Leica 1600 thoughts

[mike33]

Jeff excellant point! Take a NF 5.5x22 zero stop , nf rail and rings where we at eay 2,100.00. 5 years a go i would of said no way now im ready to order a 3rd one and not looking back. So how do i click it if i didnt range it right. There is a price tag for quality.
mike

 

[Pdvdh]

Broz,

Never had any failure to perform with my Swaro yet in the terrain I hunt in - mountains and foothills. If I had experienced the need over the past 4 years for obtaining greater range or accuracy in readings, only then would I be tempted to spend $4000 on a PLRF-10.

Also, if I can't practice at ranges farther than my Swaro will range, I have no business shooting at animals - should the opportunity present - at ranges that I haven't practiced.

I am honestly not compromised in any manner whatsoever out to 1500 yds with my Swaro - to date. When the game is standing on a hillside or mountainside, I don't care if I range the animal or the hillside 2 yds behind the animal.

I can tell you're enthused with your PLRF-10. I was able to pretty quickly conclude that at $4000, I have no enthusiasm, because it won't do anything additional under my conditions of use, or need, than my Swar. For those that feel the need, it's now available - and that's great. I can spend that money on another custom rifle.

Every brand of electronics instrument with switches will eventually fail. The PLRF-10 is listed as water resistant - not waterproof. Why wouldn't the military require a waterproof unit? One reason I purchased a Swaro was the waterproof rating. If it drops in the wetland, creek, or water puddle, it should keep on ticking. Maybe these aren't the units that Vectronix manufactures for military use? So if it's only water resistant and it dies due to water intrusion... is there warranty coverage? If they'll send you out a new replacement rather than fuss with the efforts to repair the unit for 3 months - that would be stellar. Not trying to rain on your parade. Waterproof versus water resistant is important on my hunting turf, to the point that it will factor into a purchase decision. $4000 ought to include waterproof for my money. I'd need to know before I let go and purchased. But it's all a moot point for me.

I think it's great that such a unit is available for other LRH's whose use and goals require one. All the rock shooters out west should be able to put one of these to very good use, if they want to engage targets 50% farther than the Swaro will range a hillside or rock-slide target.

 

[Broz]

Broz,

I have no enthusiasm, because it won't do anything additional under my conditions of use, or need, than my Swar. For those that feel the need, it's now available - and that's great. I can spend that money on another custom rifle.

Every brand of electronics instrument with switches will eventually fail. The PLRF-10 is listed as water resistant - not waterproof. Why wouldn't the military require a waterproof unit? One reason I purchased a Swaro was the waterproof rating. If it drops in the wetland, creek, or water puddle, it should keep on ticking. .

I think it's great that such a unit is available for other LRH's whose use and goals require one. All the rock shooters out west should be able to put one of these to very good use, if they want to engage targets 50% farther than the Swaro will range a hillside or rock-slide target.

Water...First here is what the owners manual of my PLRF10 says

Total immersion 1 meter for 1 hour

If you like we could meet and test them both under water. Then we both will know which one will " keep on ticking"

Porwath I respect you knowledge . But I have a little advantage on you here. I have both and what I am reporting is actual field tests side by side. If you would ever want to actually see the difference, I would be glad to show you in a side by side comparison with your Swaro. Maybe you are not interested in real range distance. That is your freedom of choice for sure.

Jeff

 

[bigngreen]

I prefer the Leica's to the Swaro any day of the week because of the lousy pink reticule, every one I've tried was misserable to see. The Leica's have had the very bright red illumination that is clear to see. I have had problem like Broz has stated in flatter terrain, I've found that wheat stubble fields are almost impossible no matter what your packing. Terrain makes a huge difference in what will work for you or not.
The Vetronix is the mack daddy LRF without a doubt!! Unfortunatly for me it's on the same list as the Hensoldt, I'm just working to get to the Nightforce level!
But someone told me, you don't practice to win the Indy 500 in a VW Bug!!

 

[Pdvdh]

Water...First here is what the owners manual of my PLRF10 says

Total immersion 1 meter for 1 hour

If you like we could meet and test them both under water. Then we both will know which one will " keep on ticking"

Porwath I respect you knowledge . But I have a little advantage on you here. I have both and what I am reporting is actual field tests side by side. If you would ever want to actually see the difference, I would be glad to show you in a side by side comparison with your Swaro. Maybe you are not interested in real range distance. That is your freedom of choice for sure.

