biggrizz408
Well-Known Member
I am going to buy my first rangefinder and I was wanting some first hand experiance
Who makes the best rangefinder
- Thread starter biggrizz408
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Ernie
SPONSOR
Best in what reguards? Distance in bad lighting? Speed of read out? In order words what are you needing and/or expecting from a range finder?
ZSteinle
Well-Known Member
I have an Bushnell 1500 with arc and seems to work very well for the price. In partly cloudy conditions i have ranged a pine tree at 1660 yards. deer sized objects expect ranges to about 700 yards. As far as i have heard for the best ranging capabilities the swarovski is the best you can get for under a $1,000
geargrinder
Well-Known Member
The best is the Swaro. It's just expensive. I've used a few others but nothing comes close to the abilities of the Swaro.
biggrizz408
Well-Known Member
The best all around, speed of read out is inportant as well distance in bad lighting, and price.
gbp
Well-Known Member
This comparason is a little old but still very usefull. I have a Swaro, Bushnell and a Newcon. I personally like the Swaro best.
Laser RangeFinders
Laser RangeFinders
Merlin
Well-Known Member
Have to agree with Boss. I bought the Swaro to replace the Bushnell Elite 1500. Wish I would have bought the Swaro in the first place. Best I've seen.
new shooter
Well-Known Member
+ 1 swaro
Broz
Well-Known Member
I have the swaro now. Had one of the older Leica 1200's. I am told the new smaller Leica is great and I just may be changing to one. I had an issue with beam width last week. Here is the thread I started.
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f23/rangefinder-reticles-1000-beyond-36427/
It seems the swaro has a 6 foot tall beam at 1000 yards. This may not affect you depending on how you will use it, angles and conditions. But it got me this time. The next evening I shot a doe at 1137 using the swaro rangefinder. But the angle I was at made for easier ranging. I am looking for a shorter beam and the Leica (if I understand correctly) just might be the ticket.
Worth looking into.
JMO
Jeff
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f23/rangefinder-reticles-1000-beyond-36427/
It seems the swaro has a 6 foot tall beam at 1000 yards. This may not affect you depending on how you will use it, angles and conditions. But it got me this time. The next evening I shot a doe at 1137 using the swaro rangefinder. But the angle I was at made for easier ranging. I am looking for a shorter beam and the Leica (if I understand correctly) just might be the ticket.
Worth looking into.
JMO
Jeff
I have the CRF and just don't trade your swaro off on one 
If you want, just get hold of one and compare the two side by side. I have never done it, but I've read many many articles on the two. I like the CRF, but it seems the swaro's only disadvantages are price, a larger aiming reticle, and larger heavior physical size. Other than that, the Swaro is the champ.
If you want, just get hold of one and compare the two side by side. I have never done it, but I've read many many articles on the two. I like the CRF, but it seems the swaro's only disadvantages are price, a larger aiming reticle, and larger heavior physical size. Other than that, the Swaro is the champ.I have a Swaro. Before I bought mine I compared the Swaro to the CRF 1200 at Sportsman's Warehouse. The salesman was happy get out of the store for awhile and let me take my time evaluating them side-by-side.
The difference to me was huge. The FOV and image quality was definitely better with the Swaro. The Leica was ok, but it seemed limited to ranging only, whereas the Swaro could be used in the place of binos in a pinch (I actually leave my binos in camp for bowhunting).
I tried ranging a very large white house (basically the broad side of a small barn) and the Leica only worked 2-3 times out of 10 tries. This house was probably 30 feet by 50 feet, at least and 1000 yards away. The salesman also tried ranging the house with the same results. We were able to brace the rangefinders, but didn't use a tripod. The Swaro worked 10 out of 10 times. That was just one example. We ranged small and large objects all over that hillside and the Swaro was awesome. The CRF and LRF (they had some of those too), were only ok. Sometimes you would get a reading with the two Leica, but not always. The Swaro just plain worked. Plus I could actually glass the hillside.
If I wanted a rangefinder for hunting at normal ranges and needed it to be lightweight, then I would consider the LRF. But, if you want better image quality and the ability to range out to 2000 yards (which I have done) then the Swaro is the way to go. The Swaro works for bowhunting (where I don't bring binos and it saves weight), rifle hunting, and target shooting (as far as I could think about shooting). I felt that if I got the LRF, I would end up replacing it down the road. The Swaro was a better longterm investment for me.
Also, I have read reviews that state the Swaro donut reticle gets washed out. I have not found this to be true. If you have your eye postioned incorrectly it can appear washed out. I've never had any problems even in the brightest, sunniest days. The claims that it is slow don't bother me. Once you spend time with it you learn to press the button and wait a second. It works just fine and doesn't seem slow to me. Some people complain about the size of the reticle or beam size but I have spent hours ranging all sorts of objects and get good readings. Maybe I just haven't had a situation for this to be an issue.
I have no complaints regarding the Swaro, other than price (paid $720). I would not hestitate to buy another one and wouldn't even bother with any of the others. If money were a concern I would get the Elite and not even bother with the Leica, but that is just my opinion.
The difference to me was huge. The FOV and image quality was definitely better with the Swaro. The Leica was ok, but it seemed limited to ranging only, whereas the Swaro could be used in the place of binos in a pinch (I actually leave my binos in camp for bowhunting).
I tried ranging a very large white house (basically the broad side of a small barn) and the Leica only worked 2-3 times out of 10 tries. This house was probably 30 feet by 50 feet, at least and 1000 yards away. The salesman also tried ranging the house with the same results. We were able to brace the rangefinders, but didn't use a tripod. The Swaro worked 10 out of 10 times. That was just one example. We ranged small and large objects all over that hillside and the Swaro was awesome. The CRF and LRF (they had some of those too), were only ok. Sometimes you would get a reading with the two Leica, but not always. The Swaro just plain worked. Plus I could actually glass the hillside.
If I wanted a rangefinder for hunting at normal ranges and needed it to be lightweight, then I would consider the LRF. But, if you want better image quality and the ability to range out to 2000 yards (which I have done) then the Swaro is the way to go. The Swaro works for bowhunting (where I don't bring binos and it saves weight), rifle hunting, and target shooting (as far as I could think about shooting). I felt that if I got the LRF, I would end up replacing it down the road. The Swaro was a better longterm investment for me.
Also, I have read reviews that state the Swaro donut reticle gets washed out. I have not found this to be true. If you have your eye postioned incorrectly it can appear washed out. I've never had any problems even in the brightest, sunniest days. The claims that it is slow don't bother me. Once you spend time with it you learn to press the button and wait a second. It works just fine and doesn't seem slow to me. Some people complain about the size of the reticle or beam size but I have spent hours ranging all sorts of objects and get good readings. Maybe I just haven't had a situation for this to be an issue.
I have no complaints regarding the Swaro, other than price (paid $720). I would not hestitate to buy another one and wouldn't even bother with any of the others. If money were a concern I would get the Elite and not even bother with the Leica, but that is just my opinion.
