How important is a BDC reticle?

[George]

It can be very helpful IF you shoot past 300 yards very much. If you only shoot to about 300 once in a while it can be handy now and then. If you don't shoot much past 200-250 yards, it's just a buncha' extra crap in the sight picture

That said, I love having it there just cause it's cool to have it there, and I use it often enuff to justify it in my own mind LOL

[Les Snyder]

my 4x32 TA01 is a Desert Storm vet with a reticle calibrated for 55grain bullets... what I like about it is that the stadia lines subtend a 19inch distance, so there is approximately a 10inch wind index on each side of the vertical at that distance...It was pretty windy for the long range stage Sunday at Ft Benning, so I held a shot a 1, 1 1/2, and 2 stadia line widths for the 420y target... the 55grain S&B's will hold 5inches at 400m with my 16inch Rock River... we don't get to shoot a lot of long distance and wind shots in Florida but am learning more each year..

[TLD]

I got the Nikon 1" dangerous game. I like the way the heavy #4 retcle brackets the target. That duplex will give me an idea of MOA to help with hold over.

I think it's a pretty nice scope for the money.

But, right after I got it Midway offered the M223 1-4 in a BDC. I probably would have opted for it.

[MarkCO]

For me, the importance varries with the rifle and the targets. If I am shooting very small things (like the size of a softball) out at 300 to 600 yards with a .22 CF or 500-100 yards with a larger caliber CF, then a very fine reticle and dialing is best. A BDC tempts me to use it and it is not as precise as a dial. When I am shooting larger things, like basketball size and larger, then the BDC is preferable, and faster at the 300-600 yards ranges. If I have a rifle with say 6 matches and 1000 rounds of practice on it, a BDC makes little difference because I have shot at all possible match distances and proved my holds on target. Less than that, a BDC really does help, and it helps to prove holds with, overall, less rounds downrange. I pretty much know my holds and distances, but I do think a BDC, overall, is faster. But where it really shines for me is when I screw up (not rare mind you). For instance, I forget the range of a traget on the clock, pop a round out, see a hit and make a one shot adjustment with good confidence I can hit it. The BDC makes that process faster and easier, provided you can see the hit.

I shot the Burris 1-4 and 1.5-6 XTRs for the last 2 years, and I do like them, but, for me, the reticles were too cluttered and I hope they improve them. In Ocotber I switched to the Burris 1-4 TAC30 and I much prefer it for 400 yards and closer. On matches with targets past 400, I'll still use the 1.5-6 XTR.

IF you have one rifle, shoot it a lot and put in the time with practice and proving holds, then I beleive a non-BDC is a viable option. However, I regularly use 6 or 7 different rifles in a variety of conditons, with all different loads, scopes, etc, and BDC reticles are very important to me.

[1chota]

+100 on the IOR 1.5-8X. Hash marks match my loads.

[R-Bros_JLR]

I like having some sort of holdovers whether it be BDC or mildots or hash marks. It's certainly faster than trying to dial for everything.

[bthp]

I like them and started out shooting 3gun with an AGOG. I loved it for the distance shooting, but hated it on the close stuff. Then I went back to the basic plex. I caught a smoking deal on a Swarovski Z6 1.7 x 10 plex and I have enjoyed shooting it ever since. I zeroed it four inches high at 100 yards, and have practiced my holds (over and under) at distances from 5 feet to 450 yards. I have found that the 1.7 on the Swarovski, with the 42mm exit objective, seems comparable to a 1.25 on brand X (just my opinion - in other words the 1.7 doesn't seem over magnified). I went back and bought a second 1.7 x 10 plex, but intend to send it back to Swarovski to have one of their BDC reticles installed.

With that being said, the Swarovski rep showed me a prototype of the Z6 1x6 BTR reticle back at the 2010 SHOT show and I was hooked. The expense has kept me away until now, but I noticed several online vendors have discounted their price by about $200. So, I'm thinking about making the switch again. I like the drop lines of the BDC reticles and the Swarovski glass, so we'll see. I want to shoot a equally equipped AR with the 1.7 x 10 plex against the 1 x 6 BTR to see how much of an advantage the BDC makes. Then it would boil down to how much of a difference the .7 makes on the close stuff. I know the 10x has is an improvement (for me) on the long stuff. I guess ultimately I'll either shoot a 1.7 x 10 with either a plex or BDC or either a 1 x 6 with the BTR.

However, all the holdovers, come ups and BDCs aren't worth a hill of beans if you can't hit your target (with speed) - I just need to learn to shoot better/faster with whatever optic I end up with.

[dchang0]

I'm actually preferring equidistant stadia lines like mildot or MOA over a BDC.

The reason is that the mental estimation is a bit faster, such as rounding off 1.8 mil to 2.0 mil versus rounding your 270yd target off when you know that the nearest BDC lines are at 200 and 300yds. Basically, it's linear estimation versus parabolic/quadratic.

Makes it easier to visually estimate the exact holds on the target.