Do Nikon BDC actually work

[Varminterror]

That's part of the reason I like the Leupold BDC and CDS combination. For those shots that are quick, the BDC is "good enough" on a deer sized kill zone. IF I have time I can easily click into it using the CDS dial.

The big downside here, using a BDC AND dialing, instead of a standard milling/MOA’ing reticle is the fact you’re completely in the dark once you dial.

Say I spot a coyote at 400, I dial for 400yrds with a G3 reticle, then a coyote wanders back to 447yrds, I can hold .4mils and deliver the shot. All I have to do is glance down at my data card, subtract 1.6 from whatever the new hold shows, and send it. If I dialed 400 with the set up you describe, I’d have either have to dial back to zero, dial to 450, or run the calculator again with a 400yrds zero to give me the reticle hold over... not as fast as simply holding corrections which match up with my turret graduations.

 

[Chuck R.]

The big downside here, using a BDC AND dialing, instead of a standard milling/MOA’ing reticle is the fact you’re completely in the dark once you dial.

Say I spot a coyote at 400, I dial for 400yrds with a G3 reticle, then a coyote wanders back to 447yrds, I can hold .4mils and deliver the shot. All I have to do is glance down at my data card, subtract 1.6 from whatever the new hold shows, and send it. If I dialed 400 with the set up you describe, I’d have either have to dial back to zero, dial to 450, or run the calculator again with a 400yrds zero to give me the reticle hold over... not as fast as simply holding corrections which match up with my turret graduations.

I've got milling reticles on precision rifle/varmint rigs.

Don't use the BDC AND dial, it's either or.

In this case "big game" IMHO the BDC reticle works for it's desired range/target combination. Based on presentations; distance, time animal's in view, I often don't have time to even laser, never mind consult a data card for holdovers. My normal procedure is to laser terrain features once I set-up to develop a "hasty" range card. IF I have time, I'll lase an animal, but a lot of times it's not possible based on terrain and the animals movement.

I'm not saying a BDC is as accurate as a milling reticle, don't think anyone here is. What I'm saying is it's faster, simpler and based on the size of target area "good enough" for the ranges most big games is shot.

 

[Varminterror]

What I'm saying is it's faster, simpler

This is the part which I have never heard real objective evidence for. Faster and simpler than a milling reticle - I can’t see how?

 

[Chuck R.]

This is the part which I have never heard real objective evidence for. Faster and simpler than a milling reticle - I can’t see how?

I dunno, but 3-4 simple lines/dots, no need to count hashes/dots, no need to refer to a dope card, sure seems simpler/quicker to me. Not to mention NOT packing in a scope with target turrets, extra weight etc.



VS:





Your mileage may vary, obviously, and I wish you well with your choice..........

 

[Walkalong]

At close range it just isn't that critical, or hard, and the 200 yards the OP mentioned is definitely close range, even with a slow heavy caliber.

 

[JimKirk]

We didn't have BDC reticles either, we would use the crosshairs, then eyeball 1/4 of the way between the crosshair and the bottom post, then 1/2, 3/4, then the top of the post. Shoot your gun and figure out about how far and what you need to hold over. Used our mental computer only. Eyeball the distance and mentally judge where to hold.

Back in early 1970s ...Leupold published the distance between the crosshairs and the top of post @ a certain power ... I used to recall those figures right easy .... now I do good to recall anything much ....

I now do MPBR for everything but my AR....

 

[Gtscotty]

I dial or hold mils for all of my range and target shooting, but do prefer a simple bcd reticle with wind holds for large and medium game hunting. I'm not interested in carrying heavy match rifles or scopes up and down the front range, so BCD scopes provide a lightweight, economical compromise for hitting larger targets at reasonable ranges without having to hold air and hope.

I currently use the Nikon advanced BCD on one rifle, and Leupold B&C on another. Both are intended for use at 400 yds and in, in general , I zero them at 300 yds with the 300 yd aiming point, and check where I'm actually hitting with the aiming points out to 500 yds. I also figure out what the wind holds equate to for my load and verify at the range. Both the Leupold and the Nikon were quite close to the intended ranges on their respective rifles, and once set up are quick to use in the field. The Nikon has more hold points, but I think I prefer the Leupold as it is simpler, works with a 200 yd first zero on my rifle and still has good holds for 300 and 400.

