range finders

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by waylon, Aug 8, 2005.

  1. waylon

    waylon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Was doing some web surfing and came across a range finder by newcon-optik. and they have some that can range 2500m or yards and wondering if they are any good. Need some to range more than 1500 yard.
     
  2. ss7mm

    ss7mm Writers Guild

    Messages:
    3,707
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    50bmg:

    I can’t really speak from personal experience with the Newcons but if you use the search feature you will find that a lot of people were dissatisfied with theirs.

    You will also find that those of us that have the Swarovski range finders swear by them. They are great and have the typically super Swaro glass. I have ranged just under 2000 yards with mine and Kirby and Shawn have ranged to just over 2000 yards with theirs.

    The next real step above the Swaros is probably going to be in the $1750.00 - $2500.00 range to get one that will do what you want. You could also go with a Wilde optical range finder if the size isn’t a problem. That would give you the distance and the price is minimal. The big drawback is the size though, since they aren’t really portable hunting units.
     

  3. brian b

    brian b Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    302
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    [ QUOTE ]
    50bmg:

    I can’t really speak from personal experience with the Newcons but if you use the search feature you will find that a lot of people were dissatisfied with theirs.

    You will also find that those of us that have the Swarovski range finders swear by them. They are great and have the typically super Swaro glass. I have ranged just under 2000 yards with mine and Kirby and Shawn have ranged to just over 2000 yards with theirs.

    The next real step above the Swaros is probably going to be in the $1750.00 - $2500.00 range to get one that will do what you want. You could also go with a Wilde optical range finder if the size isn’t a problem. That would give you the distance and the price is minimal. The big drawback is the size though, since they aren’t really portable hunting units.

    [/ QUOTE ]I do not necessarily agree with this in one aspect "I have ranged just under 2000 yards with mine" at what a school bus a school house?????
    I have not seen a commercial laser rangefinder better than the Leica. at 2000yds you need a WILD optical rangefinder or military equipment that you or I will never see.
    at 2000yards if you are using a commercial laser rangefinder you are ranging the hillside at best , if you are using a WILD optical rangefinder it is big and bulky but you can range the intended target accurately past 2000k, it does not fit in your shirt pocket like a laser but for now it is the only game in town (unless you have a 7 figure salary or your name is jr100bs eeerrr jb1000br)
    B
     
  4. Shawn Carlock

    Shawn Carlock Sponsor

    Messages:
    1,897
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    The Swarovski will with the aid of a tripod range accurately at 2000 yards. I have lazed rocks 3-4 feet in diameter getting a reading of say 1986 moved the circle down hill to a rock closer and gotten 1941. moving to the side of the rocks to the grass/brush at those distances would result in no reading, so I am confident that these were good readings and they were repeatable. I have used them side by side with the Leica and I feel that there is no contest between the two. Equipment is like most everything else you will find varing opinions on it. I have not seen anyone that was not tickeled with their Swarovski. Try to find someone with one and see for yourself, I think you will get one like the rest of us did.
     
  5. Fiftydriver

    Fiftydriver <strong>Official LRH Sponsor</strong>

    Messages:
    6,848
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    Brian B,

    I have also gotten similiar results as Shawn C with my Swar. I was actually getting reading in relatively bright sun light at ranges out to 1850-1875 meters on grassy hill sides.

    As the sun gets lower or if its cloudy, the Swar will reach out to +1900 meters. Last time I was out practicing I could get consistant readings on red angus cow at 1968 meters. Got four readings in a row between 1962 and 1970 meters which is in the 2160 yard range. Don't know it I was getting readings off her or the side hill behind her but they were VERY consistant at this range.

    They vastly outperform any other handheld RF I have played with including my Leica 1200.

    I actually used the Swar to set up my Wild optical rf at 2000 yards. Worked great and now the two read damn near exactly the same out to that range and everything less.

    They are great RFs. Best in the commerical handhelds by a fair margin.

