canadian black rifles and optics with bdc reticles (trijicon, elcan etc.) question

[Haakman]

Hi guys.

I have a question in regards to Optics geared towards black rifles like the trijicon acogs and elcan spectre's, the new vortes strike eagle and the various Leupold patrol optics. I'm asking this in the black rifle section and not the optic section because I feel its more about the rifles matching the optics than it is just about optics.

SO, do the Ballistic reticles on these things actually match up with the bullet drop that comes out of our Canadian non restricted black rifles with their 18.5" barrels?
Like some of these optics have BDC hash marks that claim to line up with bullet drop out to 600 meters. That seems kind of unbelievable to me, my experience with precision rifles tells me that with a change in barrel length, bullet weight and speed changes that bullet drop trajectory dramatically. which is why I've always avoided BDC reticles in my precision rifles and stuck to good ole MOA reticles. but there is a LOT of .223 or 5.56 BDC offering for black rifles so it raises some questions.


Like most Canadian shooters (I think) I have a 18.5" bbl and use kind of a mish mash of .223/5.56 ammo I can find at the time, I have the norinco stuff, PMC 55gr .223 stuff, PMC xtac 5.56 green tip stuff, federal .223 stuff etc. The reticles on these scopes to make them work seem to require specs like "16" barrel and use xm855a1 only" for your rounds to actually land on the 600m hash mark at 600m, and like most guys, can't really standardize on one specific load and barrel length combo, especially when sometimes the ammo that these reticles call for only come in once a year and is costly to shoot.


So does anyone have these optics and had success with their reticles matching the bullet drop of the typical factory stuff out at the longer ranges? like if I commit to buying a trijicon or elcan I want it to actually work on my rifle on 300m and further. like if I buy some American eagle or federal 55gr .223 and put a trijicon acog on my 18.5 tavor or acr at 300 meters and beyond are the hash marks going to be on or close to the actually drop in trajectory?
Has anyone had experience with this? If I have a target at 400m can I hold over on the 400m mark on an acog, shoot and actually hit that gong at 400m? or because we have non matching ammo and a different barrel length will the rounds be off from the reticle?
thanks guys.




ps: I know the 1-6 optics with actual moa or mildot reticles would be more accurate at longer ranges but to have to work out the dope then REMEMBER that dope for each gun and be able bring it on target fairly quickly doesn't really work for me I tried it without much success, especially when a guy might not shoot that particular rifle for a couple months or has the dope of his 308 stuck in his head and confuses the two etc. lots of room for user error. if the markings on acog scopes are supposed to match at 600m I should be able to hold over on the 600m mark and hit that 12" gong relatively easy shouldn't I?

 

[maurice]

i keep my ballistics card for my rifle and ammunition with me...but i really don't want to #### with my windage and elevation to dial in,..and return when i am out hunting. Some interesting articles i have read and for speed and accuracy, is using a BDC type reticle...using the hashmarks might be more accurate...as the lines are laser etched, and depending on the quality of the internals of the scope, dialing in might not be as reliable as hold over utilizing said reticle. I know keep a large photo for my scopes reticles to remind me of how my reticle should be used with my given load/ ammunition. For my Burris, i use the 1x4 and would use with my range finder to correspond with the proper hold on....same with me Vortex diamondback with BDC on my XCR

 

[Haakman]

I see what your saying but what your doing is exactly what I want to avoid in this case, packing around a range card is fine for precision rifle when its slow precise shooting at the range or a particular spot in the field and you definitely wouldn't dial with any kind of acog style optic, but I think the point of these acogs is if: your target is 300 meters away, you should be able to bring the rifle up and just hold over on the 300m mark on your acog, fire and your hit the target. no having to reference a range card or diagram of the reticle before hand.

I believe the point of an acog should keep you roughly on target (again not looking for long range precision here but more minute of man hopefully a little tighter) throughout the bdc's range without the operator having to remember or reference any kind of corrections (lets just ignore wind all together for this situation, I mean all trajectory).

scenario: 18.5" tavor loaded with pmc 55gr .223 with some kind of trijicon acog on it.
I see my target at 300 meters, I bring my rifle up, look through the optic, hold over on the "3" hashmark that indicates 300m.
Pull the trigger and hit the target. done. nothing else to it.

Can that be done with our longer barreled rifles up here in Canada when not using the specific XM193 or XM855a1 loads? or do we completely lose the consistency of the BDC when those changes are made?

 

[tommygunz]

Great question. Can't help you but very interested

 

[onetwentyish]

The Tavor also brings another interesting and probably more important factor into the equation. The height over bore for my Elcan Specter DR 1-4x is approximately 4". Thats substantially more then the AR/M4 platform most optics are designed for intended use with.

