Originally Posted by Oliveralan
no, i think you portrayed everything very well! thanks for typing it all up.
as jett stated, vectronix is looking mighty tempting... specifically plrf05 terrapin. No point owning high performance chambering if your rangefinder isnt up to the job.
Just my opinion here guys, but I'd suggest the PLRF10 over the 05.
Here's why; It's been my experience through testing and using a few of the best that the horizontal beam divergence is just as likely to give a false reading as excessive vertical dispersion. This is on relatively flat ground, like you both got a chance to experience here recently, and Especially
on small targets like a coyote or prarie dog or rock chuck. Perhaps not so much on a broadside deer or antelope. A lone sagebrush or dirt bank that's only a couple feet to the left or right of the intended target but as much as 50 yds behind it has given me a false reading many times.
The PLRF 10 is supposedly .3 vertical X 1.5 mil horizontal
The Leica 1600 is supposedly .5 X 2.5 mil
The PLRF 05 is supposedly only marginally better at .4 X 2.4 mil and over twice the money as the Leica.
Granted, the 05 is probably a stronger laser/or receiver so it may range further than the Leica.?
Even using the PLRF 10 just a couple weeks ago, it failed one of my tests and it failed while using it on a sandbag on the hood of the truck......as steady as I could be. I was trying to range a 10" diameter AR500 plate at 812 yds. There's a small dirt berm that is directly behind and extends horizontally a fair distance each side of the plate; the berm is 18 yds behind the plate. No matter where I held or how steady I held the PLRF 10, It gave readings off the berm rather than the plate.
Here's my hypothesis; At 810 yds, the vertical beam covers 8 3/4", surely small enough to hit only
the plate. However, the horizontal beam covered 43 3/4"........in other words, the majority of the beam was going to both sides of the plate (over 1 1/2 times the size of the plate extended beyond each side). I am assuming that since over 75%
of the beam was shooting outside the plate that it was much easier to bounce back from the berm than the plate, hell; makes sense right? I mean the majority of the beam was hitting the berm and not the plate.
Again, this was with the PLRF 10 which has the smallest divergence of them all and it was only 810 yds. But 20 yds at 810 is a miss with most cartridges. FWIW, my Leica 1600 has the same problem with this plate at 510 yds.
People who hunt steep country don't have this worry nearly as much as us "flat landers", but out here on the plains; a lone sagebrush will reflect back the laser quite a bit better than a deer or antelope or coyote will, and that lone brush just off to one side or the other, could easily be 20 yds or further beyond the game and still appear to be the same distance.
Just thought I'd pass this on.