    Kirby Allen(50)
     
  6. lerch

    lerch <strong>SPONSOR</strong>

    Messages:
    1,497
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2004
    My families business sells the leupold, swaro, nikon, and leica rangefinders. THe leica work great but will not cover the distance that the swaro will.

    When people come in the store and ask me what rangefinder they need it usually goes like this. Bowhunters usually get the nikons because they are small and handy. Most rifle hunters get the nikon or leica if they wanna range out to 1000 on a good day. And if someone either wants a great set of binos and rangefinder combo or a legitimate 1500yd rangefinder I would tell them to go with the swaro.

    I can't speak for any of the other brands but this might help you a little.

    I have ranged prairie dog mounds in bright sunlight out to 1500yds before.

    Good luck
    Steve
     
  7. Ian M

    Ian M Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,410
    Joined:
    May 3, 2001
    VECTOR - makes the others wish /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
    Right, Len!
     
  8. goodgrouper

    goodgrouper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,705
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    [ QUOTE ]
    I have not seen anyone that was not tickeled with their Swarovski

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I guess I am the first one not to be impressed.
    WHile the optics are top notch and the size is good, the aiming circle was clearly designed to range red staggs standing broadside at 100 meters! I think Rosie O' Donnells butt is smaller than the orange circle in the Swaro's! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

    It seems a bad engineering design for those of us who like to range farther than 100 meters.

    With the aim point so vague, I found it very hard to range what I wanted to past 1000 yards. On the other hand, the Wild rangefinder (while big and heavy) will range anything as long as you can see it! I can range the <font color="blue">chuck </font> at 2000 yards and not the hill or mountain he resides on. It gets exact where the Swaro AND Leica just let you get ballparkish. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
     
  9. lerch

    lerch <strong>SPONSOR</strong>

    Messages:
    1,497
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2004
    Well I will agree with you that the reticle in the swaro is pretty big and kinda poorly designed. I wish they would have used the reticle that is in the leica in the swaro.

    I wouldbe interested to see if the orange circle completely covers up Rosie O'donnels butt at 100 yrds though.

    While it may be slightly vague on animals as small as pdogs at 1k plus it still is a heck ofa good range finder/bino combo though.

    Take it easy
    Steve
     
  10. rwleonard

    rwleonard Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    61
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    I would like to see something like the Swaro in a variable-power spotting scope (say, 15-30 or there abouts)with a 1/8 MOA dot and some way to "zero" it. But that's just me.

    Rick
     
  11. waylon

    waylon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Thanks for the info I belive I'll pass.
     
  12. Jon A

    Jon A Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    I had an LRB 7X50 and was very pleased with everything except the size and weight. I traded it in for a LRB 7X40 and am very happy with it so far. Peoples' poor experiences with the smaller monoculars does not accurately reflect on these--smaller lasers, smaller objectives, etc.

    I simply can't stand looking with one eye very long unless I'm about to shoot /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif and don't want to have to get out another instrument to range something after finding it glassing. I'd put their ranging performance up against anything in that price range--before the Swarvy came out at least. From what people say, it might actually range farther.
     
  13. 7Rumloader

    7Rumloader Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    540
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    Re: range finders GG, brian b??

    GG, and brian b let me ask you this question. If you broke your leica and the warranty was dead and gone and had to buy another unit which one would it be?? Swaro or leica?
    I'm looking at both units for a new range finder and I'm completely bumfuzzeled as to which one. I was leaning Swaro because of all the great reveiws until your reports of funny looking aiming point. Help me if you can!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif
     
  14. goodgrouper

    goodgrouper Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,705
    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Re: range finders GG, brian b??

    If I had to replace my Leica with another laser rangefinder, I think I would just either buy another one or bite my lip and throw down the big coin for one like John Burns uses. I went to their website awhile back and saw that they made a few models and all were capable of at least 2000 meters or more but were very spendy.

    Can anyone provide a link for the rangefinders John uses?
    Much appreciated.