 

[ianfroese]

I've had pretty good success using my ACOG bdc with my .223. You are right that if you run the numbers, you will likely be a few inches off at the longer ranges, however, I'm not generally aiming for a bullseye at 600 with my ACOG. If I'm shooting longer range, it is generally at steel or something large and reactive, like a water barrel. So inches don't matter so much. If I'm shooting at a coyote, I'm within 200 meters, and the one inch that I've figured is the difference between poa and poi, is not an issue.

So if you ask me, it depends on your use. For what a black gun and "mil style" optic like an ACOG or Elcan is generally used for, the difference is more or less negligible between your 18.5" barrel and what the sight is calibrated for.

 

[skypilot]

There is really only two options. Manage the BDC/Mildot via empirical field data and memory recall or data book, or simply set up the firearm for MPBR.(maybe 1.5 high @ 100 m and never be above or below 3" out to 300m? Just aim with crosshairs dead on.

There is really no short cut. Either manage the POI data and have a way to recall it/implement it or set MPBR.

I know what you mean about switching from 223 to 308 and the easy confusion. What about a mini range reference "card" with a 200-300m notation in your eyepiece flip cap?

The BDC will only be "on" for a certain specific combo of barrel length, mv, round. It will be "close" with varying combinations and even fall between the dots, circles, etc. with other changes in barrel length or simply changing ammo.

As long as you remember or know where the POI with different ammo in relation to the reticle at different ranges you are golden, but then you are back to what you wish to avoid.

Sounds like simple/easy set and forget Minimum Point Blank Range is a consideration for you.

 

[J996]

I had an older Acog TA11F model which was calibrated for XM193 from a 20 inch barrel and I ran it on a 20" rifle. It was dead on from 100 to 600 yards with 55 grain. With Acogs they tell you what models are calibrated for which round and barrel length.

 

[maurice]

I use a couple of different online and downloaded apps,...I put in my scope, reticle, and which factory ammo with FPS ratings.

 

[Haakman]

I've had pretty good success using my ACOG bdc with my .223. You are right that if you run the numbers, you will likely be a few inches off at the longer ranges, however, I'm not generally aiming for a bullseye at 600 with my ACOG. If I'm shooting longer range, it is generally at steel or something large and reactive, like a water barrel. So inches don't matter so much. If I'm shooting at a coyote, I'm within 200 meters, and the one inch that I've figured is the difference between poa and poi, is not an issue.

So if you ask me, it depends on your use. For what a black gun and "mil style" optic like an ACOG or Elcan is generally used for, the difference is more or less negligible between your 18.5" barrel and what the sight is calibrated for.

Yeah what your saying is definitely what I am thinking of when it comes to acog use, if its an inch off at 200 meters as far as acog use goes I would still consider it prettymuch on target, I'm not trying to make tight little groupings but more wanting to ring gongs at all ranges that the BDC will work for. which is fine for me, as long as the acog can fulfill the need to ring an 8" gong at 300m without having to hold out in space somewhere between the 300m mark and the 400m mark, as long as its somewhere kindof on the hashmark that's fine, I'm not trying to print a group in the exact centre of the gong but more hoping that I can get all 5 rounds on the gong in a row using the hashmarks on the reticle, like actually putting that reticle to use.

So you have an acog style sight on a black rifle? how has the consistency been to you as far as being able to actually use the markings on the reticle? poa and poi match up pretty good?

 

[Haakman]

There is really only two options. Manage the BDC/Mildot via empirical field data and memory recall or data book, or simply set up the firearm for MPBR.(maybe 1.5 high @ 100 m and never be above or below 3" out to 300m? Just aim with crosshairs dead on.

There is really no short cut. Either manage the POI data and have a way to recall it/implement it or set MPBR.

I know what you mean about switching from 223 to 308 and the easy confusion. What about a mini range reference "card" with a 200-300m notation in your eyepiece flip cap?

The BDC will only be "on" for a certain specific combo of barrel length, mv, round. It will be "close" with varying combinations and even fall between the dots, circles, etc. with other changes in barrel length or simply changing ammo.

As long as you remember or know where the POI with different ammo in relation to the reticle at different ranges you are golden, but then you are back to what you wish to avoid.

Sounds like simple/easy set and forget Minimum Point Blank Range is a consideration for you.

Yeah what I want is the poa to match the poi as much as possible, those acogs are built for military's with specific guns and loads, most of us don't run that system and can't like really who is going to plink all year with XM855a1? kind of expensive really.

The selling point of these BDC's I believe is not having to manage POI data, the reticle guides the user on to target, where as moa/mildot the user guides the reticle onto the target with memory/data on poi. and I can do that I do with my precision 308 holdovers are stuck in my head and I can probably do that with a tavor too but if I buy a Trijicon I shouldn't have to do that really I don't think.

like if its kind of minor, say I have to zero an inch high at 100 for the POI and POA to match through out all the other ranges that's fine for me I can do that with this kind of optic, 1" wont bother me. or say its 6" low at 600m that's find too what's 6 inches at 600 with a black rifle its not a big deal like it would be a bolt gun I would just keep in my mind to put the bottom of the hashmark on the top of the 12" gong and I should hit somewhere around the center of it.

