Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Sig BDX Scope Review
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="catorres1" data-source="post: 1632098" data-attributes="member: 80699"><p><strong><span style="font-size: 18px">Sig BDX Scope Review Continued</span></strong></p><p></p><p>To try and figure out what was going on here, I looked at the aero jump and Coriolis numbers that the Kestrel included in it's solution, and they were near zero based on our DOF etc. So that does not appear to be the reason the drops were off just a bit. So I suspect that the CDM's for that particular bullet are just that much more consistent and accurate and that is where the disparity is. It's just a guess, but with my Leicas, when using the onboard ballistics, I have to make the same type of adjustment to the BC (upward) for my heavier ELDX's. In the case of my Leica, I am usually off closer to 1 MOA at that distance, so Ultralite is about .5 MOA closer to the mark, but in both cases, it just illustrates the importance of truing your data. Sig clearly recognizes this, as the app actually has a somewhat automatic truing feature that we could have used. It lets you designate your impact difference at a given distance, and it automatically adjusts velocity to match what you are seeing on target. We tweaked BC out of habit, but either way we got it done, but it also goes to show how useful it is to have access to a more robust ballistic solution when you start to stretch those distances. Sig's 2400 ABS has had that capability for a while, but new players like the BDX, the Vec X and Leica's 2800 take a different route to providing that complete solution.</p><p></p><p><strong>BDX scope using distance-based holdovers</strong></p><p></p><p>A feature of the BDX system is allowing the shooter to decide what tech they want to use, or not use, both in terms of amount and brand. So we wanted to test how the scope would work if you did not have a connection to a BDX RF, either because your RF could not broadcast or maybe you are using another brand of RF. Once we had the BC worked out, we gave the plates a run, again, out to 700 yards. As expected, it was a simple task of knowing the distance and holding on the right dot. Of course, you have to remember how you setup each dot, but if you utilize the scope in this manner consistently, it should be second nature. Either way, in our test, it was on without fuss to 700 yards.</p><p></p><p><strong>BDX scope using MOA-based holdovers</strong></p><p></p><p>The BDX system also allows shooters to set up to 8 dots in the scope to a desired increment in terms of MOA or Mils. In order to test its accuracy, we set 8 dots up in 2 MOA increments and ran through the plates. Using this system, we had no problem making first round hits out to the 700 yard plate. What I like about this capability is that, like all the holdovers, with Sig's 'digital focal plane', the subtensions automatically adjust to the level of magnification. So if you are using the dots to range, you can use it like a first focal plane scope in that regard. The dots can also be used to supplement your elevation by giving you holdover to add to your dialing, thereby allowing for longer range shots than would otherwise be possible.</p><p></p><div style="text-align: center"><a href="http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC02145.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC02145.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 12px">Beneath the caps are finger adjustable dials that can be reset to zero. However, there is no zero stop, so you will need to keep track of your revolutions</span></div><p></p><p><strong>BDX scope dialing only</strong></p><p></p><p>Finally, we wanted to see what would happen if all the electrics went out on the scope entirely and we had to use the scope like any other scope, without the benefit of any of the BDX tech. This was particularly important to me because I hate to have to depend on tech without a backup. When talking to Sig about this, they told me that the scopes did not have a bunch of elevation, they were not really designed with this in mind. However, what you have would track true.</p><p></p><p>We started by running the scope from top to bottom to see how much elevation we had to work with. In this particular scope, we had just over 50 MOA total elevation. While not a lot, it's enough to get us well past the 700 yard plate easily. Depending on your setup and location (elevation etc.), 25 MOA will generally get you to 1000 yards, and this could of course be extended by using a canted rail. So while limited, it is probably sufficient for most shooter's needs in a hunting scope.</p><p></p><p>To test tracking, we started at the 150 plate and ran it through the targets out to the 700 plate. First round hits were not a problem, impacts were where expected. We then ran it back down to the 150 plate and then back up to the 500 plate and again, no problem. We then returned it to the 100 yard zero and ran it through the whole course again using the full capabilities of the scope (RF indicated holds, and also distance based holds), and it was on. While certainly not a box test, we felt confident it would do the job.