nikon bdc reticle
- Thread starter gunnercody
- Start date
Former Special Op sniper and author of Long Range Shooting Handbook: A Beginner's Guide to Precision Rifle, Ryan Cleckner is adamantly against this type of reticle. He says that you should be focusing on the reticle and not the target, and that reticle with an open area were your bullet is supposed to go is counter productive. Me, I have no opinion as I have only used MOA hash-marks type reticles, but his logic makes sense to me.
I have looked through a Nikon BDC scope and I don't really care for the look of it, but that isn't really saying anything.
I have looked through a Nikon BDC scope and I don't really care for the look of it, but that isn't really saying anything.
Okay I actually just spoke with Cleckner, he had this to say:
"I'm not "adamantly" against them - but you're on the right track. I think you can still use those and just zero with the bottom of the circle."
I think maybe there was a lost in translation, because I don't know how that would work given the combination of cross hairs and open circles underneath, but that's what he said.
"I'm not "adamantly" against them - but you're on the right track. I think you can still use those and just zero with the bottom of the circle."
I think maybe there was a lost in translation, because I don't know how that would work given the combination of cross hairs and open circles underneath, but that's what he said.
- Location
- Blaster land, Okanagan BC
I like the bdc reticle, the crosshairs aren’t thick and I do not find the overall layout of it distracting while hunting or shooting targets for that matter. Get a nice deer in the crosshairs and I can guaranty you won’t notice the other aiming points. 
I have the rimfire version and like the reticle. As stated above, not too thick and not distracting. Other users I go plink with like it also.
Go look through one, as retical thickness is sometimes subjective what your eyes are comfortable with. I've looked through some scopes and very thin reticals (too me) can be fatiqueing on the eyes and just not comfortable to use.
My wife uses the Nikon BDC rimfire version also, and can CONSISTENTLY hit a 4" gong at 100yds using this, and VERY high rate hitting the 3" gong ( I have since lost this rifle and scope combo as it is now her's).
Go look through one, as retical thickness is sometimes subjective what your eyes are comfortable with. I've looked through some scopes and very thin reticals (too me) can be fatiqueing on the eyes and just not comfortable to use.
My wife uses the Nikon BDC rimfire version also, and can CONSISTENTLY hit a 4" gong at 100yds using this, and VERY high rate hitting the 3" gong ( I have since lost this rifle and scope combo as it is now her's).
- Location
- 53.5444° N, 113.4909° W
I'm fairly new to all this but to me it seems a bit silly that in order to get the best out of your scope you need to use an app to do your calculations for you. I'd rather get mil hashes and learn everything I need so when the time comes to pull the trigger I haven't had to look at my phone a couple of times. Especially when hunting, I have a buddy who uses a BDC, it seems rather ineffecient and combersome.
- Location
- 53.5444° N, 113.4909° W
Is that with known distances or while you're hunting? Ive been offered a 4-16 for a reasonable price but I am avoiding it specifically because it's BDC. Stupid question: say I'm tracking a deer and it's moving further away, besides experience how do I know where on the rectile I need to place my shot if it's between those calculated points.
Last edited:
Between the fixed points on the reticle that you know the ranges for you will need to estimate if your target is in between. If the distance is exactly mid way (which it won't be) then it is easy if not then a bit more challenging.
- Location
- In the shadows of the Rockies
The circles can be used to estimate range. For example with the BDC 250 at 9x the circle diameter subtends 2" at 100 yards. Backbone to brisket on a big Muley Deer is about 18". If the circle covers about 1/2 that on the Deer then the range is (100 yds/2") x 9" = 450 yards.
I have the rim fire BDC scope on my Browning T-Bolt and I like it. It takes the guess work out of holdover when shooting at longer distances. The Spot-On app is easy to understand & use. I don't mind the circles but to each their own.
Put in your bullet weight etc and write the distance per dot info down (for each level of magnification).
Tape the pseudo 'dope sheet' to your stock instead of looking at your phone........
That said, for a hunting rifle I don't use one. MOA reticle (and ballistics calculations/range checks) for me.
prairie lover
CGN Regular
- Location
- southern MB
The app cuts down on the guesswork. You'd still have to use a app to get your drops with the mill reticle. Once you figure it out it's all the same. I'm not a huge fan of the circles but they work I have 4 of them. I'd prefer a little hash marks like the Burris ballistic reticle. The beauty to me of a ballistic reticle over a mill or moa hash reticle is for most average hunting rounds the marks fall in 100 yard intervals. I have plenty of them and they work perfect to 500 yards. Zero at 200 shoot at 400 to check the drop vs the 400 yard hash mark and usually it's within a couple inches. So if Mr whitetail is 350 yards away as per the rangefinder there is no looking at apps or charts it's simply point and shoot holding between the 300 and 400 yard hash marks. No looking for where .8 mil or 14.25 moa is on a reticle. No dialing.
Of course if your into longer range shooting your gonna want a proper scope that tracks and dial all your shots. But for lightweight hunting rifles I want a good ballistic reticle the Burris or Zeiss being my pick. Bushnell and Nikon work but not as nice.
- Location
- 53.5444° N, 113.4909° W
Thanks everyone. Really appreciate the info and lessons. I'll do more research and see what's best for me.
