Gunwerks G7 BR2 Rangefinder Review

[COBrad]

I did not know there was a MIL version available for military/leo.
I am not a computer geek, but would it not be a simple thing to put the MIL conversion program into the same unit that already gives corrections in MOA? It would seem to me to expand the market for this unit, and for me it has proven to be a really great unit.

 

[Havingfun]

I think the short answer is "no" they don't make one for anyone.

Here is a note I got from them when I recently asked the question:


_____________________________________________________________

From: Aaron Davidson <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Mon, Sep 3, 2012 12:08 pm
Subject: Re: G7 Rangefinder

Laser tech is supposed to do a military version that uses Meters/Mils. Our "civilian" version may never have it. It is a current topic of discussion.


Aaron Davidson | Owner
220 Main St. | Burlington, WY 82411
(307) 762-3240 | Gunwerks - Long Range Hunting Rifles | Berger Bullets | Ammunition | Turrets

_______________________________________________________________
(I was later advised by Aaron that Laser Tech is not associated with Gunwerks.)

They are obviously missing a huge niche that needs to be filled and why they aren't doing it is beyond me and a lot of others. My guess is there are some "proprietary" issues or agreements with others involved but that's only conjecture on my part.

Someone will do it even if not them and they'll reap the rewards when they do.

 

[Scot E]

Interesting. That answer is an odd one in my opinion. "may never" sounds like they don't have the decision making authority to decide. It's not like were talking about new military technology for goodness sake! Were talking about MILs that are in all kinds of optics!

Very odd. Sure wish we could get to the bottom of what the issue is.

Scot E.

 

[Broz]

I would think it may have something to do with the fact that the polls on this show 80% of the voting shooters use MOA. So if you take the 20% that use Mils and then figure how many of that 20% would actually buy a unit the sales numbers are very low. If there were a real advantage to Mils over MOA it would surely help. But even the Mil guys admit that MOA will do everything MILs do with a slightly smaller increment of measure. So I guess I would not see the reason for both either. I will admit I find Mils more confusing, but I would attribute that to what I have used all my life. I just for the life of me csan't see why anyone would want to change from MOA to Mils. But I do understand why they only make it in MOA and why MOA is 4 times more popuar among long range shooters.

Jeff

 

[Scot E]

I would think it may have something to do with the fact that the polls on this show 80% of the voting shooters use MOA. So if you take the 20% that use Mils and then figure how many of that 20% would actually buy a unit the sales numbers are very low. If there were a real advantage to Mils over MOA it would surely help. But even the Mil guys admit that MOA will do everything MILs do with a slightly smaller increment of measure. So I guess I would not see the reason for both either. I will admit I find Mils more confusing, but I would attribute that to what I have used all my life. I just for the life of me csan't see why anyone would want to change from MOA to Mils. But I do understand why they only make it in MOA and why MOA is 4 times more popuar among long range shooters.

Jeff

Maybe. But 20% of the market is a big share and any company ignoring 20% of its market base seems odd despite what percentage may buy.

Additionally, there is a much larger market for their product than just this site. I can give you at least 2 other sites where the poll numbers would be the opposite and there is no reason the BR2 wouldn't be just as popular there as it has become here. But I don't even think they advertise to that market.

In my opinion it doesn't have anything to do whether MOA or MILS is better, it has to do with offering a product that fits what a shooter already has invested in. Only offering MOA means anyone that already is invested in MIL would have to sell off all their optics and buy new MOA scopes just to use their product. I can agree that the % of guys willing to do that will be low.

Scot E.

 

[Broz]

Scott, Just an idea but maybe if you really want one in Mils so bad you could get all those Mil shooters that you mentioned together and do a group buy if GW would agree to build the unit. I would expect the cost to be a little more unless you get enough of an order together to equal and offset some of the extra production costs. But if there are that many guys that will hook up simply get an agreement with GW, get deposited to comfirm sales, and go for it. I am sure if you prove that the market is there they would be open to the sales.

