I love the round myself, doesn’t loose that much to the 300WIN, can win back some weight, and certainly is milder to shoot.
This particular one was a Browning Hells Canyon. I have always likes the slick Browning action, which is in part to the three lugs and smaller bolt opening angle.
The Hells Canyon adds camo and ceracoating on the action and barrel. The ceracoating prevents any rust or patina forming – so makes it a good option for a gun that may be used in the wet.
This one had a Hardy on the front and a Sig BDX System on top.
Sig BDX Scope and Rangefinder
I had actually had a BDX Scope out a couple of weeks before on another rifle – but this one also included the rangefinder that talks to the scope to provide distance and additionally, enables a wind adjustment indicator function. Why you can’t have some form of wind indication going on without the Range Finder can only be explained by a market and sales decision – as the Range Finder doesn’t measure wind.
However, the actual setup was a breeze, after I had chronographed the rifle, I loaded up the projecile and velocity into the app on my phone, synced the scope and the rangefinder and we were done!
Supporter Bonus Content
Site supporters get to see the zeroing/test targets, ammo and velocity results and my thoughts on what I liked and what I would change with the rifle. This one – my thoughts on the Sig BDX system – including the issues I have with it.
Again, another 300WSM that just shoots well. Simple to seutp, zero and shoot out to distance.
- Ammo: Hornady Precision Hunter 200gr ELD-X
- Velocity: 2702 fps – 12/24 SD/ES
What would I change?
Replace the SIG.
On the whole, I am still not sold on the whole rangefinder/ballistics built into the scope side of things. I have setup several of the Eliminators, Swaro DS and Sigs now – and never really just meshed with them.
There is a couple of reasons, both workflow wise and technical.
Simply put, I don’t like having to range with the scope – I realise this is not the case with the SIG – but is with the Eliminator and DS – while I am sure it’s a fast for some forms of hunting – I don’t tend to hunt far enough where I need a rangefinder anyhow. For target shooting – you can’t pick up your rifle and range a selection of targets while on the firing line – it’s simply not an option.
Additionally, from a hunting point of view, I do like the idea of sitting down, sketching out a map of identifiable points and ranging them, much like a Sniper Field Range Card. The workflow works better for me and my memory.
Certainly, in regards to the Sig – I could see (and have spoken to people) about an effective method where one spotter is identifying and ranging targets, while the shooter then just needs to engage them. This would work better with the SIG binos, provides double identification of target and provides a nice workflow.
So, the SIG has it on that point – but would use the BDX KILO3000 as a preference – the same kind of system, but in Thermal would be an awesome option for Pest Control – as you could have two operators working in conjunction – again – doubling identification and ID duties. However, I don’t believe items like the Pulsar Accolade 2 currently offer this option.
The main issue though, is the scope reticle. It’s too thick. Because of the design, the electronics of the reticle itself seem etched onto the glass. And it’s like the heater element on your window screen. The thing is massive. Unlike the Swaro, where the data is projected (I think) onto the screen, even when off, the posts on the SIG are huge.
This may not be an issue for hunting, but when I am now used to small, thin, precise FFP reticles, it seems very large and clunky. The crosshairs covered the aiming dot on the 100m zero board.
It still shot fine, and I got great groups out of it, but it just seems a stepbackward.
In addition, because you have a dot for elevation, and a dot for wind (when used with the rangefinder) you are actually holding in imaginary land for shooting. Meaning – you are drawing an imaginary line down and across for your holding point. Again, workable, fine shorter ranges, but I am used to a more precise system now – either dialling elevation and holding wind on the reticle, or, the Christmas style reticles, where you have a definitive hold point as you move down and across in the reticle.
The inbuild (and arbatory) limiations would also do my head in. I have a Kestrel Elite – so – if I include that in the system (now with four components in it) – I can get a ballistic solution out as far as I can range. Without it, I believe the system is limited to around 500 yards. Sure – that is beyond my hunting distance anyhow – but for people wanting to use this both for hunting and target – do you use the inbuild out to 500, then switch back to dialing from there out? I dont like, or reccomend the idea of having to learn/master two systems – I would rather just simplify and use the one.
Oh. And the scope I used was broken. You could wiggle the diopter end of the scope (where you turn to focus the reticle) and the whole reticle would move within the scope. That obviously would move POA/POI. However – this also sounds like it is a warranty issue. But still. Pain in the Arse.
Personally, I would lean more to a Leupold with a CDS turret, Windplex reticle and a rangefinder bino. Each to their own though. I can see the benefit – but also think people would benefit more from not becoming reliant on a system that does it for them. I have one client who recently replaced the Swaro DS on his hunting scope for this reason – he wanted to learn and do more with ballistics and realised the DS had become a crutch.