Jeff

Jeff,

I should have said you're really, really, really enthused with your PLRF.

The brochure from the Vectronix web site is here: http://www.vectronix.us/userupload/1511_PLRF.pdf

It states "PLRF contains crystal clear optics, operates in multiple environments, and is water resistant." Your owner's manual must have expounded further on the Vectronix definition of water resistant from their on-line Brochure. Did the manual say what happens following Total immersion 1 meter for 1 hour?

I don't see where respect of knowledge and advantages of ownership of both units comes into play.

Knowledge of my needs and uses is the basis for my statements, and that knowledge is credible without regard to comparison of my knowledge to your knowledge, or that of others? How could you have the advantage within the context of the statements typed in my post?

My statement consisted of; "I have no enthusiasm (for the PLRF), because it won't do anything additional under my conditions of use, or need, than my Swaro", and I'll add at this point - "other than to cost an additional $3270". I stated my Swaro has ranged as far and as accurately as I've needed in my hunting scenarios for the past 3 1/2 years. Never a failure. To that end, I suppose I can state that I am "not interested in real range distance", beyond my Swaro capable distances.

I believe every detail you've reported on the PLRF, including that it will range more than 500 yards farther than the Swaro. I believe a $4000 LRF could and should range farther than my $730 Swaro. I haven't tried to claim otherwise. I stated the PLRF-10 is promoted as water resistant rather than waterproof, and the link to the Vectronix brochure is available for you, and others, to read.

I have acknowledged the PLRF-10 could be a God-send to others who's needs and uses are different, and others does include you.

 

[Broz]

OK Porwath, lets just say for he sake of sparing the other here we each have our priorities and we are both content with our Rangfinders. You with your Swaro and me with my Vectronix.

You have expressed that your Swaro does serve you very well in your type of terrain and hunting, and it ranges far enough and accuratly enough for all your needs. Thats cool with me and I am truely happy for you. But why would you even be considering the Leica CRF 1600 when you have stated many times how your Swaro was so much "better" in every aspect than the Leica you use to own? Which I would assume was an early Leica LRF.

I have my own opinion why you would consider a different unit.

Butt, we all know what opinions are like, so I will keep it to my self. Feel free to voice your opinion about the Vectronix you have never owned or tested. It is your right to do so.

Jeff

 

[Pdvdh]

OK PHorwath, lets just say for he sake of sparing the other here we each have our priorities and we are both content with our Rangfinders. You with your Swaro and me with my Vectronix.

You have expressed that your Swaro does serve you very well in your type of terrain and hunting, and it ranges far enough and accuratly enough for all your needs. Thats cool with me and I am truely happy for you. But why would you even be considering the Leica CRF 1600 when you have stated many times how your Swaro was so much "better" in every aspect than the Leica you use to own? Which I would assume was an early Leica LRF.

I have my own opinion why you would consider a different unit.

Butt, we all know what opinions are like, so I will keep it to my self. Feel free to voice your opinion about the Vectronix you have never owned or tested. It is your right to do so.

Jeff

I'm not about 'pride of ownership' and the only pride of ownership with my Swaro is that it's done everything I've needed a LRF to do - so far. My conclusion on the Vectronix is I don't need one, in light of the additional, substantial cost. Nothing more or less. If I've said more or less than this, show me.

I have nothing to hide with my statements, now or former, on any of the LRF units I've posted on. So with respect to the Leica 1200 and your question "But why would you even be considering the Leica CRF 1600 when you have stated many times how your Swaro was so much "better" in every aspect than the Leica you use to own? Which I would assume was an early Leica LRF."

Easy answer: The Leica 1200 Scan I had failed to range a herd of dall rams on a scree and vegetated mountainside at 670 yds in good weather conditions. Useless. I need a rangefinder to range 1200 yds under almost all conditions. 1500 under most conditions. The Leica 1200 Scan didn't cut it. If the Leica 1200 Scan would have ranged 1200 yds, I could have used it for another year or so. My interest in the Leica 1600 is based on the belief it will range farther than the Leica 1200. My Leica 1200 Scan was described as water resistant. I understand that the Leica 1600 has waterproof rather than water resistant construction. In addition, the 1600 provides temperature and atmospheric pressure readings, which may allow me to leave the Kestrel behind. That being said, if the Leica 1600 won't range almost as far or reliably as the Swaro, I won't keep it simply for the temperature and pressure data.

