range finders

[waylon]

Sorry might have missed it but what kind of rangefinders does John Burns use.

 

[Eaglet]

50bmg,
I think is this one... Looks like it!

http://www.lamsa.com/xlr.html

 

[ricka0]

Re: range finders GG, brian b??

[ QUOTE ]
B1g B0re: I wont make accuracy claims until I get two GPS's and range my pal (that we can get simultaneous GPS readings so atmospheric error is consistent). [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Be cautious with the above process. Accuracy of GPS depends upon a lot of things besides the local ionsphere conditions. Post processing from a local "station" keeps things fairly 'less' expensive.
I work with those **** things every day. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif I have access to an RTK system which is about the only thing that I would trust for Looooonnnnggg range distance measurement. Justa tho't.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
Great we gave and expert. He's my thinking, please help out. I have two GPS that give the same readings when they are in the same place (they better). My two RF's max out at 1,500 and 1,300 yards. Suppose we range something at 1,300 yards (we range each other). With the wakie talkies we take simultaneous readings. My thinking was atmospheric conditions (including ionospheric) should be pretty darn close at the two locations. Generally in mathematics you can get much lower error bounds doing delta's than absolute values. The two readings should have very similar error terms.
I can test my conjecture by selecting two fixed points, recording atmospheric conditions, solar time, etc and readings over multiple days/times. A statistical analysis should revile the error bounds.
Note that RTK correction data is just noise when you get more than 50 miles from a transmitter (generally anywhere you're hunting).

 

[ricka0]

Re: range finders GG, brian b??

Awesome Post goodgrouper. Also, Jon Burns doesn't correct for atmospheric or altitude changes (He uses a BDC) - so he can't afford much error. Not that he shoots vermin at 2K yards.

 

[fastfire57]

Is this the rf that will get to 2,000 ?
Swarovski 8x30

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.

 

[Broz]

Is this the rf that will get to 2,000 ?
Swarovski 8x30

I have owned several of the 8x30 Swaro laserguides in the past. In morning or evening light they will give readings to 1999 yards sometimes. But this is a 7 year old thread. Range finders have progressed dramatically in this time. Some of this progression was due to the gained knowledge and experience of the users requestion better products. Today we enjoy better technology and some way better choices for a laser RF.

Try searching for info on the Leica 1600 CRF, Vectronix PLRF05 also known as the Terripin the Vectronix PLRF10 or the G7 BR2 for todays top choices.

Also I advise anyone looking at any RF to study the size of Beam Divergence and the affects the larger beams like the swaro has.

Hope this helps you to find the info you are looking for.

Good luck.

Jeff

 

[fastfire57]

How do I find out the size of the beam devergance?

 

[Broz]

How do I find out the size of the beam devergance?

The Swaro is 2 milrad x 2 milrad That converts to about 6feet x 6 feet at 1000 yards.

Think of the way a flashlight beam gets larger with distance. This is what beam divergence is and does. The problem is if you are ranging on flat ground that beam coverage gets prety long, much like laying a flashlight ona table. So the chance of picking up something like sage brush or objects that are closer, or also objects that are farther but more reflective are greater with the large beam units.

The Swaro and the Zeiss are among the largest beams in the RF's priced from $500 to $1000.

The Leica is much smaller and more precise. I have tested this many times. So for a RF under $1000 I prefer the Leica 1600.

The Vectronix RF's are top notch, but you will pay for their superiority. The PLRF05 will run just under $2000 and the PLRF10 about $3700

The new G7 BR2 by gunworks has a large beam diverence but they are claiming to have new technology with a laser that can tell what you are intending to range. I have only used one a few times as they are new, and I have not had the pleasure to run one through my testing yet. So I will not give an opinion at this time. However the guys using them on here give them a good review and have recorded reading to 2000 yards. The big difference in the G7 is it has a very nice ballistics program in it that will read your field conditions, shot angle and give you a dial up correction for the shot. This function only gives readings to 1400 yards though.

The Leica also has some field condition reading like Baro and temp and has a much less sophisticated balistics program.

There is tons of reveiws and data on this site about RF's.

Pick the name of the one you wish to learn about and type it in the search box at the top right cornerof this page to learn more.

Hope this helps

Jeff

 

[fastfire57]

Jeff, Thanks for the info. I'm going to serch the PLRF05

Thanks, Dave

The Swaro is 2 milrad x 2 milrad That converts to about 6feet x 6 feet at 1000 yards.

Think of the way a flashlight beam gets larger with distance. This is what beam divergence is and does. The problem is if you are ranging on flat ground that beam coverage gets prety long, much like laying a flashlight ona table. So the chance of picking up something like sage brush or objects that are closer, or also objects that are farther but more reflective are greater with the large beam units.

