# Beam Diameter of Swarovski LRF?

#### Ernie

Does anyone know the beam diameter of the Swaro LRF at say 300, 500, 700, and 100 yards?

I thought this was posted at one time, but didn't find it.

I thought I read 6 feet @ 1000 yards. I don't know if that translates evenly back to say 6" at 100 yards though.

Does anyone know the beam diameter of the Swaro LRF at say 300, 500, 700, and 100 yards?

I thought this was posted at one time, but didn't find it.

I go this in an email reply from Swarovski in August, 2005.

Thank you for you interest, past purchase, and kind comments about Swarovski
Optik products. The beam divergence on the Swarovski laser guide is a
circular shape of 2 miliradians at 1000 yards, advertised simply at "2
mrad". This translates into 2 yards at 1000 yards, 18 inches at 250 yards, 1
yard at 500 yards, 3 yards at 1500 yards or 4 yards at 2000 yards. The Leica
1200 and 900 series of range finders are advertised with a beam divergence
of "approx. 0.5 x 2.4 mrad" that would suggest a rectangular shape. I
believe one of the differences in the perception is that the Leica is a 7
power unit where the Swarovski is an 8 power. I hope this helps.

Tom Hogan

Thanks!!!
2 mil is approx 7MOA, which is about 70 inches at 1,000 yards.

Now, my next questions is the diameter of the ring the same as the beam divergence?

U know what i would do with that Swaro Ern.? I'd set up a piece of paper at 100 yds. and measure the reference mark itself. Next thing i'd do is find out where the lowest part of the beam is in reference to the aiming point. I think u could do this by putting up a piece of paper and gradually going up the paper until u get a true reading of what's behind the paper. This way u should be able to determine where the lowest point of ranging is on the reference mark. I'd be real sure u have the steadiest rest possible though.

Dick,

Thanks for posting. Been looking for those numbers for awhile.

I have the Leica 1200 LRF and have been doing some range building. Its a bit of a trick, read much work and and a very steady tripod, to "sight in" the LRF.

Its a bit too soon to tell but I think the beam is cut in about the center by the top horizontal line on the sighting square.

I fully recognize the importance of knowing precisely what one is ranging. Learned that one the hard way.

Its a bit too soon to tell but I think the beam is cut in about the center by the top horizontal line on the sighting square.

Roy, I'm using the same rangefinder. Could you explain your statement above a bit more? Are you saying that there appears to be a vertically oriented rectangular beam that the aiming square 'trucates', for lack of a better term? Thanks, Jon

Jon,

The conditions under which I noticed this condition are a bit unique as I do all of my shooting prone from a "shooting bed", (Railroad ties filled with sand) over a long flat area. The kicker is anything over 200 yds I have to shoot over a swamp with tall reeds. Until I get out to 900 yds I'm shooting through the tops of the reads. (Wonder what that does for group size? W/the 338 Rum and 300s it doesn't seem to make much difference.)

I have a "ranging board" mounted to a post at the firing line The idea is to range the board when setting the target. With the LRF on the manfrotto tripod I can "just" see the board over the reeds. Above the board, looking from the range is a large tree and the house, about 80 yards back.

I have to be careful to not range the reeds or the house. To squeeze a good reading out of it I kept moving the red square/rectangle? up until I missed the reeds and didn't get the house. The sighting board was in the bottom half of the sighting square.

I'm confused regarding whether I'm shooting high or low with it.

After things freeze up around here, it was 20* this morning, I'll make a couple of passes with my Zuki and flatten some reeds. I'll then do a better "sight in" .

I was pretty amazed with how much more distance could be achieved with the steadiness of the bipod and the ability to pick that small white board out of all of the clutter around it.

More to come.

This was posted by BROZ here........ http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f18/1500-yrd-range-finders-46838/index8.html
"After being able to use the Leica CRF, Saro Laser Guide and the Zeiss Monocular side by side last weekend I was pretty excited to try the zeiss more in the field. A friend sent me this handy calculator to figure the size of a beam at a given distance.

pseudonomen137's JScript Diameter Calculator

Using this I computed the size of the beams of all 3 units at 1000 yards in to feet.

Leica 1200 CRF ........1 1/2' tall by 7 1/2' wide

Swarovski Laser guide........... 6' circle

Zeiss monocular.............. 6' tall by 12' wide

Looking at this it is easy to see why some will report longer distances more readily. Also how some may be giving you a range on something other than your quarry. Imagine how much stuff a 6' x12' beam will cast upon on flat ground. Getting those big numbers back is nice to look at. But,,, if you miss and don't know why maybe it was because you had a range on the bush 20 yards in front of the target instead of the actual target.

I am thinking if we are aiming small with the rifle,, we also need a rangefinder that will aim small too.

Just food for thought.

Jeff "
______

The 2 mils looks like a match from the info sent from Swarovski 2 mil =72 inches at 1000 yds The Zeiss beam at that distance is quite large but it sure ranges well! 30-338

Does anyone know the beam diameter of the Swaro LRF at say 300, 500, 700, and 100 yards?

I thought this was posted at one time, but didn't find it.

Just to add to the list:

Newcon 3000 Pro beam at 1000 yds: 2' tall, 5.5' wide. Makes it much easier to keep from hitting in front of or behind your target. Target selection helps too....

I'm just sayin'....

Just to add to the list:

Newcon 3000 Pro beam at 1000 yds: 2' tall, 5.5' wide. Makes it much easier to keep from hitting in front of or behind your target. Target selection helps too....

I'm just sayin'....

That is a sweet range finder the price is stiff but it's still cool. Now if only I had \$1700 to burn.................

Perhaps my thinking is wrong here, but is seems to me that a 1.5' or 2' high rectanglar beam as the Leica and Newcon have would be less likely to range erroneously. Comments? Does anyone know the beam shape and size on the older Leica 1200 Scans?

Sure wish Newcon would make those 3000 Pros in a 10x model--basically combine a more powerful rangefinder with 10x binos in one unit.

Jon A, how are the optics on that 3000 Pro?

Thanks,

jon

Jon A, how are the optics on that 3000 Pro?
The optics aren't that great, but usable. The Geovids certainly will make a better set of binos. With the rebates they've had lately there have been some good deals too. For most "normal range" hunters they're probably the better deal.

But for many of us here, we just have to have the best laser we can get.....

Warning! This thread is more than 15 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.