The Swaro that replaced the Leica 1200 Scan is rated as waterproof. It ranges 670 yd distances as easily as it ranges 50 yd distances. It has never failed to range the distances I needed on my hunts, or targets. It may take a second try when the yardages get out to ~900 yds, but I range out to 1600 yds with it much more reliably than I could range 800 yds with the Leica 1200.

Your demeanor rather surprises me: "Butt, we all know what opinions are like, so I will keep it to my self. Feel free to voice your opinion about the Vectronix you have never owned or tested. It is your right to do so." If my statement to the effect that I have no need to own one at their current cost is offensive, you'll just have to be offended and miserable. To add insult to injury I don't own a single Nightforce scope either. Doesn't mean they aren't a good scope. Just means they aren't a good scope for my hunts in Alaska.

Is that air of disgust a result of pride of ownership? I can't state that I haven't yet experienced the need for the PLRF-10 after you've purchased and promoted it without a counterattack? I've explained myself. Are you willing to do the same?

If the PLRH-10 was the only LRF option available to me that would range 1500 yds the majority of the time, and 1200 yds virtually every time, I would own one.

 

[Broz]

No Phorwath, I hardly think it is "pride of ownership" that makes me so fond of my recent purchase. And I don't know why my "demeanor rather surprises you"

So yes I will be glad to explain my self and feelings to you although I feel any further crashing of the thread is not in anyones best interest. I will try to state facts about RF's in hope that someone will benifit from this post.

I will try to keep it short.

You well know and have read the troubles I have had with the Swaro's I have owned. Briefly... first one had the common problem with the freeze up and you need to R&R the battery to get it going again... sent it back... they sent it back to Austria, got in back for the next season.. 3 days later.. did it again, they sent me a new one... ranging the largest Elk I have ever had the chance to shoot.. it did it too. So I started carrying a Leica CRF also in my bag. Swaro very gratiously next dayed me another.. it did it too so they sent another, unit #4. It works fine and has for some time. Hurray!!

I, hunting in flatter terrain than you have had instanced where the larger beam of the swaro made it impossible to return 3 consecutive distances at around 1000 yards due to the beam grabbing objects in front or behind the game.. I know you in your area you do not have this problem ranging into a hillside. But trust me, it does exist. I see coyotes at 1000 yards and just beyond quite often... I watched two pester a cow with a new calf last year and could not range them or the near by corner post in the fence. It was about 1300 yards.

Again you may or may not remember all the posts about problems and disgust I have had trying to range things I felt were with in my effective range and could not. I worked hard, sold off some things I no longer used, and took a chance on a Vectronix PLFR10. If it was not all I expected, I would be calling it as I see it. Somethings work for some and not for others. Like the LB3.0 program. It did nothing for me, and I stated my feelings as so. But I realize it does work for others.

This PLRF10 is quite different... It is just not a little better than my Swaro or my Leica CRF1200... It is way way better. Instant ranges and clear optics... the choice of crosshairs or the ability to add a box illuminated reticle. A display Ray Charles could see... well almost.. I say not just a little better and here are some examples of what I have ranged in full sun. Please remember the Beam is 1/2 the size of the Swaro and shaped in a rectangle like game, not a huge circle.

Evergreen tree to 2950 yards tree size about 20' tall.

Antelope on flat ground, and I mean the antelope only...slightly over the back came back with no readings as there was nothing there. Like you where hunting and ranging from a prone position. Distances of many in the 1200 to 1400 ranges one to 1450.

Cows.. small herd and I could range each one and the distances came back in respect to their location to each other. Farthest was 1782 yards.

My steel targets painted white, 20" square the farthest on top a knob with nothing beind it for a ways. 1765 yards and the hill behind it at 2050.

Rocks and bushes are easy at 2000 yards, again in full sun. Rock cliffs to 2650 and farther are not hard to get either.

So Phorwath... What you are hearing is, a statement from someone that has longed for a unit like this. " Pride of ownership" no... eagerness to tell of a good piece of equipment that does the job to his full expectations ... yes.. I wish someone would have told me all this long ago.

So, yeah, I did take a little offence to your first post and wanted to respond. I felt you were trying to state reasons the unit was not worthy of its price. I feel it is. I am not trying to be cool here by owning this RF. But I truely feel it is worth easily as much as another custom rifle in my safe and with out it I sure don't need another LR rifle.

