Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catorres1" data-source="post: 1558079" data-attributes="member: 80699">Sig BDX System Review: 2400 BDX Part 1cRanging Performance<div style="text-align: center"><a href="https://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01716.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01716.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center">Not a lot of street signs on this West Texas ranch where I tested the 2400, but there is a big mule deer buck in there somewhere….</div>Before we get into the performance numbers, one note on these results.  According to Sig, the 2400 will hit over 3000 yards on reflective targets, 1800 on trees, and 1400 on deer.    I have heard anecdotally from others that they have hit the range limit both nearer and farther, and I don't doubt it.  Through all the testing I have done, I have found all RFs' performance to be pretty dramatically affected by the conditions of the day.  Sun, haze, dust, moisture in the air, and of course the nature of the targets, really effect the results.  A clear day in the city I live in gave much shorter results than those achieved at 10,000 feet in Colorado or out among the Guadalupe Mountains in West Texas.  So to really get a feel for how an RF performs, I test them over and over in many conditions, times, places, and against various targets, and I run these tests against a well known control at the same time so I can get an idea of how the conditions and the target might be affecting performance.  I do this both hand-held and tripod mounted.  Only by doing it over a long period of time in tandem with a control can I really get an idea of what the true performance capability of the RF is.So your mileage may vary depending on the environmental and target conditions you may encounter, to say nothing of unit to unit variation (which should be much less pronounced).  The results below should be seen as an assessment of the average performance as demonstrated across a broad spectrum of conditions over an extended time.  In some situations, a particular unit may perform better than what I have documented, or worse.  But overall, I think what I have experienced is a fairly representative view of what you can expect from the 2400.Two other data points of significance that affected my testing.  In distance testing the 2400, I initially had some inconsistent results. The aiming circle on the 2400 is approximately 3.5 mrad, while the laser divergence is 1.3 and round. So for small targets at long distance, you could conceivably be barely on target, or even slightly off target.  In addition, while ideally the laser would be aligned directly in the middle of the circle, it is not on my unit, and in talking to others, this appears to be a common situation, and not just with Sigs.  Subsequently, I found the same issue on another RF I am testing by another manufacturer. Accordingly, I tested using an antenna pole and found that the sensor on my 2400 is right of center, and very slightly low, but still within the aiming circle.<div style="text-align: center"><a href="https://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01765.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01765.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center">Ranging and optical performance were tested both hand-held and tripod mounted</div>The other point to note is that of the divergence of the beam.  That, coupled with the size of the reticle and placement of the sensor, made it easy to miss the target (and think the RF ran out of gas) or hit the wrong target at times. For those longer range targets, there is a setting to help ensure you are hitting the farther target rather than objects close to the RF. But sometimes, it was hard to tell if you were reading off a tree at 300 yards, or a target at 385 just beyond it.  Generally speaking,  if I were to change anything in this regard, I would recommend going to a shape and size similar to what Leica uses.  That beam is about the same width of the Sig's (which is 1.3 mil round), but less than half the height and rectangular, making miss-hits on closer range targets less likely.  That, and/or knowing right where the sensor is in relation to the reticle (either by testing for placement, or by a combination of a smaller reticle and more precise sensor placement within the reticle) would be helpful in ensuring you are ranging what you want with the 2400.  Once I determined where my sensor was placed and adapted to its shape and size, I re-ran my ranging tests with much more consistent results and was able to get returns on small targets at much longer distances.Testing took place in Central Texas, North Texas, Colorado, as well as out in West Texas, Michigan and Northern Indiana.  Some of these locales have a lot more long range targets and weather conditions available to me than where I live, particularly in terms of rain and snow conditions.  Testing took place under controlled conditions, as well as in actual field use hunting elk, mule deer and Aoudad sheep.<div style="text-align: center"><a href="https://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">Range testing took place in multiple locations including Colorado, Central and West Texas, Palo Duro Canyon, Indiana, and Northern Michigan.  Conditions ranged from full sun to snow, at all hours of the day.</div>Natural TargetsMore often than not, I find myself ranging trees and bare hillsides when I am hunting (assuming there is no game to range, which sadly seems to be my lot this year!), so that is the standard I use to see how an RF will do.  Generally, with RF's, after thousands of actuations, I usually find they have a 'consistent' distance, where they are very strong and can generally be depended upon to return off of an average target in most conditions.  Very bright light will lower this number, but I can usually find a shaded portion that will return even in those conditions.  Then there is the 'stretch goal', so to speak….which are targets which will only return periodically in full sun, but much more often at the end of the day just after sundown or under cloudy skies.  These tend to represent the limits of what the RF will do on that category of target, often with the use of scan mode.TreesFor the 2400, it was a pretty solid performer out to 1800 yards, even in sun.  There were some trees it would not range at 1600 and there were one time hits at 2300 or a bit more, but the RF was generally fairly solid and fast at the 1800-1900 yard range.  As the sun went down, I very occasionally got hits as high as 2330 on trees, but those were few and far between and I never saw 2400 or higher show on my unit when ranging a tree.  Sig claims 1800 on trees, and I think that is a fair, if not conservative, estimate, depending on conditions, with a stretch goal being in the 23-2400 range.  Keep in mind, this is on trees, not on reflective targets.Cliffs and HillsidesAs strong as the 2400 is on trees, it really excelled on stone outcroppings and hillsides, especially when they were lighter in color.  While Aoudad hunting in Palo Duro Canyon, where there are a lot of cliffs and some long distance opportunities, while briefly testing at the end of the day I was able to hit out to 2787, and perhaps could have gotten further with a tripod mount, which I was not carrying due to trying to cut pack weight.  In these conditions, the RF really seemed to be able to stretch its legs and appeared to want to approach its reflective target range.  On reflective targets, Sig claims over 3000 yards, which anecdotally, I have heard is accurate.  I don't have consistent reflective targets to test, though I could sit by the highway and shoot road signs, but I don't find that particular data point all that useful so I have not gone out of my way to do that.  But considering that near 2800 was achievable on white rock cliff walls, I suspect that 3k on a reflective target is entirely reasonable, just as Sig claims.Range Targets<div style="text-align: center"><a href="https://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC01729.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC01729.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center">Private range where I can test on steel out to 1390</div>Concerning steel, I did get to try the 2400 at a range I use to test RF's and optics, and they recently added a 24" x 48" plate at 1390. The plates are all painted yellow and red, so not exactly reflective and certainly not white, and the plates at 1125 were about 20 inches in diameter, so just under 2 MOA.  The conditions were basically bright, full sun in the afternoon, testing off a tripod and continued until a little before sunset.  Under these conditions, I was able to hit a 24"x48" yellow and red plate at 1390 yards, though reticle alignment had to be just right (biased towards the right). I could hit the 20 inch plate at 1125 pretty easily with less concern for alignment and more consistency.</blockquote>

Verification