Looking at a scope with this, and would like to hear practical experience.

After reviewing the site (https://www.leupold.com/media/manuals/ballistic-aiming-system-manual.pdf) P1-10, it looks like the most adjustability you have is based on 3 preset groups based on different cartridges.

So if you have a cartridge from one of the groups, and you dial the scope in for 200, how close to accurate can you expect the other lower crosshairs to be?

Has anyone tried this with a cartridge not in one of Leupold's groups?

Thanks in advance.

The Leupold B&C reticle simply places its reference marks at a certain minute of angle below the central crosshair. Check the trajectory of your load (use the JBM program http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmtraj-5.1.cgi or some other dependable reference) to see how closely it matches the spacing of the reference marks of the B&C reticle.

Most reasonably high velocity spitzer loads from modern hunting rifles fall within an MOA or so of each graduation. I personally MUCH prefer the B&C, or even the simpler Leupold LR reticle, to any type of fiddling with the elevation knob of the scope.

I'd agree with that, Stonecreek. I've long thought the trajectories of my favorites the .30-06 and 338WM were remarkably similar in their classic bullet weights.

And yes, fiddling with the knobs in the field is a second-rate idea IMHO.

I use this on my 338WM; at 8X it works fine out to 500. I would recommend you zero at 500 yards using the bottom of the post (that is the 500 yd zero for the B&C reticle) if possible.

It is not failproof. I was practicing at 400 yards the other day and instead of using the 400 crosshair, I used the 300 and missed my first shot. You need to consciously think about which reticle to use. On a general big game rifle like the 338 WM, I prefer it; if I know I won't be shooting past 200 yards (eg deer hunting in MN), I prefer a standard duplex.

quote:

if I know I won't be shooting past 200 yards (eg deer hunting in MN), I prefer a standard duplex.

Agreed! If your anticipated longest shot is limited to less than the "point blank" range of your rifle, then yes, simpler is better! It's hard to beat the Duplex for a clean and quick reticle. Zero it for 200 yards and forget it.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:

quote:

if I know I won't be shooting past 200 yards (eg deer hunting in MN), I prefer a standard duplex.

Agreed! If your anticipated longest shot is limited to less than the "point blank" range of your rifle, then yes, simpler is better! It's hard to beat the Duplex for a clean and quick reticle. Zero it for 200 yards and forget it.

And, the bottom post on most duplexes works out to a 300 yard zero - that covers 90% of the shots I have ever made (on animals at least).

quote:

It is not failproof. I was practicing at 400 yards the other day and instead of using the 400 crosshair, I used the 300 and missed my first shot

User error is not the products fault.

I have several B@C reticles I like them thou I prefer plain mil-dots.