Jeff

 

[bigngreen]

Is the beam divergence spec usually in the ops manual or do you have to pull it out of an engineer or can you measure it some how? I'm going to have to buy a range finder in bino form because my left eye quits focusing if I look through a monocular style range finder or spotting scope. I'm going to have to go with a Bushnell 1600 because of simple economics, but I would like to research it out more.

I'm not that interested in the extra data it will give other than incline. It may be nice to have a back up for environmental data for the Kestrel but if the Kestrel goes down I won't be taking any shots any way with no wind data.

 

[Broz]

I have found them either in searching for Specs or in owners manual and also by calling the company.

The Swaro is 2 mrad circle or 2 mrad x 2 mrad... this is a 6' circle at 1000 and 9' at 1500.

Leica CRF1200 I forget and need to find my notes but like 1 1/2' x 6 1/2' at 1000.

Zeiss mono is larger than either of the Swaro or Leica.

PLRF 10 is .3 mrad x 1.5 mrad... 1' x 4 1/2' at 1000 and roughly 1 1/2' x 7' at 1500.

I feel the smaller the beam the better if you want to range the actual target and not it's surroundings.

Jeff

 

[Pdvdh]

So Phorwath... What you are hearing is, a statement from someone that has longed for a unit like this. " Pride of ownership" no... eagerness to tell of a good piece of equipment that does the job to his full expectations ... yes.. I wish someone would have told me all this long ago.

So, yeah, I did take a little offence to your first post and wanted to respond. I felt you were trying to state reasons the unit was not worthy of its price. I feel it is. I am not trying to be cool here by owning this RF. But I truely feel it is worth easily as much as another custom rifle in my safe and with out it I sure don't need another LR rifle.

Jeff

Notice that I didn't begin posting in the PLRF Thread. My goal wasn't to rain on the PLRF-10 Thread or parade. I'm glad the unit works so well, and of course it's always exciting and interesting to learn about the new tools of the trade.

My comments and opinion from my experiences with the Swaro would, I imagine, be similar to this hypothetical scenario for you. You've located and now own a rangefinder PLRF-10 that does everything you ever expect it to do. Would you pay another $3200 for an improved unit? How much better than what you've got is the next better unit or model worth? I think it's great you've found the LRF that will suit your needs.

My comment is that the Swaro has been for me, everything you expect the PLRF-10 to be for your uses. Perfectly acceptable.

I hope the Leica 1600 will range equal to me Swaro, do it with a narrower beam, and provide accurate temp and pressure data. That will make the 1600 better than the Swaro for my needs, at a similar or lesser cost. Then I'll be just about as content with the 1600 as you are with the Vectronix

I remember well all the difficulties you had with those Swaros. If I'd been through those disappointments, I may have owned a PLRF-10 before you.

 

[bigngreen]

I have found them either in searching for Specs or in owners manual and also by calling the company.

The Swaro is 2 mrad circle or 2 mrad x 2 mrad... this is a 6' circle at 1000 and 9' at 1500.

Leica CRF1200 I forget and need to find my notes but like 1 1/2' x 6 1/2' at 1000.

Zeiss mono is larger than either of the Swaro or Leica.

PLRF 10 is .3 mrad x 1.5 mrad... 1' x 4 1/2' at 1000 and roughly 1 1/2' x 7' at 1500.

I feel the smaller the beam the better if you want to range the actual target and not it's surroundings.

Jeff

Are those width by height? I've followed your LRF saga and hoped you would find one! I'm not in as great a need of the small beam as you are as my effective range is maxed out at about 1000ish yards and most of my important ranging is in steep areas that are kinda open so I will not be of by far, antelope do have me worried though as catching grass and sagebrush is a problem.
Thanks Broz

 

[Broz]

Are those width by height?

antelope do have me worried though as catching grass and sagebrush is a problem.
Thanks Broz

Example height x width... The PLRF ... .3 mrad tall by 1.5 mrad wide.


Atelope or Coyotes are tough on the flats. Yeah, you will catch the ground or brush and the return will be 3 tries and 3 different numbers. This was the problem with that huge Kansas Buck that was 950 to 1050 in a flat cornfield. I didnt shoot as it was getting dark and I would not take the shot without a solid range. Boy he was huge too.

Jeff

 

[bigngreen]

Thanks Broz, I just tried Bushnell and Leica and they don't have late service, I'll light up the phone tomorrow to see if I can drag the beam divergence out of anyone, the ops manuals have nothing, even in the five other languages