Burris Fullfield E1 4.5-14 x 42mm with Ballistic Plex

[Artoaster]

I just purchased this scope for $152 and got Burris Zee medium rings for another $35. Mounted on Ruger American Go Wild 30-06. I debated on reticle style and settled on the Ballistic Plex. The great thing about this is that Burris has a calculator online that let's you enter exterior ballistic data or factory loads and then calculates the drop for the BDC lines. As you change magnification settings the distances for the BDC lines change allowing you to find what range and what magnification setting will get you your desired firing solution.

Burris did a pretty good job with this online calculator. It can be found on their website.

 

[beetroot]

If you don't mind me asking, who was selling flux capacitors in 2006? If may be useful to know in the future/past.

 

[Artoaster]

I do mind. Perhaps you can elaborate on your motives?

 

[308pirate]

I do mind. Perhaps you can elaborate on your motives?

Pay no mind to him. There's a subgroup of people who can't understand that not every shooting problem needs a giant mil/mil/ffp scope with target/tactical turrets.

OTOH nothing that Burris is offering with your scope including the software to fine tune the bdc drop value is new.

 

[Artoaster]

Thanks. If the mindset is extreme long range shooting, which is apparently trending, then this post must appear dated to some. My intentions, as you can see only reside in traditional hunting ranges up to an ethical 300-400 yards (depending on marksmanship skill). The rifle and scope are a new purchase within the budget of $1K or less. The reply was either about a movie a long time ago or a poke at someone perceived to be a Fudd, I guess.

 

[Birddog6424]

The ballistic reticle is still extremely popular amongst the rank and file shooters. This just happens to be a forum dedicated to long range precision, where fine mil reticles are the most popular. So discussions on BDCs won't get a lot of love.

I just had this conversation with a Burris sales manager about a month ago. We were discussing the new Veracity PH. A hunting optic with a heads up display inside that just came to market this year. I asked if they planned on adding a simple mil or moa SCR, and he told me they don't sell. They offered the SCR in the Veracity in the past and they couldn't move them. The BDC reticles rule the roost with the hunting crowd. And justifiably so. They are simple and easy to use, and extremely functional at the ranges the average hunter expects to shoot.

 

[308pirate]

The BDC reticles rule the roost with the hunting crowd. And justifiably so. They are simple and easy to use, and extremely functional at the ranges the average hunter expects to shoot.

And they provide all the precision needed within their operating envelope.

 

[KYAggie]

And they provide all the precision needed within their operating envelope.

Exactly! I have a 1-6 Burris I put on my Marlin 336 Cowboy to see what the long range potential was, not for hunting, but target shooting. It has a BDC reticle and the first time I tried it out I hit the steel 14”x16” target at 600 yards. Strelock told me what power setting and hold to use and it was spot on. I was using a discontinued Nosler 140 Custom Competition that has a similar profile and seats the same as the 160 Hornady Leverevolution; I put one in the chamber and one in the magazine, never two. Point is, the BDC worked great for this application as does my three old Zeiss Conquest scopes with their Rapid Z-800 BDC reticle and they weigh a lot less than a FFP target turret scope. Not everything needs a FFP.

 

[Artoaster]

The ballistic reticle is still extremely popular amongst the rank and file shooters. This just happens to be a forum dedicated to long range precision, where fine mil reticles are the most popular. So discussions on BDCs won't get a lot of love.

I just had this conversation with a Burris sales manager about a month ago. We were discussing the new Veracity PH. A hunting optic with a heads up display inside that just came to market this year. I asked if they planned on adding a simple mil or moa SCR, and he told me they don't sell. They offered the SCR in the Veracity in the past and they couldn't move them. The BDC reticles rule the roost with the hunting crowd. And justifiably so. They are simple and easy to use, and extremely functional at the ranges the average hunter expects to shoot.

Great. I'll just mount my Schmidt and Bender First Focal Plane (FFP) 10-60x56 Mil-Radian scope. That, and fire up the flux capacitor. Thanks all.

