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: 1632097" data-attributes="member: 80699"><p><strong><span style="font-size: 18px">Sig BDX Scope Review Continued</span></strong></p><p></p><p><strong>Optics</strong></p><p></p><p>At this time, the scopes in the BDX line are variants of the Sierra 3 scopes. The scope I had for testing was their 4.5-14 x44, which as a 30mm tube. They also have a 3.5 -10 as well as a 6-18 in the line, but I requested the 4.5-14 as a good middle of the road range for hunting and some longer range shooting.</p><p></p><p>The scope is much the same as their Sierra 3 scopes, so it shares the basic characteristics. All the BDX scopes are MOA at this time, though future scopes might have a Mil option, I don't know. Clicks are the standard .25 MOA, and the turrets on this model are covered, but have regular finger adjustable dials underneath that can be reset to zero, but there is no zero stop. This model has the parallax adjustment on the left side where the power dial is for the BDX system, and BDX scopes are IPX-7 rated.</p><p></p><div style="text-align: center"><a href="http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC02139.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC02139.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 12px">Parallax adjustment is on the left turret, along with the power selector for the illuminated reticle/BDX system. Elevation and windage dials are capped</span></div> <div style="text-align: center"></div><p>I was pleasantly surprised when first using the scope, the glass was clear with good color balance, lacking the blue color hue that the RF exhibits. There are thin lines that traverse the bottom half of the scope, ostensibly to enable the hold dots on the stadia, but they are barely visible and disappear once you get used to them.</p><p></p><p>To test the scope's brightness and clarity, I set it up along with a Zeiss HD5 3-15x42, and a VX6 3-18x50. All three scopes were set to 14 power and were parallax focused on a standard eye chart at 100 yards. We began testing on an overcast day 30 minutes before sunset and ran through to 30 minutes after sunset, and I brought my teenaged son with me as a second set of much-superior eyes to get his opinion as well. As has pretty much always been the case, his recorded observations about what he could see verses what I could see through a given optic was about 1 line deeper on an eye chart, but our rankings of the scopes in order of performance were consistent.</p><p></p><p>Overall, we both scored the VX6 as the sharpest and clearest, being able to read deeper at any given light level than the other two under all light conditions. Next, surprisingly to me, was the Sig. And just behind was the HD5. The VX6 held a solid 1-1.5 line advantage over the Sig from 30 minutes before to 30 minutes after sunset. The Sig, on the other hand, held a much smaller, but consistent advantage over the HD5. Generally, about a half a line advantage (ie, could read half the letters but not all). This stayed pretty consistent through to the end of shooting light. Bringing up the rear, but not by much, was the HD5. Not that it was poor, I have used this scope hunting hogs into the night enough to know that I could easily take shots past shooting light with this scope, so its performance is more than enough to get you to shooting light for most game animals. But the fact that the Sig exceeded it, though marginally, was unexpected considering the price point of the base (non-BDX) Sierra scope. I would be very interested in seeing some of Sig's top end glass, like a Tango 6, to see how it does in comparison. But as it is, we did not see any indications that the current BDX Sig won't get the job done to past shooting light.</p><p></p><p>One other point about the optics that should be considered is around flare and haze control. I have been in several situations with other scopes where, due to internal design and/or the coatings, stray light becomes a significant problem depending on your angle to the sun. This is particularly evident at the end of the day when the sun is low on the horizon. What can result is very strong veiling flare, such that you cannot actually see through the scope without dialing mag down significantly. The scope my son had originally had such terrible veiling flare that the guide we were with thought it was broken and suggested we switch rifles. You literally could not see at all. We later switched him to a Leupold VX3i, and the problem was solved. From what I have seen so far, this is not a problem for the 4.5-14x44 BDX scope. I can't say how the other models, especially those with the larger objectives, would fare, but this model, even when I have tried to blow it out, handled it just fine.</p><p></p><p><strong>Accuracy</strong></p><p></p><p>All the tech involved here is useless if it does not provide sufficiently accurate holdovers in the reticle. In addition, what happens if you don't have a BDX RF? And what happens if the battery dies and you are running old school? To find out, we headed out to the private range where we do some precision rifle training to put the scope through the paces. We tested using the full system, so 3000 BDX communicating holds to the scope (one run using the AB ultralite, one run using AB Elite via Kestrel); using distance hold overs; using MOA holdovers; and using no tech, simply dialing the solution indicated by the Kestrel.</p><p></p><p>Because this is a private range used heavily for training law enforcement and others, we did not have the luxury of waiting for good weather, so it was a bit tricky with 5-15 MPH gusting winds that changed seemingly randomly from no value to half value. To make it worse, the range is not laid out like many other ranges with all the targets lined out in one direction on a flat plane. In this case, they are in slightly different directions, between random breaks of trees, sometimes in gullies, sometimes in the open, sometimes completely surrounded by trees, so all shots are made from a hilltop.