BDC vs regular duplex?

J

jermyzy

Regular
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Location
GVRD
Just got my first rifle (Weatherby Vanguard S2) and am planning on mounting a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 scope. It comes with either regular Nikoplex or BDC reticle. Just wondering what people here use and what their preference is. I'm using solely on the range for 100 and 200m distances, would the BDC be useful at these distances or am I better off with just a regular duplex reticle? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
i would go witha regular duplex especialy if shooting under 250 yrds. no need to clutter up your view with lines you won't use.
 
Bdc work well when you use the correct ammo to meet the bdc specs. I've seen bdc work up to 450yards with only 8" of height variation with a 53gr vmax .223, with a bushnell ar scope for 55-60gr pills. Thats impressive to me anyhow.
 
I'll echo the sentiment here, and add that simple is best with hunting gear imo.

by the time you laze for range, pick a line, and dial in your AO if you have one, that critter is like to be gonzo...
 
The Nikon BDC reticle, is one reticle that I would never choose. The silly circles are handicap when any kind of precision shooting is the goal.
 
I'll take the opposite position. Additional aiming points don't weigh anything, don't cost cost much and if you don't use them don't hurt anything. I fail to see how a few lines or dots below centre is going too clutter anything when you are looking through the centre. It's not a binocular.

On a normal year I might shoot 1000 rounds at targets at various ranges for every shot taken at game. It's a lot of fun banging plates and targets at longer ranges and the scopes that don't have a ballistic reticle, or yardage dial or regular turrets start coming up short. It's a sort of a shame when the reticle quits before the rifle, load, scope and shooter does.

Mind you, this is a generic stance not a recommendation of that particular reticle.
 
Dogleg said:
I'll take the opposite position. Additional aiming points don't weigh anything, don't cost cost much and if you don't use them don't hurt anything. I fail to see how a few lines or dots below centre is going too clutter anything when you are looking through the centre. It's not a binocular.

On a normal year I might shoot 1000 rounds at targets at various ranges for every shot taken at game. It's a lot of fun banging plates and targets at longer ranges and the scopes that don't have a ballistic reticle, or yardage dial or regular turrets start coming up short. It's a sort of a shame when the reticle quits before the rifle, load, scope and shooter does.

Mind you, this is a generic stance not a recommendation of that particular reticle.
Click to expand...

Yep just like the fully loaded vehicles and all the stuff on your phones! How many use all them options? But there sure nice to have. I have 2 of the BDC nikons and really haven't put them to the test with the holdovers yet but sometime I will. All the ones I buy now have some type of holdover and one dials with wind hash marks and a couple mil dot ones - plain is boring!
 
Or, varying the magnification can be used to fine tune the reticle. Knowing how to use equipment wouldn't seem to be an unreasonable requirement, but certain pieces of gear do seem to attract people who are looking for short-cuts.
 
Thanks for all the feedback guys, kinda tough decision for me. On one hand, there's a 95% chance I'll probably never use the BDC features. On the other hand, it's only $10 more and as long as the circles aren't too intrusive might be nice to have a feature to play around with.
 
dero338 said:
The BDC being in second focal plane the holdover correction will be good only at one specific magnification
If not used properly, its more a handicap.
Click to expand...

Unless of course you use our custom software application, Spot On. Input your calibre, load, zero and scope and we can give you the yardages for every magnification. Best part of BDC is that its free and fully customizable.

http://en.nikonsportoptics.ca/spoton/english/index.html

Obviously this will sound biased, but I honestly believe this is one of the ballistic calculators on the market. $5 for iPhone or Android in the stores.
 
Dogleg said:
I'll take the opposite position. Additional aiming points don't weigh anything, don't cost cost much and if you don't use them don't hurt anything. I fail to see how a few lines or dots below centre is going too clutter anything when you are looking through the centre. It's not a binocular.

On a normal year I might shoot 1000 rounds at targets at various ranges for every shot taken at game. It's a lot of fun banging plates and targets at longer ranges and the scopes that don't have a ballistic reticle, or yardage dial or regular turrets start coming up short. It's a sort of a shame when the reticle quits before the rifle, load, scope and shooter does.

Mind you, this is a generic stance not a recommendation of that particular reticle.
Click to expand...

that's why I said "when hunting"

there are exceptions to every rule and for this one, for me, it's (gophers and anything that doesn't really matter) target shooting, when I actually like a BDC reticle. I had a Pentax BDC reticle scope on my .204 and the graduations were so close with my 39gr handload it was functional even when hunting...provided I guessed the range proper that is... :)
 
BrotherRockeye said:
that's why I said "when hunting"

there are exceptions to every rule and for this one, for me, it's (gophers and anything that doesn't really matter) target shooting, when I actually like a BDC reticle. I had a Pentax BDC reticle scope on my .204 and the graduations were so close with my 39gr handload it was functional even when hunting...provided I guessed the range proper that is... :)
Click to expand...

I use them when I'm hunting too. The most memorable was a 568 yard poke at a red stag in Argentina. I probably wouldn't have tried that one with a straight duplex, but in actuality it wasn't that hard a shot to make from prone. You wouldn't have known it by the fuss the Spanish speaking guides made; I thought they were going to build a statue or something. ;)
 
I'd go with the duplex over the BDC. Although if you are willing to work with the limitations of the BDC and sight in the hold-over with the specific ammo you're using, you could find use for the BDC. I don't really see the point of SFP BDC in a hunting optic or a short (under 300yrds) range rifle.
 
Dogleg said:
I use them when I'm hunting too. The most memorable was a 568 yard poke at a red stag in Argentina. I probably wouldn't have tried that one with a straight duplex, but in actuality it wasn't that hard a shot to make from prone. You wouldn't have known it by the fuss the Spanish speaking guides made; I thought they were going to build a statue or something. ;)
Click to expand...

LMRNFAO a statue lol that's funny right there I don't care who you are!

I liked the BDC on my .204, especially for longer shots on dogs, but spent a lot of time building ammo and shooting before I was really confident with it. If long shots were more common here I'd probably be singing a different tune. I would guess the "average" shot on deer/elk around here is well under 200yds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom