Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Rangefinder need....as opposed to want...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FearNoWind" data-source="post: 978663" data-attributes="member: 50867"><p>First, let's go to the question of need. Unless you have a scope reticle (MOA or MilDot) that provides a platform for ranging a target or, unless you can judge distances very accurately over a range of 500 yards, you need a range finder.</p><p>A 1 MOA error at 500 yards equals a five inch miss. If your standard for accuracy is (as mine is) to be able to consistently hit an 8 inch pie plate at your effective range or pass the target by, that could easily equal a miss or a wounded animal.</p><p>Like the others, I assume you're looking at the Leica Rangemaster 1600B. That's pretty nice. Quite frankly, the 1000 is pretty nice too. Based on their specs., the only real difference in the two is their reflective range. The 1600 with a 1600 yard range and the 1000 with a, you guessed it, 1000 yard range. So if money is tight and I had to make a choice I'd opt for the 1000 and understand that in a few years I might want to upgrade.</p><p>More importantly, if I had an eleven year old that might not get to go hunting with his dad because there wasn't enough money to buy a range finder or take a trip, I'd leave the commercial range finder on the shelf and make a rudimentary range finder out of a few scraps. It might even be a project the two of you could work on together. Wait too long and the eleven year old may lose interest in spending time with you.</p><p>All you need to do is take a tube that can be closed at both ends; cover one end with a solid material and cut a viewing hole in the center. Cover the other end with a piece of clear plastic. If the plastic is translucent rather than transparent, cut a long rectangular vertical slot in it. Get some info. on the animal you intend to hunt and learn what the distance is from top of back to bottom of chest. Make a "target' of that size and move it out to 100 yards. Mark the height of the top or bottom (which ever approach you want to use) on the vertical slot. Move it out to 200 yards and do the same thing. You can go as far as you like. With a little experimentation and some practice you'd be surprised how good you can get at making one of those.</p><p>Whatever you look at through the tube that is the same or nearly the same size as your sample target will line up with the yardage you marked on the front lense. It's not "dead on" accurate but it'll give you more accurate data than a look and guess. it's certainly good enough for hunting in the field if you combine it with good sense. Hunting, after all, is about the hunt; not about the kill.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FearNoWind, post: 978663, member: 50867"] First, let's go to the question of need. Unless you have a scope reticle (MOA or MilDot) that provides a platform for ranging a target or, unless you can judge distances very accurately over a range of 500 yards, you need a range finder. A 1 MOA error at 500 yards equals a five inch miss. If your standard for accuracy is (as mine is) to be able to consistently hit an 8 inch pie plate at your effective range or pass the target by, that could easily equal a miss or a wounded animal. Like the others, I assume you're looking at the Leica Rangemaster 1600B. That's pretty nice. Quite frankly, the 1000 is pretty nice too. Based on their specs., the only real difference in the two is their reflective range. The 1600 with a 1600 yard range and the 1000 with a, you guessed it, 1000 yard range. So if money is tight and I had to make a choice I'd opt for the 1000 and understand that in a few years I might want to upgrade. More importantly, if I had an eleven year old that might not get to go hunting with his dad because there wasn't enough money to buy a range finder or take a trip, I'd leave the commercial range finder on the shelf and make a rudimentary range finder out of a few scraps. It might even be a project the two of you could work on together. Wait too long and the eleven year old may lose interest in spending time with you. All you need to do is take a tube that can be closed at both ends; cover one end with a solid material and cut a viewing hole in the center. Cover the other end with a piece of clear plastic. If the plastic is translucent rather than transparent, cut a long rectangular vertical slot in it. Get some info. on the animal you intend to hunt and learn what the distance is from top of back to bottom of chest. Make a "target' of that size and move it out to 100 yards. Mark the height of the top or bottom (which ever approach you want to use) on the vertical slot. Move it out to 200 yards and do the same thing. You can go as far as you like. With a little experimentation and some practice you'd be surprised how good you can get at making one of those. Whatever you look at through the tube that is the same or nearly the same size as your sample target will line up with the yardage you marked on the front lense. It's not "dead on" accurate but it'll give you more accurate data than a look and guess. it's certainly good enough for hunting in the field if you combine it with good sense. Hunting, after all, is about the hunt; not about the kill. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Rangefinder need....as opposed to want...
Top