</p><p></p><div style="text-align: center"><a href="https://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC02131%20for%20LRH.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC02131%20for%20LRH.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></div> <div style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 12px">Targets are set out in realistic hunting scenarios in small openings in the thick cover with variable wind blocks that makes accurate wind calls challenging. The large row on the left runs to 540 yards. The far clearing in the upper left is 1390. The closest clearing on the right runs to 700 and the upper right clearing is 1125</span></div> <div style="text-align: center"></div><p>All that is to say, getting the wind right at this range is always a bit of a challenge, and this day, it was particularly tricky, so we limited our test data to the last plate before 1125, which was the 700 yard plate. Targets were at 150, 200, 300, 400, 500, 540, and 700.</p><p></p><p><strong>BDX scope with 3000 BDX and Kestrel 5700 and AB Elite</strong></p><p></p><p>For the first run, we ran it with everything: BDX scope connected to the 3k BDX binos, which were connected to the Kestrel for its solution. The Kestrel was setup to utilize AB's custom drag model for the 145 ELDX that my son uses in his .270 Winchester Weatherby Vanguard. Shooting from prone off a bipod, we found the holds to be dead on all the way out to 700 yards. Now and then the wind would shift and gust unexpectedly, but bullets still hit plates with windage being off a bit, but elevation was excellent. Overall, communication worked excellently out to about 9 yards or so, with the proviso that you needed to have direct line of site between the RF and the scope, the holds were right, and the workflow was super-fast and efficient.</p><p></p><p><strong>BDX scope with 3000 BDX and AB Ultralite</strong></p><p></p><p>For the second run through the plates, we disconnected from the Kestrel and let AB Ultralite provide the solution. We knew this would work out to 500 plus yards because this is pretty much the setup we used in January to make shots on Aoudad out to 571 yards. In that case, we were using this same scope, but had the 2400 BDX with us, but the ballistics engine is the same. Ultralite uses G7 for it's BC's, and many bullets, this one included, are selectable as presets. Oddly, I noticed the G7 it populated with was different than what Hornady specified, but we went with it nonetheless, and it worked fine on the Aoudad. However, once we got it on steel at longer distances, we noticed that the solution had us hitting just a bit high consistently. By the time we got to 700, we could see it was off by a pretty consistent .5 MOA (as much as we could tell within the accuracy envelope etc.). To adjust, we did what I do with my Leicas, which is start to tweak the BC until it matches the proven drops provided by the Kestrel. It did not take too terribly much, but we did eventually get it pretty much on. We re-ran the tests from 300 to 700 and it worked like a charm.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="catorres1, post: 1632097, member: 80699"] [B][SIZE=5]Sig BDX Scope Review Continued[/SIZE][/B] [B]Optics[/B] At this time, the scopes in the BDX line are variants of the Sierra 3 scopes. The scope I had for testing was their 4.5-14 x44, which as a 30mm tube. They also have a 3.5 -10 as well as a 6-18 in the line, but I requested the 4.5-14 as a good middle of the road range for hunting and some longer range shooting. The scope is much the same as their Sierra 3 scopes, so it shares the basic characteristics. All the BDX scopes are MOA at this time, though future scopes might have a Mil option, I don’t know. Clicks are the standard .25 MOA, and the turrets on this model are covered, but have regular finger adjustable dials underneath that can be reset to zero, but there is no zero stop. This model has the parallax adjustment on the left side where the power dial is for the BDX system, and BDX scopes are IPX-7 rated. [CENTER][URL='http://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC02139.jpg.html'][IMG]https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC02139.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [SIZE=3]Parallax adjustment is on the left turret, along with the power selector for the illuminated reticle/BDX system. Elevation and windage dials are capped[/SIZE] [/CENTER] I was pleasantly surprised when first using the scope, the glass was clear with good color balance, lacking the blue color hue that the RF exhibits. There are thin lines that traverse the bottom half of the scope, ostensibly to enable the hold dots on the stadia, but they are barely visible and disappear once you get used to them. To test the scope’s brightness and clarity, I set it up along with a Zeiss HD5 3-15x42, and a VX6 3-18x50. All three scopes were set to 14 power and were parallax focused on a standard eye chart at 100 yards. We began testing on an overcast day 30 minutes before sunset and ran through to 30 minutes after sunset, and I brought my teenaged son with me as a second set of much-superior eyes to get his opinion as well. As has pretty much always been the case, his recorded observations about what he could see verses what I could see through a given optic was about 1 line deeper on an eye chart, but our rankings of the scopes in order of performance were consistent. Overall, we both scored the VX6 as the sharpest and clearest, being able to read deeper at any given light level than the other two under all light conditions. Next, surprisingly to me, was the Sig. And just behind was the HD5. The VX6 held a solid 1-1.5 line advantage over the Sig from 30 minutes before to 30 minutes after sunset. The Sig, on the other hand, held a much smaller, but consistent advantage over the HD5. Generally, about a half a line advantage (ie, could read half the letters but not all). This stayed pretty consistent through to the end of shooting light. Bringing up the rear, but not by much, was the HD5. Not that it was poor, I have used this scope hunting hogs into the night enough to know that I could easily take shots past shooting light with this scope, so its performance is more than enough to get you to shooting light for most game animals. But the fact that the Sig exceeded it, though marginally, was unexpected considering the price point of the base (non-BDX) Sierra scope. I would be very interested in seeing some of Sig’s top end glass, like a Tango 6, to see how it does in comparison. But as it is, we did not see any indications that the current BDX Sig won’t get the job done to past shooting light. One other point about the optics that should be considered is around flare and haze control. I have been in several situations with other scopes where, due to internal design and/or the coatings, stray light becomes a significant problem depending on your angle to the sun. This is particularly evident at the end of the day when the sun is low on the horizon. What can result is very strong veiling flare, such that you cannot actually see through the scope without dialing mag down significantly. The scope my son had originally had such terrible veiling flare that the guide we were with thought it was broken and suggested we switch rifles. You literally could not see at all. We later switched him to a Leupold VX3i, and the problem was solved. From what I have seen so far, this is not a problem for the 4.5-14x44 BDX scope. I can’t say how the other models, especially those with the larger objectives, would fare, but this model, even when I have tried to blow it out, handled it just fine. [B]Accuracy[/B] All the tech involved here is useless if it does not provide sufficiently accurate holdovers in the reticle. In addition, what happens if you don’t have a BDX RF? And what happens if the battery dies and you are running old school? To find out, we headed out to the private range where we do some precision rifle training to put the scope through the paces. We tested using the full system, so 3000 BDX communicating holds to the scope (one run using the AB ultralite, one run using AB Elite via Kestrel); using distance hold overs; using MOA holdovers; and using no tech, simply dialing the solution indicated by the Kestrel. Because this is a private range used heavily for training law enforcement and others, we did not have the luxury of waiting for good weather, so it was a bit tricky with 5-15 MPH gusting winds that changed seemingly randomly from no value to half value. To make it worse, the range is not laid out like many other ranges with all the targets lined out in one direction on a flat plane. In this case, they are in slightly different directions, between random breaks of trees, sometimes in gullies, sometimes in the open, sometimes completely surrounded by trees, so all shots are made from a hilltop. [CENTER][URL='https://s448.photobucket.com/user/catorres1/media/DSC02131%20for%20LRH.jpg.html'][IMG]https://i448.photobucket.com/albums/qq209/catorres1/DSC02131%20for%20LRH.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [SIZE=3]Targets are set out in realistic hunting scenarios in small openings in the thick cover with variable wind blocks that makes accurate wind calls challenging. The large row on the left runs to 540 yards. The far clearing in the upper left is 1390. The closest clearing on the right runs to 700 and the upper right clearing is 1125[/SIZE] [/CENTER] All that is to say, getting the wind right at this range is always a bit of a challenge, and this day, it was particularly tricky, so we limited our test data to the last plate before 1125, which was the 700 yard plate. Targets were at 150, 200, 300, 400, 500, 540, and 700. [B]BDX scope with 3000 BDX and Kestrel 5700 and AB Elite[/B] For the first run, we ran it with everything: BDX scope connected to the 3k BDX binos, which were connected to the Kestrel for its solution. The Kestrel was setup to utilize AB’s custom drag model for the 145 ELDX that my son uses in his .270 Winchester Weatherby Vanguard. Shooting from prone off a bipod, we found the holds to be dead on all the way out to 700 yards. Now and then the wind would shift and gust unexpectedly, but bullets still hit plates with windage being off a bit, but elevation was excellent. Overall, communication worked excellently out to about 9 yards or so, with the proviso that you needed to have direct line of site between the RF and the scope, the holds were right, and the workflow was super-fast and efficient. [B]BDX scope with 3000 BDX and AB Ultralite[/B] For the second run through the plates, we disconnected from the Kestrel and let AB Ultralite provide the solution. We knew this would work out to 500 plus yards because this is pretty much the setup we used in January to make shots on Aoudad out to 571 yards. In that case, we were using this same scope, but had the 2400 BDX with us, but the ballistics engine is the same. Ultralite uses G7 for it’s BC’s, and many bullets, this one included, are selectable as presets. Oddly, I noticed the G7 it populated with was different than what Hornady specified, but we went with it nonetheless, and it worked fine on the Aoudad. However, once we got it on steel at longer distances, we noticed that the solution had us hitting just a bit high consistently. By the time we got to 700, we could see it was off by a pretty consistent .5 MOA (as much as we could tell within the accuracy envelope etc.). To adjust, we did what I do with my Leicas, which is start to tweak the BC until it matches the proven drops provided by the Kestrel. It did not take too terribly much, but we did eventually get it pretty much on. We re-ran the tests from 300 to 700 and it worked like a charm. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Sig BDX Scope Review
Top