Leica 1600b inaccurate?

[catorres1]

I have 1600b and noted some accuracy problems with it in terms of the displayed "effective horizontal range". I was in Colorado shooting with a friend into a steep canyon, and when I used the dope from JBM for the conditions (8k feet, 50 degrees, 25% humidity, 30.06 inches), coupled with a reading from my friends Sig kilo, spot on at 500 and beyond.

When using the Leica displayed EHR, and then checking the dope supplied by JBM for Leica's standard conditions (sea level, 68 degrees, 50% humidity, 29.92 inches), it was okay at 500, but started to fall off as we stretched it. By the time we got to 875 raw horizontal, the difference between Sig holdover and Leica holdover was off by around 1 MOA, the Leica range causing me to be low, the Sig range/corresponding drop being good.

I have noticed that the Leica pretty much is off in terms of what temperature it reads back to me, not sure if pressure is also off etc. Or if perhaps there is some setting I have set wrong.

Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[Barrelnut]

Sounds like you comparing your 1600B to a Kilo 2400. The Kilo 2400 uses AB ballistic solutions, the 1600B does not. It uses 12 pre-loaded ballistic profiles that will never be as accurate as AB on the Kilo2400.

I don't use my 1600B for ballistics info. I use it to gather the temp, station pressure, and inclination angle. I then use this info for the ballistic app on my phone. I get good solutions using this method.

There is a huge price difference between the Kilo2400 and the 1600B, Having the AB solutions app integrated into the Kilo2400 is expensive. I would rather have the 1600B with AB on my phone.

I have no issues with the temp provided by the 1600B. obviously I can't pull it of of my hat and expect it to be accurate, but that is expected. I have tested the station pressure for the 1600B against three other devices, readings were accurate. Also the inclination angle matches other devices i have used.

Also read the user guide for the 1600B, all of this is explained in detail.

 

[catorres1]

Thanks for the reply! Have read the user guide a few times over, but still not sure if I have missed something. I could also be missing a setting in JBM, perhaps...

The sig we were using was a 2000, not the 2400. I just pulled local conditions and then plugged them into JBM on my phone. Then used the angle modified range from the sig for a holdover from JBM.

For the Leica, I have selected the closest curve, and the correct zero range. So I took the EHR it output, and plugged that into JBM, using the standard conditions applied that I got from Leica.

When I compared those two holdovers, the Sig JBM output called for more holdover and was correct. The Leica was not.

Not sure why. The only thing I can think is that my pressure/temp readings in the RF are off. I have set it by a thermometer in my room and just left it there for a few hours before, and it's usually about 10-12 degrees too warm.

I wonder if maybe pressure is off too. Need to find a way to check it's accuracy in that regard, but thought I would see if there are any other settings either with the Leica or in JBM that I am messing up.

 

[Barrelnut]

OK. I believe the EHR in the Lica is tied to the ballistic profiles and is not a perfectly true EHR. This is probably why it will not provide a EHR unless one of the profiles is selected.That is why I use the inclination angle it provides. Kinda sux. But I have no issues, if I use the inclination angle.

My temp has no issues. The station pressure will usually be a little different with each use of the button. It might have like .10 or .05 variances, but these are not enough to affect my solutions.

 

[catorres1]

OK. I believe the EHR in the Lica is tied to the ballistic profiles and is not a perfectly true EHR. This is probably why it will not provide a EHR unless one of the profiles is selected.That is why I use the inclination angle it provides. Kinda sux. But I have no issues, if I use the inclination angle.

My temp has no issues. The station pressure will usually be a little different with each use of the button. It might have like .10 or .05 variances, but these are not enough to affect my solutions.

Gotcha, I was afraid that might be the case. I noticed the new 2700b allows you to actually upload your exact profile, wish ours did as well.

The other thing I don't like is that the 1600b won't give me a angle modified range past like 875, even if it were accurate. I never thought I would really care about this, but we were shooting out to 1250, so that kinda sucked.

I understand the new Kestrels for shooters will measure angle to target, along with everything else short of distance. That might be a solution....click RF, enter raw distance into Kestral...click Kestrel....out comes a shooting solution covering all parameters....kinda spendy for those models of Kestrels though.

 

[SnakeRiverEric]

Yes, the EHR is inaccurate in the 1600B, always low for me, so I don't use it anymore, the angle, pressure are accurate, the temp is always high and takes a long time to stabilize. Like others I just plug the values into a ballistics calculator. Sucks it ties them all together with the curve you pick.

 

[catorres1]

Yes, the EHR is inaccurate in the 1600B, always low for me, so I don't use it anymore, the angle, pressure are accurate, the temp is always high and takes a long time to stabilize. Like others I just plug the values into a ballistics calculator. Sucks it ties them all together with the curve you pick.

Thanks for the reply, looks like what you are seeing is identical to me. Too bad, because the actual glass on these is awesome, and the ranging itself is great too. I actually use it as a 'pre-glassing' tool, before I pull out my binos, I take a look with the 1600 to augment my poor vision. The glass is so nice and clear, a lot of time, I don't have to pull the binos.