Jeff

 

[Havingfun]

Personally, I think there's more to this than a market share issue.

If you look at the large numbers of high end optics manufacturers; Night Force, Schmidt Bender, Premier Reticles, March, Leupold, Swarovski, Kahles, etc. that either have or are moving more and more products into the .mil formats, there is obviously a significant market.

I think there are other issues that we're not privy to.

Seems even odder (is that a real word?) to me too as there appears to be a fairly close relationship between NF and the G7 folks. Perhaps NF is working a deal to have the G7 folks build one for them to brand as their own. Who knows? (Again, just PURE CONJECTURE).

In any case, the simple fact of the matter is that us .mil folks won't change to MOA simply to get the G7. We'll just wait to see who comes out with the better mouse trap.

 

[Scot E]

Scott, Just an idea but maybe if you really want one in Mils so bad you could get all those Mil shooters that you mentioned together and do a group buy if GW would agree to build the unit. I would expect the cost to be a little more unless you get enough of an order together to equal and offset some of the extra production costs. But if there are that many guys that will hook up simply get an agreement with GW, get deposited to comfirm sales, and go for it. I am sure if you prove that the market is there they would be open to the sales.

Jeff

Not a bad idea. I still wonder though why they don't just market to the mil folks. Considering that it was really LE and military folks that got this LR thing started anyway, I know the overall MIL market is much larger than the MOA market for the overall LR game. And look at how other companies are scrambling trying to keep up with the ballistic rangefinders. Everyone is behind on this game and G7 is leading the charge in many ways. I just wish they would keep it up and not let one of these big companies come in and steal their thunder! I like G7 and think they are great for our sport and want to keep it that way.

Personally, I think there's more to this than a market share issue.

I think there are other issues that we're not privy to.

I agree with this as well.

Scot E.

 

[BountyHunter]

The device uses a 905nm laser diode. The expensive models achieve better ranging performance because they use a 1550nm diode which is more expensive and is not limited on power output to remain eye safe.

Skip, Are you saying the others are non-eyesafe?

that would mean they are a class 3B or 4 laser which cannot be sold outside of the military. No one can possess non-eye safe laser rangefinders. All mftrs have to sign agreements with the FDA before they are allowed to mftr and sell them to the military.

I am assuming the BR2 is a class 1?

 

[Scot E]

I can't speak for all of them but I know the Terrapin is class 1.

Scot E.

 

[Jerry Cunningham]

Here is my question. Does the rangefinder read out in negative numbers?
For example, your rifle is sighted at 400 yards and you try to range a target at 300 yards. The correction in moa would have to be minus x number of moa.
Or does the rangefinder operate with a 100 yard zero and then any correction would be in positve numbers.
Any insight would be helpful

Jerry1

 

[Greyfox]

Here is my question. Does the rangefinder read out in negative numbers?
For example, your rifle is sighted at 400 yards and you try to range a target at 300 yards. The correction in moa would have to be minus x number of moa.
Or does the rangefinder operate with a 100 yard zero and then any correction would be in positve numbers.
Any insight would be helpful

Jerry1

The unit can be programmed for the zero you choose and display the MOA adjustment for shorter distances in negative MOA values.

 

[Jerry Cunningham]

Thanks Greyfox!!

 

[Greyfox]

I just came back from a week of Mule Deer and White Tail hunting in Alberta which was my second hunting trip which I was able to use my G7 BR 2. On this trip I did have numerous opportunities to test the units effectiveness ranging game at extended distances. The unit had no trouble ranging deer the size of whitetail does at 1300-1400 yards with repeated identicle readings. I had difficulty getting readings with my Leica Geovids and my buddy's Swarovski RF binoculars at these distances.The near/far ranging proved effective at selectively eliminating interfering brush, hills, and other animals in the foreground or background. By far, the best feature. Also, had no problem ranging cattle out to 2000 yards. One was ranged at 2015 yards. Now having taken five deer and antelope using the G7, I have developed a high level of confidence in the unit.