Am I crazy for being anti-BDC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Candyman87

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2014
Messages
712
Location
Northeastern PA
I've been looking in the ~$2-300 range for a new scope and I'm surprised how many use some sort of BDC reticle.

I definitely see the appeal for those who shoot a few times a year with factory ammo, but as a handloader, I don't wish to match my loads to my scope, but rather what is most accurate for the rifle.

But my big questions is why are they so prevalent? Is there no market for something like a simple duplex? Or even a mil-dot? I've gone out of my way to find scopes with just a duplex reticle because I don't want that BDC!

Or am I just being dense?
 
A lot of the Nikon Prostaff series, Cabelas branded scopes, and some Bushnells come primarily in some sort of BDC reticle. At least some of the Nikons come in both, but the duplex ones are a bit harder to find at least locally to check out.
 
My son sought out a BDC reticle for his dedicated Savage heavy barrel target rifle in 308 (and he buys only 168gr BTHP bullets and Lapua brass). He had the opposite problem: most scopes he looked at were duplex crosshairs and he had trouble finding a BDC bullet drop reticle for his specific use.

I am not anti-BDC. All I have are the standard duplex reticles or plain crosshairs. I do try to keep range notes on trajectory for each each gun with different bullet weights. I do not believe it is crazy to prefer either duplex reticle or plain crosshairs over a BDC reticle specific to a caliber and load.
 
BDC is a double edged sword. At the range or hunting from a stand it can be quite useful. On the other hand any clutter in reticle can dramatically confuse you when an accurate shot is needed in a hurry.

Don't ask how I know this.
 
I'm not a fan either. I would rather have a standard duplex, or a mildot for certain applications. The BDC is good in theory, but most people that buy them never bother to verify their actual zero at anything past 100 yards. A good mildot reticle is much more useful, but requires some training to take full advantage of. The scope makers know that most shooters are gadget people, and the BDC is marketed as the best thing since the invention of the scope.
Look at Leupold. Less gimicks, and more reticle options.
 
Mission drives the gear. A good BDC scope makes a lot of sense for a hunter shooting at reasonable distances or a designated marksman needing fast torso hits to 600yds or so.

It makes little sense for anyone needing extreme precision like a sniper, long range shooter etc. For those applications, a good mil reticle and mil turrets along with a range-finder and ballistic software is the ticket.

I can get a 2nd round hit on 12" steel at 500yds with my TA33 Acog which is really good for a 14.5" barreled 5.56 and a 3x BDC scope.

With a precision rifle and a mil scope, a 1st round hit would be expected at that range, but it would take more time.
 
I personally could care less but do have one mounted on my RRA. It is set up for 600 yds. My preference is still mil dot reticle, as I don't own a range finder and use it for ranging.

I convinced my brothers to use BDC reticles because after 30 yrs of shooting and hunting they refused to learn how to properly use a scope. They believe in one hundred yard zero and Kentucky windage.

The BDC reticles makes it easier for them since they have range finders.
 
I don't think you're crazy for not wanting a BDC reticle. I like a clean sight picture too and prefer a simple dot or crosshair.

The other one I can't understand is the target knobs on almost everything these days! I was looking at a 1-4x Leupold Mark-AR scope as a possible option for my Colt M4gery. But the newest models come with target knobs. Honestly, I don't see the need to make range adjustments on a 1-4x scope on a 250-yard rifle. And the last thing in the world I want is something that can be easily moved off of zero when letting others try my rifle.
 
Yeah, I don't like target knobs on low power scopes either. It irks me that the entire Nikon AR line has target knobs. I like Nikon and I'd like to buy an AR suited optic from them, but without the target knobs. I guess that leaves the Monarch line.
 
ms6852 said:
I personally could care less but do have one mounted on my RRA. It is set up for 600 yds. My preference is still mil dot reticle, as I don't own a range finder and use it for ranging.

I convinced my brothers to use BDC reticles because after 30 yrs of shooting and hunting they refused to learn how to properly use a scope. They believe in one hundred yard zero and Kentucky windage.

The BDC reticles makes it easier for them since they have range finders.
Click to expand...
This is largely my reasoning too... I prefer using mil-dots for ranging as that's one less device to carry and that can fail.

I prefer doing things the hard way, or at least maintaining my proficiency with the hard way.
 
Different scopes for different applications. I relate things like this to hunting applications because that's most what I personally do.

If I'm hunting a stand where I may have 300+ yard shots, then a BDC scope and a rangefinder would make sense.
If I'm hunting my stand that is located in hardwood bottoms where 60-70 yards is the furthest I can shoot, obviously I wouldn't want it there. A .30-30 with a fixed 4x would be more than adequate.

For me it would depend.

As far as whether or not you want one, well that's a personal choice and I certainly see your point and understand your reasoning for not wanting one.
 
I don't think it's hard to find a non BDC reticle.

But to say you don't want to match a load to a reticle...well 100fps one way or another isn't going to make a 6" circle at 400 yards not let the bullet impact inside it.
 
I greatly prefer a standard duplex over a BDC.

Now, if Leupold offered their standard VX1, VX2, or VX3 in a legitimate mil-dot reticle (even being second focal plane), I'd be all over that like white on rice on a paper plate in a snowstorm. Just can't justify spending extra for a higher end mil-dot scope right now.
 
It depends on the scope. I agree that some are too busy. I don't care at all for Nikons version. Nor the Redfield or VX-3. But the reticle Leupold uses on the VX-1 and VX-2 as well as Burris and a few others aren't bad at all. The Burris scope with dots is only $10 more than the duplex and the VX-1 and VX-2 are less than $50 more. Especially at only $10 more I see no downside, and the extra $50 is worth it to me. I wouldn't pay much more though.