But can I get that kind of consistency with POA and POI with the differently configured rifles and loads there are up here in Canada? is the difference huge or negligible?

Say worst case scenario at 600m the reticle is way off and I have to hover the hash mark like a foot or two above the gong out in lala land just for the bullet to hit the gong then the optic/reticle is of no use to me I may aswell go get a normal scope and DOPE it all but that's what I'm trying to avoid. for acogs I feel they should be close to point and shoot where POA matches POI if not it should have an acceptable easily managed +/- factor.


thanks man cheers

 

[Haakman]

and another thought would be whats would be the best reticle/optic set up to match an 18.5" barrel?

I'd assume a BDC calibrated to a 20" barrel and .223 would bring a guy closest to to what we see for POI and hopefully the difference is negligible?

 

[Gunnerlove]

Run your loads through JBM ballistics. See and note differences.

 

[skypilot]

Yeah what I want is the poa to match the poi as much as possible, those acogs are built for military's with specific guns and loads, most of us don't run that system and can't like really who is going to plink all year with XM855a1? kind of expensive really.

The selling point of these BDC's I believe is not having to manage POI data, the reticle guides the user on to target, where as moa/mildot the user guides the reticle onto the target with memory/data on poi. and I can do that I do with my precision 308 holdovers are stuck in my head and I can probably do that with a tavor too but if I buy a Trijicon I shouldn't have to do that really I don't think.

like if its kind of minor, say I have to zero an inch high at 100 for the POI and POA to match through out all the other ranges that's fine for me I can do that with this kind of optic, 1" wont bother me. or say its 6" low at 600m that's find too what's 6 inches at 600 with a black rifle its not a big deal like it would be a bolt gun I would just keep in my mind to put the bottom of the hashmark on the top of the 12" gong and I should hit somewhere around the center of it.

But can I get that kind of consistency with POA and POI with the differently configured rifles and loads there are up here in Canada? is the difference huge or negligible?

Say worst case scenario at 600m the reticle is way off and I have to hover the hash mark like a foot or two above the gong out in lala land just for the bullet to hit the gong then the optic/reticle is of no use to me I may aswell go get a normal scope and DOPE it all but that's what I'm trying to avoid. for acogs I feel they should be close to point and shoot where POA matches POI if not it should have an acceptable easily managed +/- factor.


thanks man cheers

A small example...today I shot the XCR 18.6" with a regular crosshair out to 250 meters with no issue(about 2.25 MOA on a 8x11 size paper) It's my yote rig so I set it for about 1.5 high at 100 m so its never above or below 3" until past 250 meters.

It's simple compared to my bolt guns with their mildot/dope/come ups/data book etc.

Oh, and I used factory 55 Vmax, AE black box 55 gr nd AE 50 gr HP all close enough to be on the paper (8.5x11) easily at 250m could have easily set it up for longer distances, just didn't.

 

[greentips]

In the real word with a combat optic, the BDC is just a reference so fire will likely need to be adjusted. The 1moa difference out to 600m is nothing compared to the margin of error in range estimation and inclination. This is not a sniper rig, the and there is no kestrel and range finders for infanteers. Fire and adjust.

 

[Astute Observer]

... or simply set up the firearm for MPBR.(maybe 1.5 high @ 100 m and never be above or below 3" out to 300m? Just aim with crosshairs dead on.
...There is really no short cut. Either manage the POI data and have a way to recall it/implement it or set MPBR.
...Sounds like simple/easy set and forget Minimum Point Blank Range is a consideration for you.

I guess I learned something - I thought MBPR stood for "Maximum Point Blank Range". Anyways - I set that up on my favourite rifle. I use a Trijicon Accupoint 1-4x with the German Crosshair reticle.

(Not Trijicon's reticle, but nearly identical)

Set up for MBPR, I know that I'm pretty much on the crosshairs plus or minus 3" or less, out to 250m (I'm using it on a .308). My next step is to figure out at what range the point of impact is at the top of the post. I estimate it'll be 400m or so, but I'll have to figure that out by trial and error, shooting at different distances and comparing point of impact to point of aim.

Then, my intent is to buy a second Trijicon with the same reticle - and put that on a .223, and then shoot a ballistically similar bullet. I have been playing around with a ballistics calculator online that lets you graph out and compare two bullets' ballistics graphically.

http://gundata.org/ballistic-calculator/

I found two loads that have a pretty similar trajectory for a .308 and .223:

Even out to 500m, there's only a 2.5" difference between the two. Within the MBPR, there's less than 0.06" difference.

