Friends-

I have two 3.5-10X40ish scopes. One is a Leupold 3.5-10X40 with a Boone & Crockett reticle. The other is a Zeiss Conquest 3.5-10X42.

My plan is to match those scopes with the following rifles:
The Leupold will go on my custom M-1917 Enfield in .300 H&H.
The Zeiss will go on my custom M-1917 Enfield in .338 Mag.

My reasoning is that the .300 H&H will see a lot more action hunting everything from White Tail Deer to Elk and thus, the B&C reticle will be a very handy tool.

The .338 will be for Elk and heavier game.

Is my reasoning sound? Your thoughts are appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Yep, sounds like a plan to me Two superb chamberings and two of the industry's most practical scopes.

Mark,

I don't have any Leupolds with the B&C reticle, but I have several of the Century (100th year) model with the LR sighting dots placed identically to the crosshatches on the B&C reticle. I've become quite addicted to them! I have this model on both a .25-06 and a .300 H&H and it makes hitting anything the range of which you can accurately estimate a much easier task. The B&C additionally provides you with some windage assistance that the LR dots don't. This comes at the expense of a little more clutter in the sight picture, but I've heard very few complaints about the reticle being too "busy".

I think you are right to use the Leupold on the .300 for an additional reason: Its trajectory (assuming a 180 grain spitzer at about 2900 fps) will match the calibration on the B&C reticle a bit closer than a .338 with a 250 @ 2700 fps. My .300 H&H is dead on when zeroed at 200 yards with the 300, 400, and 500 yard reference points. Curioiusly, the .25-06 is similarly dead on if you simply substitute meters for yards.