Barr & Stroud Rangefinder

While I can see it being useful for many things, especially for the price, that level of accuracy is not enough to replace a laser IMHO. At 1500 yds hitting the target is hard enough, personally I think adding a 30 yd window of range uncertainty would preclude me, at least, from any hopes of a certain first round hit.
 
While I can see it being useful for many things, especially for the price, that level of accuracy is not enough to replace a laser IMHO. At 1500 yds hitting the target is hard enough, personally I think adding a 30 yd window of range uncertainty would preclude me, at least, from any hopes of a certain first round hit.

Jon,
If you are replying to me.
I was not talking about using a GPS to determine range beforehand, but rather after the fact.
 
I am with UnkB & BuffaloBob on this one. I have had my Wild for appx 8/9 yrs love it and will never part with it. Nothing comes close to it when setting up for some LR PD or bench shooting, no battery issues, weather issues, no reflective target issues. Not to mention the "Coolness" factor of having one when most dont even know what it is..

On the other hand, it stays home when deer hunting as it is not fer that!! Thats when then yardage pro comes along. They both have their uses.

However in my book, the coolness factor, the operational simplicity and unparalled reliability of the optical rangefinders is second to none..

Whatever floats your boat, grab your paddle and pull!!

Nodak
 
While I can see it being useful for many things, especially for the price, that level of accuracy is not enough to replace a laser IMHO. At 1500 yds hitting the target is hard enough, personally I think adding a 30 yd window of range uncertainty would preclude me, at least, from any hopes of a certain first round hit.

after reading this post by Jon A today and the post by yobuck yesterday, I must appologize because I assumed (dont EVER ASSUME anything) that people on LRH of all people would be able to appreciate what a rangefinder like this can do and its limitations.
obviously Buffalobob is the only person that could see where I was coming from.
If you look at the pictures that Buffalobob posted (thanks BB) he has his Swarovski LG rangefinder along side his Wild rangefinder.
A BARR & STROUD RANGEFINDER or a WILD IS NOT (can you read this) IS NOT meant to REPLACE your laser rangefinder, it is meant to COMPLEMENT your laser rangefinder.
It is much bigger and more bulky, you cant put it in your pocket but it will work in any weather or light condition and yes jonny it is as accurate or more so than any laser unit but will range to much greater distances and will last forever.
If you are a glass is half empty person dont buy one, if you dont range past 1500 very often DONT buy one, if you are cynical about proven technology that has been around since before you were born , please dont buy one.
IF IF IF (are you pickin up on this) you are looking for a rangefinder that was made with great craftmanship that will last forever and extend your range beyond what is capable of a civilian laser rangefinder please consider buying one ASAP before they are no longer avalible.
I hope this cleared up some of the confusion.
UB
 
A BARR & STROUD RANGEFINDER or a WILD IS NOT (can you read this) IS NOT meant to REPLACE your laser rangefinder, it is meant to COMPLEMENT your laser rangefinder.
OK then. Sorry for the confusion. But it had absolutely nothing to do with my "lack of appreciation." It was due to your statement:
An optical range finder will still be in use by your great grand children decades after you and your lazer eeerrr laser rangefinder have decomposed.
 
i dont think its a question of comparing the quality of 2 different units. its more of what will work for you for the type of use you need it for. certainly a long range prarie dog hunter in open terrain would be better served with a barr&stroud or similar unit. if your hunting close by your vehicle, again the barr&stroud is as good as it gets. but portable they are not. we have been using a book we made up years ago, of the spots we walk to. using the barr&stroud we ranged various rocks etc. and made up references for all those spots. it works fine for us. we dont take the rangefinder along. its not a perfect situation however. that is where the little lazers pay off. for the most part, we could get by without any rangefinder. we know our spots well enough to get very close. since we always use a spotter anyway, its the piece of equiptment we least need. the same argument and logic can be applied to binnoculars. the large ww2 binnoculars, such as the 20x120 battleship type, or the 10x80 flak glasses, are head and shoulders above as for quality. but for practicality in a hunting situation, a valid argument can be made against them. so again, it comes down to what works for you for your type of use.
 
uncle b, ive been away for a few weeks due to ike. im just getting caught up on my reading. i dont know how long youve been around these rangefinders, but ive owned one for about 40 years. they are not the bullet proof units you think they are. many are coming undone due to lens seperation caused by glue failure. remember, most are 60 or more years old. lens seperation is very common on ww2 optics of all types. as for repairing them, only a fool or a qualified optic man should attempt that. your friends at duetsh optik will confirm that for you. with regard to my comment on distance being determined by how far we see hits. that has nothing to do with ranging distance. we always use a spotter who is using very good large tripod mounted binnoculars. when he says he cant see the bullets hit, we stop shooting. now if that statement reminds you of a woman having her period thats your problem, not mine. you see, only a fool or someone lacking in experience, would completly trust a rangefinder, a chart, or his so called ability to read conditions. shooting at prarie dogs on a dirt mound and seeing dust fly on the shot, isnt anything like shooting at a deer standing on a distant hillside in trees. youve obviously not experienced that or you would have known what i was talking about. and no im not the distance police. but fact is much of the talk about distance is ********. yes it can and is done on a regular basis. but mostly by those using a team of experienced people, using good equiptment. especially on shots beyond 1000 yds. rangefinders and charts are necessary tools. but only to get inside the ballpark. after that it takes ability.
 
uncle b, ive been away for a few weeks due to ike. im just getting caught up on my reading. i dont know how long youve been around these rangefinders, but ive owned one for about 40 years. they are not the bullet proof units you think they are. many are coming undone due to lens seperation caused by glue failure. remember, most are 60 or more years old. lens seperation is very common on ww2 optics of all types. as for repairing them, only a fool or a qualified optic man should attempt that. your friends at duetsh optik will confirm that for you. with regard to my comment on distance being determined by how far we see hits. that has nothing to do with ranging distance. we always use a spotter who is using very good large tripod mounted binnoculars. when he says he cant see the bullets hit, we stop shooting. now if that statement reminds you of a woman having her period thats your problem, not mine. you see, only a fool or someone lacking in experience, would completly trust a rangefinder, a chart, or his so called ability to read conditions. shooting at prarie dogs on a dirt mound and seeing dust fly on the shot, isnt anything like shooting at a deer standing on a distant hillside in trees. youve obviously not experienced that or you would have known what i was talking about. and no im not the distance police. but fact is much of the talk about distance is ********. yes it can and is done on a regular basis. but mostly by those using a team of experienced people, using good equiptment. especially on shots beyond 1000 yds. rangefinders and charts are necessary tools. but only to get inside the ballpark. after that it takes ability.

I had quite a rebuttal prepared for this post until I realized after reading it twice, that yobuck may have made the worst post ever on LRH. I hope you are as sorry for posting it as I am for reading it . Guessing Ike was harder on you than I could have imagined.
UB
 
I had quite a rebuttal prepared for this post until I realized after reading it twice, that yobuck may have made the worst post ever on LRH. I hope you are as sorry for posting it as I am for reading it . Guessing Ike was harder on you than I could have imagined.
UB
actually, ike missed us completly. but since we left anyway, we decided to take a little time away.

certainly there is lots of room for opinions other than mine. in fact some ive seen on this site have caught my attention. i fully intend to try them.

but i really would have liked to hear yours.

other than how stupid we are over not completly sharing your views on the rangefinders many of us own of coarse. so call it ignorance on my part if you like. i only know what i was taught.

back in pa, there are alot of other ignorant but very successful long range hunters and shooters. in a few weeks ill be back there enjoying their company. yobuck
 
Warning! This thread is more than 16 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top