 

[stolivar]

The Nikon BDC is my least favorite compensating reticle, and I hate compensating reticles in general - especially in second focal optics.

In particular, the Nikon BDC’s with the HOLES for their drop dots are terrible, because they are HOLES instead of lines. They’re too small to really use the top of the hole vs. bottom of the hole, but too large to really let you place a refined point of aim on a small target at distance. Equally, as you float your hold for windage AND range, the round circle doesn’t give you sufficient reference to make a solid horizontal AND vertical hold in the open space. It’s much easier to judge open space hold with a LINE than a hole.

Of course, if you are at anything but the reference magnification, the represented ranges change with the second focal Nikons.

So say your first hole is 178yrds, second is 347, and your target is at 244yrds... where do you hold? Man, that target is kinda small, zoom in a little more - crap, now your first circle is 152yrds and your second is 293yrds, so now where is the hold for that 244yrd target? Oh wait, the target, a coyote, now walked to 218yrds... what’s the hold for that?

If you have all of the time in the world to run Spot On and you’re not shooting in any wind, then they’ll work ok. If you’re shooting in the real world, you would do a hell of a lot better with a regularly graduated MOA’ing or milling reticle, and especially do better with a first focal reticle.

As others have mentioned, these things are like a stopped watch at their best. Most of the time, they just aren’t right. Which is fine, I don’t care if the marks are 243 yards instead of 200, but the fact they are not regularly graduated forces the shooter to do WAY too much math or rely upon the reticle solution software far too much. With a MOA’ing or milling reticle, you can live your life in MOA or Mils for your trajectory, then only have to correct your reading based on the magnification setting. Aka, if I know I drop 2.7mils at 500, set at 16x, at 12x I know my hold has to be 2.1mils instead. The math is a lot easier, and the shooter gets to work with their trajectory, not parse out arbitrary numbers for range which change for every environmental condition and every zoom setting. Learn your trajectory, and live your trajectory. Don’t mess with “this circle means 282yrds and that circle means 374yrds, unless I’m on 8x and then this circle means...”

Absolute waste of time and money.

If you knew how to use it it does work. You don't just use the middle of the circle.... it gives you yardage using the top, middle and bottom of the circles. Most of the time between the top middle and bottom of the circle is only about 25 yards difference.
I find it very accurate. If you want to use it for very precise shooting use the dials, they give you the clicks for all known distances.

Steve

 

[Varminterror]

If you knew how to use it it does work.

Fully aware of how they are supposed to be used. Still find it to be a fool’s errand to employ them in place of a regular-interval-stadia milling or MOA-ing reticle.

The real breakdown with the system isn’t the irregular gaps, it’s the fact the irregular gaps force the shooter to live in yards, instead of their trajectory. If a guy looks up the subtensions, and has a really good memory, a BDC can work like a MOA-ing reticle. Guys get mislead into thinking those 200, 300, and 400yrd hashes or circle’s mean 200, 300, and 400... in the case of the OP, with a LOT of drop to reach 250, those marks aren’t even in the hunt.

 

[stolivar]

I verify mine with a chronometer and mine is accurate for any yardage I shoot out to 500 yards. I verify my ranges and use a shot card to dial in if I need more precise shooting for distance or windage. For what I use it for for hunting it does a fine good job and very quick.

Steve

 

[Laphroaig]

in the case of the OP, with a LOT of drop to reach 250, those marks aren’t even in the hunt.

Don't lose sight of the fact that the OP's scope is set up for muzzleloaders, and the circles should be reasonably accurate assuming he is using a typical inline powder/projectile load. Personally, I'd want to verify before I took a 250+ shot, but I'd guess it would be minute of whitetail accurate.

 

[Chuck R.]

