats a good picture. Then spent awhile trying to find the elk. Is that him near the tip and behind that one spruce.

I think just about all of us are able to figure what works best for ourselves on our ground. My duplex-equipped scopes will continue to be sighted about 1 to 2 inches high at 100 for quick shots at any sane (for me) range, but the ones with extra aiming points are now zeroed at 100, well within the opportunities I've had in recent years, and the secondary points used farther out. Even my Grendel is only a bit low at 150 with a 100-yard zero, and its a simple matter to range various points within view from any vantage point and select the magnification that works. Typically, all my scopes stay on the lowest setting until I think more Xs are in order.

My only scope with a "tactical" reticle is a SS 6x42, and actual tests have proven to me that it's too fine for dim light, for me anyway. Show me a FFP reticle that works for me in low light (without illumination) at low magnification and I might give it a go. I say "without illumination" because of all the scope-setting sins, the one I'm most likely to commit is killing the battery by leaving the light on.

Sure is!

I thought that looked familiar. You put a great shot onto him.

That's a great image, and the "Where's Waldo" thing with the elk is icing on the cake.

From this morning:
Top is using secondary aiming point at 9x at 200 yards.
Bottom shows actual drop, fired at 14.5x








Really just a little range exercise. The secondary aiming points in that scope are too fine to be of much use in dim light. I was struggling a bit today as the sun kept going behind clouds. If I were hunting and had a 200 yard poke offered, I'd just hold a hand high and shoot. Might work in the "gopher woods".

up to 500-600 meters use human eyeballs anything over that a 8-36x50 scope

I’m really enjoying the Ballistic Plex in my 708, the hash marks work almost perfectly at 100,200 etc out to 500 Metres
And before anyone asks the scope stays on 9X , as does my 3-9SWFA , which has been my practice for the last 40 years

Almost exactly my experience. I still own a few BDC equipped scopes, but have a hard time using anything but my Mil/Mil FFP or fixed scopes anymore.

I agree about BDC; if I need to twist, I'd prefer a real dialing scope, and BDCs are often attached to scopes with "questionable" adjustments.

But for quick shots under the conditions I encounter, a secondary aiming point can be useful, if one has the presence of mind to keep the power dial where it belongs. Finding a FFP scope with a reticle suitable under conditions here without illumination is tough. As mentioned, even the reticle on the Burris I used on my Grendel is too fine. Gonna probably switch that one out for a standard FF 3-9 with dots under the crosshair, but a Weaver K6 is also available and would cut some weight. My shots are usually between 20 and 100 yards, so a rifle zeroed at 100 makes the most sense, and helps with threading the needle through brush.

As long as those hash marks are measured in MRADs I agree, other than that, I have zero use for generic BDC reticles.