Looks like I will be looking at other solutions though. Thinking pairing this up with a kestrel might be the way to go. Otherwise, I could just enter the data manually into my phone, but don't really like that solution...my phone and I don't get on too well.

Last choice would be get a new RF....the Sig 2400 is way too rich for my blood though, and if I bought a 2200, I'd still need a wind solution.

 

[Frank in the Laurels]

I've never had an issue with my 1200 that I know of....usually it lighting, reflectability , atmospheric conditions...still about as good as it gets..

 

[Mike 338]

Humidity accounts for almost nothing. Barometric pressure is a pretty big deal. I adjusted my Kestrel to get a true Station Pressure reading. Once done, this replaces any altitude inputs. On JBM, disable the two boxes below the barometric pressure inputs (Standard Atmosphere at Alt & Pressure is Corrected). See if that doesn't line up your ballistic solution.

 

[catorres1]

Humidity accounts for almost nothing. Barometric pressure is a pretty big deal. I adjusted my Kestrel to get a true Station Pressure reading. Once done, this replaces any altitude inputs. On JBM, disable the two boxes below the barometric pressure inputs (Standard Atmosphere at Alt & Pressure is Corrected). See if that doesn't line up your ballistic solution.

Mike, thanks for the suggestions. I tried this, but it makes no difference. The reason is that my dope strictly for working with the 1600b numbers is at 29.92, 0 altitude. So checking the 'pressure is corrected boxe or removing the check gives the same drops. If I check both boxes, it changes by .2 MOA at 800. The dopes are good for a little more than 500 yards, but it then starts to diverge when compared to the drops I get from a sig 2000, and from actual hits on target.

My guess is 1) I am messing something up that I just can't see or 2) Leica's generic curves are just not good enough for use out at 600-875 or 3) there is something wrong with the pressure/temps stuff on my RF. Snakerivereric above describes my exact experience.

So I have a Kestrel inbound. I'll use the raw distance and angle info from the Leica, then let the Kestrel do the rest for these longer shots.

Considering getting an Conx...on sale for 299....that would be much more convenient...but not liking all that I am seeing re reviews....Leica is so conveniently sized, and most of all, the glass is awesome. I use it as a 'quick look' spotter all the time.

Wish Sig or Leica would make one that talks to the Kestrel.....2400 is way out of my range cost wise, as I got a smoking deal on the Kestrel.

 

[Solby]

That is an issue I have with my 1600B as well. The EHR is never accurate, it is always short. I don't know if the unit is trying to compensate for barometric pressure and temperature as well as angle or what the deal is. I read through the book as well and could not find anywhere to just give you true horizontal range. I use the rangefinder for distance and angle. Plug those into my shooter app. Bang.

 

[catorres1]

That is an issue I have with my 1600B as well. The EHR is never accurate, it is always short. I don't know if the unit is trying to compensate for barometric pressure and temperature as well as angle or what the deal is. I read through the book as well and could not find anywhere to just give you true horizontal range. I use the rangefinder for distance and angle. Plug those into my shooter app. Bang.

Yep, that is where I am heading. Frankly, I am disappointed in the Leica in that regard. It appeared to be a great solution when I bought it, EHR would take into account all the variables but wind...you could even have a turret cut with distance markings and be good to go because it always references 0, 29.92, 68 degrees with it's EHR output.

But without custom curve input (or whatever else needs to happen to make EHR accurate to extended differences), not so good.

Additionally, I don't like the EHR limit of 875 yards. When I bought it, I thought I would never shoot past probaby 500, except at a range with known distances. So 875 seemed fine. Now, that's become limiting, we had to switch to the sig for almost all of our rock busting, as 800 was the warmup, and we went out from there (not much farther, mind you, but farther than the Leica would provide an angle adjusted distance for). As we were shooting steep angles, I need a better solution.

I know that the new 2700b allows input of curves, and has a limit of 1200 for EHR. But we are already shooting past that distance, and hope to get further this year, so that won't really do the trick. Plus, I am not assured that the custom curves will fix the problem.

So for now, it's raw Leica data and a new AB kestrel, but I would like a faster solution, so the Conx has my attention. Went to look at one today at Cabelas, but they were out of stock. Anyone have any thoughts on this RF?

Seems like with the Kestrel, it would be a fast and effective solution. I know about the 2400, but that price is just way too far for me to reach.

Thanks!

 

[Mike 338]

What altitude are you? The reason I'm asking is that I'm at about 3000 ft. and my Station Pressure (not altitude adjusted but true Pressure) is usually 27 something. 29 something is a big difference. Altitude changes things.

 

[Barrelnut]

I would sell the Lica and get a Kilo 2400 and a Kestrel. The Kestrel will read wind, figure temp, station pressure, and even humidity for you. All you have to is enter the AMR from the Kilo 2400.