I just took delivery on a new Leupold VX6-HD 2-12x42 FireDot BDC yesterday. (don't have a rifle for it yet, but it was a killer deal)

Just to check things out using Strelok Pro I changed the reticle on my .300W to the FireDot BDC and ran a ballistic table for one of my hunting loads, just to see the delta between the fixed reticle hold-overs and ballistic software using my actual chronographed data, zero conditions etc.

Using current weather data, and based on a 200y Zero:

300 Yards...Strelok: 2.1 MOA, Leupold FireDot 2.19 MOA 300 Yard = 303

400 Yards...Strelok: 4.6 MOA, Leupold FireDot 4.80 MOA 400 yard = 409

500 Yards...Strelok: 7.4 MOA, Leupold FireDot 7.82 MOA 500 yard = 516

Keep in mind, the IAW Leupold the FireDot BDC is calibrated for a .300W 180 grain, not the faster/flatter 168s in my load.

At the longest range the BDC is calibrated for that's .42 MOA or about 2.1" off on a pretty decent sized kill zone. Honestly I don't know if there's a deer on this planet that will notice a .2-.4 MOA difference out to 500 yards.

 

[Varminterror]

2.1” high over a 5” group at 500 (giving a lot of credit to say 1moa from field position without a well defined aiming point), can be almost 5” off of point of aim...

Maybe I expect too much when my failings would mean the difference between meat in the freezer and the suffering of an animal...

 

[Chuck R.]

5" kill zone on a deer??

Small deer in your part of the state??

.4 MOA is about the delta you'll encounter due to conditions. So now you hunt with a tactical milling scope, Kestrel, ballistic app on your phone, and a laser?

Like I said earlier...be well....

 

[Varminterror]

5” miss, not 5” kill zone. 5” miss from POI is a 10” circle, far larger than I would allow myself for hunting deer. Others might not mind missing as much as I do.

A BDC reticle doesn’t negate the need to use a laser, that’s a poor straw man. Whether it’s 500yrds with your 300 or the OP shooting his ML, if you’re “hunting in the hashes,” you have to know the accurate actual range, and need a laser. If the OP’s eyeball is wrong by 25yrds and he holds 150 instead of a real 175, it’s a ~5” low miss (knowing my own Punkin’ Chunker trajectory and assuming it’s close enough for sake...). 200yrds is well within the MBPR for the 300, but even a “short” shot with his Inline is a lot of drop per yard traversed. So there’s no excuse to not use a laser rangefinder if you’re hunting at a range outside of MPBR for your rig which requires hold over.

And a lame attempt to put words into my mouth: Never said a guy needs a Kestrel to hunt, including not having said it in this post to the OP. Never said a hunter needs StrelokPro on their phone either. A guy has to know where his bullet is going to go, but an afternoon at the range to gather DOPE is good n’ plenty for hunting. Never said a guy has to have a “tactical” scope either - I started using mil-dot scopes over 25yrs ago, none were ever labeled “tactical” until it became the term du jour a few years back and EVERYTHING became tactical... Or maybe you consider any milling or MOA-img reticle makes it a tactical scope?

I do use Nikon BDC optics - good deals can make me invite aggravation upon myself... I’m a sucker for a good deal... there’s just too many times where they’re NOT close enough to my actual trajectory that it makes their use difficult. Maybe he’s running saboted 250’s and his rifle lines up great - I know my 45-70 running trapdoor loads behind 325’s (faster than most muzzleloaders still) has way more drop to 200 than the reticle is subtended. 150 is closest, the bottom of the first circle, then my 200 Impact would be the top of the 250yrd circle (3rd ring)... a LOT of drop happening in those few yards... about 2MOA per 25yrds from 150-250. Still have to laser the animal where he stands for the shot or have a prepped map, and can’t blindly follow the suggested ranges of the BDC circles...

When I hunt with a BDC, I don’t mess with SpotOn. I shoot the rifle to get DOPE, and then write on my range card as if I were shooting a milling reticle, but using the circles as my whole integers. So top of 2 is 2T, halfway between 2 and 3 is 2.5, etc. It works, but cheese & crackers is it convoluted to use it the way they designed it to be used...