I don't wish to match my loads to my scope, but rather what is most accurate for the rifle.
Click to expand...

No reason to do so,especially on a hunting rifle. Just load as usual, run the data though a ballistics calculation program and go to the range to verify. The actual bullet drops between various loadings is a lot closer than most people think. Most people way over think this.

If I zero my 308 at 100 yards I may find the dots are actually on at 190, 285, and 375 instead of exactly 200, 300 and 400. Or with my 300 WSM the dots may correspond to 215, 320, and 430 yards.

For one thing game in the field is almost never at exactly 100, 200, 300, or 400 yards anyway. I just use the dots as a reference point if I'm shooting at a target or game at around 200, 300 or 400 yards. Regardless of the cartridge or load I'm still going to hit no more than 2-3" higher or lower than my aiming point. There is no big game animal in North America where 2-3" either way is going to matter. And if you put in some range time and know exactly where it will hit if a game animal is at 350 yards it is a simple matter of aiming 2-3" higher or lower than the dot.

It is still far more accurate than the old fashioned method of zeroing 3" high at 100, aiming at the center and knowing the bullet is going to be no more than 8" low at 300 yards.

If you are target shooting at known ranges of 200, 300 or 400 yards then having the loads impact at exactly those ranges might be a concern. If it is then you need a scope with dials, not dots. Dots are quick to use and accurate enough for hunting.

Now, if Leupold offered their standard VX1, VX2, or VX3 in a legitimate mil-dot reticle (even being second focal plane), I'd be all over that like white on rice on a paper plate in a snowstorm. Just can't justify spending extra for a higher end mil-dot scope right now.
Click to expand...

They do, a VX-2 with mil dots

http://swfa.com/Leupold-3-9x40-Mark-AR-MOD-1-Riflescope-P60892.aspx
 
BDC is so prevalent because of the tactical market. On a tactical rifle BDC is a great tool to have, but as you all have mentioned you're constantly experimenting with loads in a hunting rifle so a BDC is useless.
 
Nope. BDC is a slick idea, but it has never worked well right from the very beginning. Too many variables involved.
 
BDC only works on a particular bullet / brass / powder combination. Anything else and there's some Kentucky windage to be entered into the equation. I use a mil dot and love it. It too however, is only useful for a specific component / magnification combination, but I've created dope tables for each magnification / bullet / powder etc combination in my log book and so far it has served me extremely well. YMMV. Whatever you choose - learn it inside and out and you'll be fine.
 
BDC works for every bullet out there. It may not match a round yardage number, but a little time at the range will prove the accurate ranges the dots line up.

The problem I see is for a hunting scope they are encouraging people to shoot beyond their skill and for a "tactical" setting they aren't detailed enough to fit many people's wants.

The old standard of zeroing for maximum point blank range has kept me within my ethical distance as well as removed the need for a complex reticle. My favorite range reticle for shooting at inanimate targets has got to be Vortex's MOA Christmas tree style reticle. Put that on a .22LR and it turns a budget rifle/ammo from 0-300 yards into the same fun as shooting .308 or a similar round out to around 1000 yards. And most all of it can be done with the reticle once zeroed. It's not the option I'd take on a squirrel rifle or really most any hunting rifle for the distances I'd take a shot, but it's a ton of fun and since MOA has been embedded into my mind from the first scope on, the reticle is intuitive.

I'd be happy to see more of the Christmas tree style reticles on a lot of these tactical style optics. Even a simple MOA hash mark reticle instead of a mildot would make a lot of sense for people who haven't converted or are just casually into a busy reticle option.
 
I set mine at 200 and leave it. I never mess with my scope during a match. IMHO higher end optics like Trijicon ACOGs are pretty accurate with their BDC's. Other scopes, maybe maybe not.. ie good enough for ringing steel but not for precision.

While hunting I might dial my power up or down but I know my zero and where to hold.
 
Last edited:
BDC scopes aren't made for super precision..never have been...never will be. At 500 yards I shoot steel with Nikon scopes 4X12 with BDC and Vortex Vipers 6.5X20 with their version of BDC...you can dial it in on the scope and shoot 6 inch steel...or use the BDC reticle and hit 6 inch steel just as reliably...the thing being its pretty much the kill zone of big game....And good enough for human targets.

The BIG thing with BDC scopes is having a GREAT Chronograph to give you the actual bullet speed....The bullet matters....The barrel twist matters...the barrel length matters and the speed matters when using a BDC scope...Wind Speed too!....You have to know SPEED of Projectile....Not whats in the reloading manual (Usually its wrong!)or the BS on the bullet box...(Also usually Wrong!)

I shoot eggs at 300 yards with an AR...Its easy if you know how!...If you start getting into 600 yards you need to start figuring in Coriolis Effect!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX7dcl_ERNs

It's not that hard!
 
I prefer reg Duplex.
Worst I'd go is "long range duplex".

Inside of 300 I just don't see the need.
Heck, most folks can't shoot good enough to 300, let alone past it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

gregp74
  • Locked
3x prism sights without the BDC?
Replies
7
Views
391
Zak Smith
Zak Smith
S
Mepota scope question?
Replies
12
Views
492
Sniper66
S
J
  • Locked
Simple vs. "Modern" Reticles for Self Defense purposes
Replies
23
Views
663
swagbrdr
swagbrdr
Legionnaire
  • Locked
  • Poll
MIL or MOA? Why? DATA, not a DEBATE!
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
4K
Chuck R.
Chuck R.
T
Scope for Ruger American Ranch 7.62x39
Replies
1
Views
447
Show Me
S
Back
Top