Rifle Scopes Reticle Conundrum

[Singlestack_Wonder]

An interesting observation with scopes that include BDC reticles is that most do not offer a ranging feature. With a mil dot, one can range and adjust hold or dial in (assuming one knows their "dope"). With most BDC's, without a ranging feature, it's either guesswork or one uses a laser range finder. Only a few manufacturers offer both. I'm looking at a 2.5-10 Nightforce with the Velocity reticle. The reticle is only available in the Velocity 600 version for the 2.5-10, which doesn't include the mil-scale that the Velocity 1000 does.

While a few manufactuers that offer a few reticles with both features, they are typically in an undesireable scope. IOR and Elcan are a couple manufacturers offering ranging/BDC reticles in what I feel are capable scopes.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

A BDC reticle is useful in a very limited scope of loads and distance - at longer distances one will have to compensate for atmospheric conditions.

I don't find either BDC reticles or knobs useful. More useful for me is a universal graduated reticle which can be used for holdoffs and moving target leads with any load or rifle.

In the ranges that a BDC reticle is accurate, it's much simpler to simply memorize the holds for your universal reticle. Out to 600 yards or so, that's only 5 numbers. For those who might lack the ability to memorize 5 numbers, they can be printed on the inside of the rear scope cap, or taped to the stock.

 

[sscoyote]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

I use all my ballistic reticles for both downrange zeroing and rangefinding. Couple years ago i was at a long-range shoot, and one of the tgts. was a bowling pin set at 600 yds. Just to check it out i measured the bowling pin at 15". When we got out to 600 yds. i "milled" the pin at .8 of the Burris EER Ballistic Plex 3-12x optic i had on an XP-100 6.5-284 handgun using the upper plex post tip to X-hair subtension of 3.1 IPHY (measured). So applying the "modified" mil-ranging formula i got--

15 x 100 / 3.1 / 0.8 = 605 yds.

I have reticle-ranged hard (and "soft") tgts. just as successfully as i have a mil-dot reticle most of the time.

 

[azimutha]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

Okay, so as not to cheat, I'm just doing this in my head as I type:

Let's say I mil the bowling pin @ .7 mils

1) 15/36 = 5/12 = 50/12/10 = .417 (and, yes, I just happen to know that 1/6 = .16777)
2) .4 * 1000 = 417
3) 417/7/10 = .59 ...(350/7) + (67/7)
4) .57 * 1000 = 590

 

[Graywolf.260]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

The Zeiss rapid z reticles have 2 moa ranging hash marks meant to be used at maximum magnification (even though the bdc is meant to be used at a mag that depends on ballistics).

 

[sscoyote]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

Actually those Rapid-Z's have an even smaller subtension unit. The last 2 MOA unit has 4 .5 MOA units that will allow for some very accurate reticle-rangefinding. Oughtta' get u very close to .05 MOA interpolative accuracy.

 

[Drifter™]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

If you wish to both range and use reticle holdovers, best bet is to get a mil-based reticle with 0.1-mil adjustments. Your chosen load's trajectory can be memorized in short order (or taped to the stock or inside a lens cap), and the reticle can be easily used for holdovers if desired.

For example, if your 500-yard drop is 3.2 mils, go up 2 clicks and use the 3-mil mark in the reticle. Not perfect, but neither is a ballistic reticle, as they will often be a click or two off at various distances.

Make it a first focal plane reticle, and you have a very versatile setup.

Going this route would also eliminate the need to work through those pesky online reticle calculators, and allow you more flexibility to change loads.

I know that ballistic reticles can work, because I've used 'em successfully. They look cool too. But a mil-mil FFP scope is superior in my opinion.


Also, it's possible to range with a ballistic reticle, but not as user-friendly. The distance between the holdovers represent a known value with the scope at its designated power for use of the ballistic reticle. If you know this value, and know the size of the target, range estimation can be computed if you're willing to do the math.

Or just get a mil-mil FFP system instead. Works with any load, at any range, with the scope set on any power.

 

[phillietimothy]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: azimutha</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Okay, so as not to cheat, I'm just doing this in my head as I type:

Let's say I mil the bowling pin @ .7 mils

1) 15/36 = 5/12 = 50/12/10 = .417 (and, yes, I just happen to know that 1/6 = .16777)
2) .4 * 1000 = 417
3) 417/7/10 = .59 ...(350/7) + (67/7)
4) .57 * 1000 = 590

azimutha,

You can also take an item of known size in inches and multiply it by 27.77. Take that result and divide it by the mils.

For example: 15" x 27.77 = 416.55
416.55 / .7 mils = 595 yards

You can also take the .7 mils and multiply it by 3.6.
.7 x 3.6 = 2.52
Then divide the 15" by 2.52.
15 / 2.52 = 5.95

Hope this helps.

Tim

</div></div>

 

[Singlestack_Wonder]

Re: Reticle Conundrum

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sscoyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually those Rapid-Z's have an even smaller subtension unit. The last 2 MOA unit has 4 .5 MOA units that will allow for some very accurate reticle-rangefinding. Oughtta' get u very close to .05 MOA interpolative accuracy. </div></div>

The Rapid Z looks like a capable scope. Too bad it has no illumination....