Now... This all assumes that those loads will shoot straight in the rifles. Finding a bullet / casing and load for a particular rifle is always a tricky thing. But I figure that I can trial and error a system, playing with variables such as zero distance, bullet selection, powder, etc, where I can fire two different calibres out of two different rifles, but use the same reticle and the same intuitive corrections for each.

That's my goal for summer 2015 anyways.

 

[Haakman]

Run your loads through JBM ballistics. See and note differences.

Does JBM ballistics show the differences in trajectory from different loads vs the trijicon or elcan BDC reticles?

I have the Horus A-trag program, I know all about building targeting data and trajectory curves, but that doesn't solve my quandary though. I'm not looking a trajectory of bullet A vs the trajectory of bullet B I'm looking for the difference between the general trajectory of the common .223 loads vs the the trajectory of whatever load the BDC reticles were made for.

When trijicon set out to build their reticle they based it off a specific load, I don't have the data on what load that is exactly so I can't really make a comparison.

The reticle's 600m hashmark just says 6, thats it, no where can I find that 600m for ### load = -xx.x"drop. That drop can change quite a bit just by varying the speed. I would do exactly what you recommended and not even start this thread if I had the specifics on what they used to build those reticles, but none of the manufactures share that info.

like if these manufactures release a ballistics table saying. this is the load we used, this is the optic height over bore, this is the speed, this is the general weather conditions and heres our curve chart. THEN I could definitely compare that load to other common loads and change up for my variables and determine if these BDC reticles are useful to me or not. (I woudn't do weather cause thats getting into a bit much for these optics but I would keep it in mind in rough comparisons)

But all Trijicon says is, and this is right from their site: "The TA01, TA11, & TA31 (.223) were designed for the 5.56mm, 20 inch barrel, 55 grain bullet"
thats not much info, Elcan shares even less info. I'd have to assume they're using XM193 but I'd rather not make an assumption then go spend $1500 or more on an optic then find out its nowhere near any of the loads commonly found in canada.
I don't have a baseline to compare to, just that they used a 55 grain bullet out of a 20" barrel, using only those two parameters messing around in Atrag I can change that curve quite a bit by altering just speed.

What I want to know in General is, do the BDC's in trijicon or elcan optics match or stay negligibly close to the common rifles and common .223/5.56 loads that are available in Canada? at 400m will your bullet actually hit on the "4" of the trijicon TA11 reticle? and the same goes for 500 and 600m? no ones taken their guns out that far? someone here should know.

 

[Haakman]

In the real word with a combat optic, the BDC is just a reference so fire will likely need to be adjusted. The 1moa difference out to 600m is nothing compared to the margin of error in range estimation and inclination. This is not a sniper rig, the and there is no kestrel and range finders for infanteers. Fire and adjust.

yeah I don't expect it to be bang on, but I kinda expect it to be reasonably close. I'm just not sure what reasonably close is for these things. like lets just say for example I wanna shoot something at 400m, no guesstimating or any other tools or data at all in play just like you say, but we do know for a fact its 400m away. I bring up my rifle, using a trijicon with a Ta11 reticle (bcc out to 800m) thats been properly zero'd as per manual. hold over on the "4" hashmark, fire "oops, miss its a little low" (lets just say 1moa off), make a minor holdover correction putting the "4" hashmark on the top of the target, fire again, hey right on I hit it.

Thats kind of what I expect out of those, is it correct to expect that kind of consistency out of these optics? Or does a guy end up holding somewhere in space not even using the "4" hashmark to have to make a connection on the target?

 

[Astute Observer]

But all Trijicon says is, and this is right from their site: "The TA01, TA11, & TA31 (.223) were designed for the 5.56mm, 20 inch barrel, 55 grain bullet"
thats not much info, Elcan shares even less info. I'd have to assume they're using XM193 but I'd rather not make an assumption...

Ok, I think I understand better. Don't have a BDC reticle myself, so I can't comment. But could you write to Trijicon or Elcan product support and ask? It seems a reasonable request from a prospective customer I'd think.

 

[J996]

What I want to know in General is, do the BDC's in trijicon or elcan optics match or stay negligibly close to the common rifles and common .223/5.56 loads that are available in Canada? at 400m will your bullet actually hit on the "4" of the trijicon TA11 reticle? and the same goes for 500 and 600m? no ones taken their guns out that far? someone here should know.

Yes it will.

TA11 with AE 55 grain fmj. 20" barrel. Aiming dead on at all ranges, using the reticle.

425 yards 10 rounds.


500 yards, two different groups (yellow and blue).


600 yards.


5 rounds fired. Four in and just above rifle, one low in the leg of the fig 11. After this my buddy put 7 out of 10 into this target.