</p><p></p><div style="text-align: center"><a href="http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01940.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01940.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 12px">Hunting Aoudad in Palo Duro Canyon gave us a great opportunity to test the BDX system under real world conditions</span></div><p></p><p><strong>Field test</strong></p><p></p><p>As I mentioned, we actually used the system in the field before the full range test. While somewhat backwards in terms of testing methodology, we got the scope just days before we needed to leave to hunt Aoudad in the Texas panhandle, but we really wanted to give the system a real run in, and this was our last major hunt of the season. So we mounted the scope up on my son's rifle, sighted it in and did some basic testing to make sure it was going to work and be accurate, then headed out a few days later to hunt. This was previous to us getting the 3k BDX, so we were using the 2400 BDX in tandem with the scope.</p><p></p><p>Without going too far into the details, I'll just say that the system worked and, due to its speed, helped make sure my son's hunt was successful. He was able to pull off a 571 yard shot, and then make an unexpected fast second shot at 270, the second shot made more possible by the speed of the system. Without it, the ram probably would have gone over the edge, but because he was able to just quickly range, drop the RF, and shoot where the dot indicated, he made a good shot and the ram never made it. Using the rangefinder to give him the distance was very important because distance cues in Palo Duro Canyon are totally different than where we live a few hundred miles south, and these hunts are very short, so you don't really get time to become acclimated to what distances look like. The ability to use a rangefinder and still shoot very quickly under pressure made a big difference here, at least for my son. After our experience on that hunt, any doubts I had about just how effective the system is evaporated. While I maintained my concerns about having to depend on the tech (until my testing verified that the system had viable alternatives built in), I was convinced by its performance in the field.</p><p></p><div style="text-align: center"><a href="http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01968%20for%20LRH.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01968%20for%20LRH.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 12px">My son hauling out the Aoudad ram he took using the BDX system in Palo Duro Canyon</span></div></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="catorres1, post: 1632098, member: 80699"] [B][SIZE=5]Sig BDX Scope Review Continued[/SIZE][/B] To try and figure out what was going on here, I looked at the aero jump and Coriolis numbers that the Kestrel included in it’s solution, and they were near zero based on our DOF etc. So that does not appear to be the reason the drops were off just a bit. So I suspect that the CDM’s for that particular bullet are just that much more consistent and accurate and that is where the disparity is. It’s just a guess, but with my Leicas, when using the onboard ballistics, I have to make the same type of adjustment to the BC (upward) for my heavier ELDX’s. In the case of my Leica, I am usually off closer to 1 MOA at that distance, so Ultralite is about .5 MOA closer to the mark, but in both cases, it just illustrates the importance of truing your data. Sig clearly recognizes this, as the app actually has a somewhat automatic truing feature that we could have used. It lets you designate your impact difference at a given distance, and it automatically adjusts velocity to match what you are seeing on target. We tweaked BC out of habit, but either way we got it done, but it also goes to show how useful it is to have access to a more robust ballistic solution when you start to stretch those distances. Sig’s 2400 ABS has had that capability for a while, but new players like the BDX, the Vec X and Leica’s 2800 take a different route to providing that complete solution. [B]BDX scope using distance-based holdovers[/B] A feature of the BDX system is allowing the shooter to decide what tech they want to use, or not use, both in terms of amount and brand. So we wanted to test how the scope would work if you did not have a connection to a BDX RF, either because your RF could not broadcast or maybe you are using another brand of RF. Once we had the BC worked out, we gave the plates a run, again, out to 700 yards. As expected, it was a simple task of knowing the distance and holding on the right dot. Of course, you have to remember how you setup each dot, but if you utilize the scope in this manner consistently, it should be second nature. Either way, in our test, it was on without fuss to 700 yards. [B]BDX scope using MOA-based holdovers[/B] The BDX system also allows shooters to set up to 8 dots in the scope to a desired increment in terms of MOA or Mils. In order