 

[krw]

I mounted one of these scopes in a Tikka 223. Pure poison on Blk birds that mess with calves and coyotes. Rifle stays in farm truck. I think these are pretty good scopes for the money. I aint gonna put a NF on a rifle to haul in the work truck. Holds zero and decent glass

 

[beetroot]

Pay no mind to him. There's a subgroup of people who can't understand that not every shooting problem needs a giant mil/mil/ffp scope with target/tactical turrets.

I don't actually believe that, not even close.
My first decent scope I bought was a FF2 3-9x40 which I still have, it doesn't get much use though.

BDC reticles are an improvement over the old 1" high at 100yards and the hold yop of shoulder past 300, but they are objectively worse that a Mil/MOA scope.The only time they really make sense is for run and type events, or cases where the BDC does properly match your ballastics.
If you are required to dial down from 14x to 12.7x to get the BDC to line up then it's a recipe for diaster.

Though I admit the average hunter who doesn't shoot past 300 much or at is well serviced with a BDC, it's still a worse system than straight Mil/MOA regardless of if it works or not. There is a good reason people people who get into PRS/field/competition/long range shooting don't usually go back to "Fudd" scopes.

 

[beetroot]

OTOH nothing that Burris is offering with your scope including the software to fine tune the bdc drop value is new.

This is more what I was referring too with my "straight otta 2006" comment.
Burris has always provided information about how to "tune" the reticle to your particular load.

Heck, Burris has even always been aware that there are flaws with BDC, and that they can give hunters a false sense of confidence.

 

[beetroot]

I just had this conversation with a Burris sales manager about a month ago. We were discussing the new Veracity PH. A hunting optic with a heads up display inside that just came to market this year. I asked if they planned on adding a simple mil or moa SCR, and he told me they don't sell. They offered the SCR in the Veracity in the past and they couldn't move them.

I wonder what "couldn't move them" actually means. Sounds like a similar situation to the folk who want Bushnell to offer the LRHS/LRTS again, but Bushnell says they don't sell. Scopes like this obviously do sell, maybe just not in enough numbers to justify their existence.

I always wanted a Veractity scope (when they first came out that is? with a SCR type reticle, could never understand why the only offered BDC despite being FFP. The XTR2 seemed to big and heavy for hunting/cross over use but the Veractity had the "wrong reticle" hence why I never bought one.

 

[Birddog6424]

I wonder what "couldn't move them" actually means. Sounds like a similar situation to the folk who want Bushnell to offer the LRHS/LRTS again, but Bushnell says they don't sell. Scopes like this obviously do sell, maybe just not in enough numbers to justify their existence.

I always wanted a Veractity scope (when they first came out that is? with a SCR type reticle, could never understand why the only offered BDC despite being FFP. The XTR2 seemed to big and heavy for hunting/cross over use but the Veractity had the "wrong reticle" hence why I never bought one.

I'm sure they have their litmus of what good sales performance looks like.

They offered the Veracity in a MOA SCR reticle for a bit. I can't recall if I ever saw it in mils. But I guess it wasn't as popular.

Speaking for myself, I've never been a lightweight scope guy, or lightweight rifle guy for that matter. My 300 Norma weighs 12lbs with my 30x XTRIII on it. My pack usually weighs around 30lbs. So 6 to 8ozs doesn't mean anything to me.

 

[308pirate]

I don't actually believe that, not even close.
My first decent scope I bought was a FF2 3-9x40 which I still have, it doesn't get much use though.

BDC reticles are an improvement over the old 1" high at 100yards and the hold yop of shoulder past 300, but they are objectively worse that a Mil/MOA scope.The only time they really make sense is for run and type events, or cases where the BDC does properly match your ballastics.
If you are required to dial down from 14x to 12.7x to get the BDC to line up then it's a recipe for diaster.