The Swaro and the Zeiss are among the largest beams in the RF's priced from $500 to $1000.

The Leica is much smaller and more precise. I have tested this many times. So for a RF under $1000 I prefer the Leica 1600.

The Vectronix RF's are top notch, but you will pay for their superiority. The PLRF05 will run just under $2000 and the PLRF10 about $3700

The new G7 BR2 by gunworks has a large beam diverence but they are claiming to have new technology with a laser that can tell what you are intending to range. I have only used one a few times as they are new, and I have not had the pleasure to run one through my testing yet. So I will not give an opinion at this time. However the guys using them on here give them a good review and have recorded reading to 2000 yards. The big difference in the G7 is it has a very nice ballistics program in it that will read your field conditions, shot angle and give you a dial up correction for the shot. This function only gives readings to 1400 yards though.

The Leica also has some field condition reading like Baro and temp and has a much less sophisticated balistics program.

There is tons of reveiws and data on this site about RF's.

Pick the name of the one you wish to learn about and type it in the search box at the top right cornerof this page to learn more.

Hope this helps

Jeff

 

[Broz]

Jeff, Thanks for the info. I'm going to serch the PLRF05

Thanks, Dave

Dave also search "Terripin" another name for the same RF. I think you will be impressed with what you read. Vectronix is the real deal.

Jeff

 

[fastfire57]

Jeff, looks like the Vectronix Terripin will have to be added to the pack.


Thanks, Dave

Dave also search "Terripin" another name for the same RF. I think you will be impressed with what you read. Vectronix is the real deal.

Jeff

 

[CS T]

LRF I really like
Swarovski EL Range 10x42

Swarovski Laser Guide 8x30 LRF

Victory RF 10x45 T* Rangefinding Binoculars

For the price and the range far.
Zeiss Victory 8x26 T* PRF

Bushnell Fusion 1600 ARC 10x42 or 12x50 Black Rangefinder

Here is a link to them.
Range Finders | OPTICS | CS Tactical


Sorry about the picture sizes.

Mike @ CST

 

[Broz]

Jeff, looks like the Vectronix Terripin will have to be added to the pack.


Thanks, Dave

I dont shoot to 2000 yards every day, but I do do it, so the Vectronix is what I have to have. Plus there are other times I use it well beyond that. Like when we spot an elk grazing at 2500 yards. Then we range a closer ridge or some trees at 1500. We know when we stalk to that ridge we will be close to 1000 yards from the elk. This helps us decide how to plan the stalk.

Jeff

 

[gjk5]

The Swaro is 2 milrad x 2 milrad That converts to about 6feet x 6 feet at 1000 yards.

Think of the way a flashlight beam gets larger with distance. This is what beam divergence is and does. The problem is if you are ranging on flat ground that beam coverage gets prety long, much like laying a flashlight ona table. So the chance of picking up something like sage brush or objects that are closer, or also objects that are farther but more reflective are greater with the large beam units.

The Swaro and the Zeiss are among the largest beams in the RF's priced from $500 to $1000.

The Leica is much smaller and more precise. I have tested this many times. So for a RF under $1000 I prefer the Leica 1600.

The Vectronix RF's are top notch, but you will pay for their superiority. The PLRF05 will run just under $2000 and the PLRF10 about $3700

The new G7 BR2 by gunworks has a large beam diverence but they are claiming to have new technology with a laser that can tell what you are intending to range. I have only used one a few times as they are new, and I have not had the pleasure to run one through my testing yet. So I will not give an opinion at this time. However the guys using them on here give them a good review and have recorded reading to 2000 yards. The big difference in the G7 is it has a very nice ballistics program in it that will read your field conditions, shot angle and give you a dial up correction for the shot. This function only gives readings to 1400 yards though.

The Leica also has some field condition reading like Baro and temp and has a much less sophisticated balistics program.

There is tons of reveiws and data on this site about RF's.

Pick the name of the one you wish to learn about and type it in the search box at the top right cornerof this page to learn more.

Hope this helps

Jeff

I tried to use the search box in the upper corner, nothing happens when I hit "search LRH.com"


I have the Zeiss PRF 1200 on order now to replace my crappy Bushnell ARC (cannot get farther than 512yds on a reflective target).

Do you want to expand upon your opinions on this unit?

FWIW my uses will be elk and deer hunting primarily in high sage and pinyon/juniper or occasional alpine meadows.

I am having a rifle worked on right now to get me out to longer ranges (.30-378) and just want a RF that I can count on to the 800-1Kyd range.

I got a pretty good deal on the Zeiss so the spread between that and the Leica was appreciable ($250ish).