Burris Ballistic Plex vs. Nikon BDC

[Guest]

Just curious which of these scopes would be the better. A Nikon 6-18x40 BDC or a Burris Fullfield 2 4-14x42 with the ballistic plex. Will be on a 30-06 that will be used mainly for close range hunting(300yds) but would also like to be able to get to 1000yd targets. My budget is about $600, are there any other scopes that would fit the bill better?

Thanks
Gene Cole III

 

[Iron Worker]

Stay away from Burris Lots of problems. I have had two now just one didn't care for Black Diamond to fuzzy.I tell you whats good for your price range is a Bushnell 4200 Elite. They have super good glass. Much better then burris or Nikon.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Do you want a hash mark style scope or be able to click your way up?? To my understanding, hash mark scopes aren't very consistent past 500-600 yards on big game. To many variable come into play. This is where dialing comes in handy. If I was recomending a dialing scope it would be a Leupold VX2, 6-18x40 Target, fine duplex. They usually run about $450. They are very nice and bright scopes and track well. The upper end of power is good for 1000 yards, and the fine duplex helps as well. I tried a burris 3-9 bal plex and found it worked ok out to 500 yards, but it was not crisp at anything above 5x. I thought that was pretty crappy. My dad however seemed to thing it was ok at 9x, so he traded me a leupld vx2, 3-9 for it. I think I got the better end of the deal on that one /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Guest]

My brother has an older VX-II 6-18x40 and I dont really like it much in anything near low light. Also, will a click type scope with a one inch tube have enough elevation to get me to 1000 with a 30-06. I used to have a super sniper 20x on this gun and it would get me from 100 to 1000 easily, shooting a 190SMK, I just dont know if a one inch tube will. Most of my shooting will be under 600, but I would like to get to 1000 as well.

 

[Ernie]

Seems to be a lot of different experiences with Burris. Mine have been very good. I have 6-24 Burris Black Diamond (30mm tube) side focus, and it does great in low light and the Ballistic Mil-Dot reticle has been right on.
I have had a good number of 3-12 LER handgun scope with the ballistic plex reticle that have all been great also.
Never had a Nikon so I can't begin to compare, but have been told they are a good optic.

 

[wilecoyote76]

genecole, I purchased a cheaper Nikon Buckmasters 3-9x40 BDC for a 30-06 and I was able to harvest both an elk and an antelope this year with it at ranges from 400-500 yards. The only downfall is the yardage circles on the BDC. At 400 yards, an antelope seemed smaller than the dang circle! I have a friend who has a Leupold VX-III with the B&C reticle and it is a much better setup. I've been happy with the Nikon and the optics are great but I prefer crosshairs over circles. Personal preference but it worked for me this year so I can't complain!

Here's some pics of animals taken this year with the BDC Nikon:

 

[Guest]

wile,
thats what I was afraid of with the BDC reticle. I would much prefer the hash mark type. I will keep looking and see what I can find.

Thanks
Gene Cole III

 

[cdog]

I have also heard mixed reviews on burris. I've had a 8x32 black diamond side focus for about 2 years, so far i'm very pleased with the scope.It is the bmd reticle and it works very well. Most of the complaints I have heard on burris were actually about customer service rather than the product itself, which seems like a shame to me. Based on my experience with this scope I would say you cant go wrong,
Cdog.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

genecole- If you can, try to look through the newer vx2's, they are pretty bright and crisp. I have no problem shooting to 1000 yards with the scope, but I was using a 300 RUM. It shoots just a wee bit flatter then a 30-06. However, the 6-18 has been on my 25-06 and 270, and I can tell you that with no special base or anything, they can get to 800 yards and thats using btips. If your wanting to target shoot at a 1000 yards though, I"m not to sure what kind of hash mark scope would be precise enough, other then a nightforce with NP-R2 reticle or something. Dialing up does require a rangefinder and a drop card and practice shooting at the distances of which your drop card says.

 

[Guest]

I completely agree with the last part of your post. I have shot this gun at 1000 before, but I am now going to use is mostly for hunting. 1000yds will be on a known distance range. I will be using a rangefinder as well when hunting. I think I will be trying the Burris. Thanks for the input.

Gene Cole III

 

[kraky]

I have 4 Burris ballistic plex....great scopes. And I know friends with another 4-6 total. No problems with any of them. They are a bargain in my book....very clear....seem to track fine. I know a guy that had to send one in for service and it took 10 days and back it came free of charge fixed. Seems like bad stories travel faster than good ones.

 

[GLMorgan]

I shoot almost exclusively Burris on my hunting rifles and have no complaints. We have compared optics from Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss and Bushnell at dusk and dawn and the Burris Black Diamond gathers light the best. I like the Nikon, but the BDC reticle kind of sucks compared to the ballistic plex. I shoot a .300weatherby using 180 gr Accubonds 84.5 grains of IMR 7828. While practicing at a life size elk target at 637 yrds, I hold my 600 yrd mark on top of the vitals section and group 3 shots in the heart consistantly. I have found that my deviation from zero at the individual yardage tics is less than an inch. I've had good luck with Burris and for your $600, you can't go wrong with a 4-16X50 Black Diamond with a ballistic plex in it. A little more buys the ballistic mil-dot. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

 

[sscoyote]

At 1st glance i wasn't too crazy about the Nikon BDC, but after considering it's virtues it might just be a very good system. One of the advantages to the system is that if it doesn't zero perfectly to whatever yardage it's supposed to, it can be "tweaked" a little since u have 2 stadia above and below the center of the circle that allows for .75 SMOA of fudge room, sort of (the dot's inside diameter is 1.5 SMOA). It should allow the shooter to reference his shot with either the top or bottom of the circle. This probably won't help a lot with the interpolative zeros (in-between ranges), but it will for the stadia zeros themselves. Another advantage to the reticle is that u should be able to easily reference windage tactically with the reticle by counting interpolative circles for wind (to the tune of 2.0 SMOA per circle outside diameter). That should prove relatively very advantageous in the wind. The lower post tip is flat which may help for turret clicking beyond the lower post tip's zero (15 SMOA).

At 400-500 yds. it shouldn't be any problem at all on an antelope/deer-size tgt. At 500 yds. the circle covers 5 X 1.5 SMOA or 7.5 inches. Might help u quickly determine that 500 yd. mark, in fact, which leads me to my next point--
It should make for an excellent reticle rangefinding system-- probably as good as the mil-dot, in fact.

1 other thing that i've always liked about the Nikon systems is that they provide all the stadia subtensions of all their reticles in the catalog. It's 1 of the best tech specs. catalogs of all the popular scope companies.

 

[teddy12b]

I know this topic is very old, but maybe we'll get an answer to this. Which of these two scopes has more MOA of adjustment in it? I think the buckmasters are around 50MOA of internal adjustment, but I'm not positive on the burris.