Starting this topic for those of us BDC nerds who have had good results calibrating their reticle for their ammo to work for them. We don't get to choose where the hashmarks are etched or what subtension they represent, and we don't get to choose what distance the aiming reference is for....the ammo does. We have to do the calibrations by chronographing the ammo and collecting data to input into a ballistic calculator and then figuring out how it corresponds with the funny reticle they gave us. It requires a lot of work in order for them to be useful or have a purpose, and each new ammo type means recalibration and copious calculations. It's a funny thing we do
I'll start. I have an LPVO with a BDC reticle with hashmarks designated by the factory for 300, 400, and 500 yards. I chrono'd 12 different ammo types and each one didn't come close enough for me to legitimize the hashmarks for the distance their "supposed to be"...except one. Disclaimer..I didn't waste 11 other types of ammo just to see which one played the best for my reticle. It was a test of 12 ammo types to see which one my rifle liked best and was the most accurate. Whichever one that was, would just have to do with the BDC, even if that meant 300, 400, and 500 was actually 267, 419, 526....etc. By some amazing stroke of luck, the most accurate ammo (sub-MOA) in my gun had the neccesary MV, BC, bullet weight along with the sight height, barrel length, and my zero range, so it's ballistics worked out where 300, 400, and 500 were just that, within ,15 MOA in the calculator. That's acceptable to me at any distances. That's BETTER than me too. If I miss an 10" steel plate at 500 yards using the correct calibrated holdover, it's MY fault, not my gun, my reticle, or my calculations.
Would I prefer just having a scope with a Christmas Tree reticle with numbered mils or moa hashmarks instead of some weird reticle someone designed with some undisclosed caliber and ammo type? Yes and no. Not for this particular rifle who's scope's BDC is matched to the ammo through tests and luck. Now I just have to worry about that ammo running out. If it does, I'll just have to make them.
Stag 15 AR15 5.56 16"
Vortex Venom LPVO 1-6x24
ARBDC-3 reticle
Frontier 75gr 5.56
I'll start. I have an LPVO with a BDC reticle with hashmarks designated by the factory for 300, 400, and 500 yards. I chrono'd 12 different ammo types and each one didn't come close enough for me to legitimize the hashmarks for the distance their "supposed to be"...except one. Disclaimer..I didn't waste 11 other types of ammo just to see which one played the best for my reticle. It was a test of 12 ammo types to see which one my rifle liked best and was the most accurate. Whichever one that was, would just have to do with the BDC, even if that meant 300, 400, and 500 was actually 267, 419, 526....etc. By some amazing stroke of luck, the most accurate ammo (sub-MOA) in my gun had the neccesary MV, BC, bullet weight along with the sight height, barrel length, and my zero range, so it's ballistics worked out where 300, 400, and 500 were just that, within ,15 MOA in the calculator. That's acceptable to me at any distances. That's BETTER than me too. If I miss an 10" steel plate at 500 yards using the correct calibrated holdover, it's MY fault, not my gun, my reticle, or my calculations.
Would I prefer just having a scope with a Christmas Tree reticle with numbered mils or moa hashmarks instead of some weird reticle someone designed with some undisclosed caliber and ammo type? Yes and no. Not for this particular rifle who's scope's BDC is matched to the ammo through tests and luck. Now I just have to worry about that ammo running out. If it does, I'll just have to make them.
Stag 15 AR15 5.56 16"
Vortex Venom LPVO 1-6x24
ARBDC-3 reticle
Frontier 75gr 5.56