Though I admit the average hunter who doesn't shoot past 300 much or at is well serviced with a BDC, it's still a worse system than straight Mil/MOA regardless of if it works or not. There is a good reason people people who get into PRS/field/competition/long range shooting don't usually go back to "Fudd" scopes.

I'm not going to get into an argument with you. BDC reticles, in the hands of people who know how to use them, are extremely effective in many applications.

My very first hunting scope was a Burris Full field 3-9x40 with a very clean BDC reticle. Killing deer with it out to 400 yards with either a 30-06 or a 300 wm was stupid easy because I can't remember any instance in which I had time to dial or even look at a dope chart. It was see deer estimate range put bdc stadia on it kill, about as fast as it takes to read this.

Ever wonder why many infantry rifles around the world have bdc optics on top?

I'll make you an imperfect pistol analogy. A Phoenix Redback is objectively superior to a CZ Shadow 2. In their practical application that "superiority" doesn't matter.

Even though several of my rifles have mil/mil/ffp optic I still have rifles with bdc scopes and with reflex optics because those are the most efficient choices for the role.

 

[Artoaster]

Anybody remember what the philosophy of use would be for a lightweight Ruger bolt rifle equipped with a 4.5-14 x 42mm lightweight scope might be? Hunting. Shooting an animal within ethical reasons.

The only reason to shoot paper or steel would be to learn the system and/or sight it in. If you spent $1K then you get a budget system that would far outperform almost all shooters at killing a certain size and type of animal.

So, under those parameters most reticles will do a good job on framing an animal within range and to allow the shooter to make his/her decision. The scope and the rifle are mostly chosen depending on what is shot at and how far. The smaller the target and the further away it is, the more it a system costs and the more complex everything becomes.

I appreciate all the input. We all shoot differently, at different things and at different ranges all with the same goal. A lot of opinions here show the type of experience that I can benefit from.

BTW, I almost pulled the trigger on the Burris with the MOA. It seems to outsell other reticles.

 

[Butleroutdoors]

I have two of the Burris SFP 4.5x14. One Predator Quest E1 with BDC in a 223 truck gun and one on a Ruger No 1 25-06 Deer/Antelope rife with MOA Long Range Reticle. Both are awesome scopes.

 

[Birddog6424]

I'm a fan of the BDC. I understand it's limitations, but used properly, it's very effective..

I love my BDC in my 1-8 XTRIIs. I have a couple of them, and I've ran them on a 308 and 223 3 Gun rifles for years. I can transition through a variety of targets from 600 yards and in without but a moments thought to find my hold. I know what yardage is represented by each line for both rifles. I think they are very intuitive when you use them.

 

[want2ride]

I love my E1FFP Burris Veracity. I have the external MAD knob and generally use the BDC reticle for 300 and under and dial if it is more. It just makes sense to me to have a BDC reticle on a FFP scope.

 

[beetroot]

Ever wonder why many infantry rifles around the world have bdc optics on top?

That's perfectly understandable as one of the caveats I gave was if the BDC actually matches your cartridge, then its a good idea.

 

[chevy_man]

Any bdc reticle in a sfp design is asking for trouble at some point.


I used to think they were cool. Now I'm stuck spending $2k+ on every rifle because now that I've crossed into the ffp/mill reticle realm I can't leave it.

 

[Ronws]

You can also get accurate BDC by using any number of ballistic calculators, like Shooter's Calculator in order to "true" the reticle.

Strelok Pro would do that for you, if you have it. You input the scope reticle you are using and then your ballistic data, whether box info or data that you collected with your chrono and it gives you what each stadia actually means.

 

[308pirate]

Any bdc reticle in a sfp design is asking for trouble at some point.


I used to think they were cool. Now I'm stuck spending $2k+ on every rifle because now that I've crossed into the ffp/mill reticle realm I can't leave it.

