Spike Camp

Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle

Michiganhunter

  • ****
  • 328
  • Honor is the gift you give to yourself
    • View Profile
Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« on: June 08, 2017, 06:09:31 PM »
I know all the rage nowadays is long distance shooting with the scope reticle being ballistic plex, BDC, etc.... if you look at all the scope manufacturers offerings, you really have to search hard to find a basic plex or heavy plex.

I tried one scope with a ballistic plex and found it too difficult to see in low light conditions and it takes too much time to focus on a walking deer. At least for me it does.

I purchased a couple Leupold scopes with a heavy duplex and a couple with the standard duplex.
I use the standard duplex in a 40mm objective lens for hunting mule deer, antelope and elk out west.
I use the heavy duplex for whitetails and black bear in Michigan. Perfect for low light of dawn and dusk and also middle of the day in the dark woods of cedar and pine. The heavy duplex with scopes that have 50 or 56mm objective lens are now my choices.The heavy duplex does not block out too much of a deer out to even 300 yards.

Of course, this is my preference and opinion. In my 50 plus years of hunting I have changed my ideas of how things should be done many times. I thought my first gun, a 30-30 with iron sights,would be all I would ever need. Until I handled a Weatherby.300 with a 3-9x40 scope.


« Last Edit: June 08, 2017, 06:12:39 PM by Michiganhunter »
If you are arguing with an idiot and someone passes by, they don't know who's the idiot.

Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2017, 06:59:16 PM »
I am also a fan of an uncluttered reticle.A lot like them though.In deep cover early and late,especially on black haired hogs ,the scopes with a lighted reticle sure come in handy.
Roger
Faster horses,younger women,older whiskey,and more money.

.257

  • *****
  • 913
    • View Profile
Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2017, 02:48:31 AM »
I used a Leupold with the standard duplex for years on everything. Just learned where to hold out at longer ranges with different calibers.

Few years back I looked through a Zeiss with the rapid 600 reticle, bought one and have used it on my 338 wm ever since.
There's not a lot to it and is very fast and easy to use. Doesn't bother me in close range hunting in the timber.

I agree the lighted reticle's are nice. I have one on my crossbow "I can no longer pull a bow" just make sure it is legal in the state you are hunting in.
Mike

dubyam

  • *****
  • 4734
    • View Profile
Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2017, 08:06:25 AM »
I like simple ballistic reticles. Probably the very best one I have is in a Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x40, from back in about 2004. It's a series of additional lines at 3/6/9/12MOA below the crosshair, all standard duplex wire thickness. Each line is 2x as wide as it is below the crosshair, so the 3MOA line is 3MOA low, and extends 3MOA to the left and right of the vertical wire, the 6MOA IS 6MOA low and extends 6MOA to the left and right, and so forth. Knowing these standard drop and windage marks allows for both range and windage correction pretty easily. I shot out my range card on that rifle and have it printed out and attached to the rifle. I generally re-memorize it, along with one other drop card, at the beginning of the season. Beyond that, I use the point blank range system and memorize three distances for every other rifle I own: dead-hold, halfway up to top of back, and top of back. That gets me out to 400-500yds with every rifle I own. Most I won't shoot past 350, but a couple are good to 500, which is my personal on-game limit.

I have one heavy duplex scope and it is truly grand in heavy timber at 5min before end of legal shooting hours.
I believe this is a practical world, and in it I can count only on what I can earn.  Therefore I believe in work, hard work. - The Auburn Creed
The older I get, the less stock I place in what men say, and the more I place in what men do. - Andrew Carnegie

Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2017, 12:04:08 PM »
I have an original short Leupold Vari X III 1.75 X 6 with Leupold's HEAVY Duplex reticle.  It is mounted on my Remington Model 7600 18.5" barreled CARBINE 30/06.  This combo IMO cannot be beat for deer and black bear in heavy thick cover. It is fast, accurate and powerful.  That HEAVY reticle really stands out in low light conditions.

Michiganhunter

  • ****
  • 328
  • Honor is the gift you give to yourself
    • View Profile
Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2017, 01:26:57 PM »
I was at a bear camp with a gentleman from Germany hunting in Ontario a few years back. He used a Schmidt-Bender 2.5-10x56 with a german#1 Reticle. It has a thick post reticle that I looked through at night. A person could realistically hunt at night with that scope if it was legal where you are hunting. In Europe, several countries permit hunting for certain species at night. I looked that scope up when I returned home and that scope sold for $2400. I could not afford or bring myself to spend that kind of money. A great scope like a Leupold VX III with a heavy duplex is perfect for low light in the woods.

I have a pair of Swarovski binoculars i bought back in the 90's. They are worth the money. I used them so much I had to send them in to get a new center focus wheel replaced. To this day I have never regretted spending so much money on binoculars.
The Leupold vxIII 1.75-6 with the heavy duplex is,perhaps, the best set up for deer,elk or bear east of the Mississippi.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 05:53:43 PM by Michiganhunter »
If you are arguing with an idiot and someone passes by, they don't know who's the idiot.

Michiganhunter

  • ****
  • 328
  • Honor is the gift you give to yourself
    • View Profile
Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #6 on: March 16, 2018, 07:48:37 AM »
I have an original short Leupold Vari X III 1.75 X 6 with Leupold's HEAVY Duplex reticle.  It is mounted on my Remington Model 7600 18.5" barreled CARBINE 30/06.  This combo IMO cannot be beat for deer and black bear in heavy thick cover. It is fast, accurate and powerful.  That HEAVY reticle really stands out in low light conditions.
I had this exact scope on a .338-06 A Square and then sold the rifle because I wanted something else. The guy didnít want the scope, just the rifle. I mounted the scope on a bolt action rem 700 with a short 18.5Ē barrel that I used 220 gr rem core-lok round nose soft point ammo. I planned on using it for black bear at a bait station in a really thick and dark cedar swamp in northern Michigan. The shots would be around 40 yds. I didnít get a bear in that spot but shot one, about a 175 lbs boar, around 100 yds from a tree stand with my older 1971 .300 Wby and 180 gr factory ammo I purchased way back in 1973. I used a 3-9 Weatherby scope that came with that used rifle. That spot was where a tornado had touched down and uprooted an area about 300 yds in diameter on state land about 2 miles from our farm. That was my first Weatherby that I earned baling, stacking and then putting up that hay in a barn, cleaning a chicken coop and splitting firewood for a neighborhood farmer. It was a great moment when that farmer handed me my dream rifle much earlier than I expected.
Itís easy to remember those times when your physical effort earned you a precious item.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2018, 07:53:58 AM by Michiganhunter »
If you are arguing with an idiot and someone passes by, they don't know who's the idiot.

Stacy

  • ****
  • 438
    • View Profile
Re: Heavy Duplex Reticle vs Ballistic Plex Reticle
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2018, 06:52:07 AM »
I've been using the Leupold duplex and the Zeiss z-Plex. I generally sight in my rifles using either the maximum point blank range method or a variation of it and keep my shots within 300 yards so I don't need anything extra within the reticle to help with holdover. It's worked okay for me so far.