to test its accuracy, we set 8 dots up in 2 MOA increments and ran through the plates. Using this system, we had no problem making first round hits out to the 700 yard plate. What I like about this capability is that, like all the holdovers, with Sig’s ‘digital focal plane’, the subtensions automatically adjust to the level of magnification. So if you are using the dots to range, you can use it like a first focal plane scope in that regard. The dots can also be used to supplement your elevation by giving you holdover to add to your dialing, thereby allowing for longer range shots than would otherwise be possible. [CENTER][URL='http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC02145.jpg.html'][IMG]https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC02145.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [SIZE=3]Beneath the caps are finger adjustable dials that can be reset to zero. However, there is no zero stop, so you will need to keep track of your revolutions[/SIZE][/CENTER] [B]BDX scope dialing only[/B] Finally, we wanted to see what would happen if all the electrics went out on the scope entirely and we had to use the scope like any other scope, without the benefit of any of the BDX tech. This was particularly important to me because I hate to have to depend on tech without a backup. When talking to Sig about this, they told me that the scopes did not have a bunch of elevation, they were not really designed with this in mind. However, what you have would track true. We started by running the scope from top to bottom to see how much elevation we had to work with. In this particular scope, we had just over 50 MOA total elevation. While not a lot, it’s enough to get us well past the 700 yard plate easily. Depending on your setup and location (elevation etc.), 25 MOA will generally get you to 1000 yards, and this could of course be extended by using a canted rail. So while limited, it is probably sufficient for most shooter’s needs in a hunting scope. To test tracking, we started at the 150 plate and ran it through the targets out to the 700 plate. First round hits were not a problem, impacts were where expected. We then ran it back down to the 150 plate and then back up to the 500 plate and again, no problem. We then returned it to the 100 yard zero and ran it through the whole course again using the full capabilities of the scope (RF indicated holds, and also distance based holds), and it was on. While certainly not a box test, we felt confident it would do the job. [CENTER][URL='http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01940.jpg.html'][IMG]https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01940.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [SIZE=3]Hunting Aoudad in Palo Duro Canyon gave us a great opportunity to test the BDX system under real world conditions[/SIZE][/CENTER] [B]Field test[/B] As I mentioned, we actually used the system in the field before the full range test. While somewhat backwards in terms of testing methodology, we got the scope just days before we needed to leave to hunt Aoudad in the Texas panhandle, but we really wanted to give the system a real run in, and this was our last major hunt of the season. So we mounted the scope up on my son’s rifle, sighted it in and did some basic testing to make sure it was going to work and be accurate, then headed out a few days later to hunt. This was previous to us getting the 3k BDX, so we were using the 2400 BDX in tandem with the scope. Without going too far into the details, I’ll just say that the system worked and, due to its speed, helped make sure my son’s hunt was successful. He was able to pull off a 571 yard shot, and then make an unexpected fast second shot at 270, the second shot made more possible by the speed of the system. Without it, the ram probably would have gone over the edge, but because he was able to just quickly range, drop the RF, and shoot where the dot indicated, he made a good shot and the ram never made it. Using the rangefinder to give him the distance was very important because distance cues in Palo Duro Canyon are totally different than where we live a few hundred miles south, and these hunts are very short, so you don’t really get time to become acclimated to what distances look like. The ability to use a rangefinder and still shoot very quickly under pressure made a big difference here, at least for my son. After our experience on that hunt, any doubts I had about just how effective the system is evaporated. While I maintained my concerns about having to depend on the tech (until my testing verified that the system had viable alternatives built in), I was convinced by its performance in the field. [CENTER][URL='http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01968%20for%20LRH.jpg.html'][IMG]https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01968%20for%20LRH.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [SIZE=3]My son hauling out the Aoudad ram he took using the BDX system in Palo Duro Canyon[/SIZE][/CENTER] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Sig BDX Scope Review
Top