A capable rifleman isn't limited to one system

 

[hafejd30]

I have several of the Burris E1 4.5-14 ballistic plex. On AR and hunting rifles. They’re my go to recommendation for guys who want a decent hunting scope but don’t want to spend a bunch of $$ or have a bunch of extra weight

For what they are and the purpose they serve they are still excellent choices

They are in SFP as they should be. Cause ffp scopes suck for low light/quick accusation when dialed down. Especially if your battery dies on your illuminated reticle

 

[beetroot]

They are in SFP as they should be. Cause ffp scopes suck for low light/quick accusation when dialed down. Especially if your battery dies on your illuminated reticle

Only because manufacturers are incapable (or unwilling) to put a decent reticle in them.
Especially lower magnification scopes (under 15x top end) there is zero reason to have reticles that are .03mil thick, not to mention putting 10mils worth of wind holds in everything.

FFP scopes (or many SFP scopes for that matter) don't appeal to hunters because they aren't fit for purpose.
The annoying part is that a thin FFP reticle is not much worse than a fine duplex reticle, which rightly hunters don't use as they are too thin, we just need a FFP design that looks like a normal duplex at lower magnification.

For a while I had a VX5hd with the Impact 29 reticle, which was completely useless in low light, the reticle was way too busy and too thin that it effectively just vanished. I have some FFP scope that are more visible on low magnifciation than what that reticle is,

Maybe a FFP reticle on a 8x or 10x mag range is hard to get right, but 4x, 5x, 6x really isn't that hard to do.

 

[beetroot]

You can also get accurate BDC by using any number of ballistic calculators, like Shooter's Calculator in order to "true" the reticle.

Strelok Pro would do that for you, if you have it. You input the scope reticle you are using and then your ballistic data, whether box info or data that you collected with your chrono and it gives you what each stadia actually means.

But at that point the BDC is now effectively just a bastardized MOA reticle (see the Burris subtensions image for the MOA values).
A standard MOA/Mil reticle will do the same job but be more useful/versatile.

BDC does have some use (like for military or 3gun type stuff where the BDC actually matches your ballistics) but once you start having to refer to a drop chart taped to your rifle to know what each stadia is related to the BDC is no longer any more use than Mildot.

 

[Ronws]

But at that point the BDC is now effectively just a bastardized MOA reticle (see the Burris subtensions image for the MOA values).
A standard MOA/Mil reticle will do the same job but be more useful/versatile.

BDC does have some use (like for military or 3gun type stuff where the BDC actually matches your ballistics) but once you start having to refer to a drop chart taped to your rifle to know what each stadia is related to the BDC is no longer any more use than Mildot.

I have one BDC scope. But I prefer the FFP scopes with the christmas tree because I like to be able to range in the reticle. I am kind of a math geek that way. But I can see others using BDC well. Especially with Straight Wall or muzzleloader. You are close enough you are almost using it like a red dot.

For that matter, I have not put any optics on my Dissipator M4 A3 (5.56.) It still has the iron sights on it, which are fine for me because that is not a "long range" rifle.

 

[chevy_man]

A capable rifleman isn't limited to one system

But a smart one uses what he's familiar with.


If I'm only going to shoot the rifle a handful of shots a year, why wouldn't I make it similar or identical to the match rifle that I fire thousands from?

 

[nevadany]

Older thread, sorry... not sorry.

I have a couple of the E1 4.4-14's also. I think they are great for the $$. I have one on an AR22, the other is on my son's 10/22...both are set up with bull barrels...not going to call them target rifles, but they are both very good shooters.

I had my AR22 out yesterday and after sighting after a rebuild then pulling some groups at 50 yards, I decided to try and hit the 12x12 steel plate at 200.

I agree with the OP about the Burris ballistic calculator. You can input your exact ammo, and zero distance, and it'll spit out what the distance for each subtension is at a set power, through the 4.5-14 range, in 0.5x increments.

I did that, printed them out and made a little booklet. I flipped through it, selected the closest zoom/subtension to 200, and after a couple of sighters to figure out my hold and I was able to hit the plate consistently.

Anyway, maybe old tech, but new to some. It's great that Burris provides it, and that the tool (there are a lot of tools in here) is there to use.

DW