Update, not the most technical field test I've ever done but definitely the most fun!
Had about a 2 hour drive down I-15. Wife drove.
I took the Kilo 2000 and ranged hundreds of times.
Found that ranging through the front windshield worked darn good on any type, shape, color and form of highway sign.
Couldn't range for squat through the highly tinted side windows.
With that many ranging opportunities I got a really good feel for the use is this unit.
Operation of the Kilo is significantly different than use of any other range finder. All other range finders seem to me to be point and click and keep clicking or using the scan mode until confident with the range reading.
Not this unit! A key feature which rises to the top is the rapid scan rate. While in a vehicle ranging is not even close to a steady, solid experience.
Simply holding the button until scanning started resulted in a constant stream of data which gave great confidence in the range of that object being ranged. Button release, if on target, resulted in a good reading. Note that 80 MPH results in a more rapid reduction of distance than I expected.
I don't know what there is about high way signs but if the beam touched any size of a high way sign it ranged it.
Very large signs were ranges to 3100 yards.
Mile markers ranged to 1000
Those little posts with a very small reflector at the top could be ranged, one at a time, from do yards to 770 yards. That was pretty much fun when going around a long turn onto a long straightaway getting ranges on those little sticks was quite pleasing.
Keep in mind that this is through a somewhat tinted windshield and at the highly reflective green/yellow/white painted side of the road sign.
It was not possible to range the back side of any sign regardless of size.
The home I was visiting was on the highest street on the east side of Brigham City, Utah.
From the rocking chair on the veranda (I think that's an upper class porch:roll eyes
ranging gravel banks to 2600 yards wasn't a challenge. After sunset ranging to 2900 yards was consistent.
The next further gravel bank was at least a mile beyond the 2600 yard spot and could not be ranged.
There is something to be understood regarding differences in reflectivity between different colored animals, colors and types of paint, hay bales, and other objects. Some things ya just can't range with any range finder.
Another consideration is the power of the laser. There are regulations, I suppose, that limit the laser power to a maximum level for civilian use. Within this limitation the Kilo seems to have a leg up on other units.
I noticed this "feature" when I was ranging a utility pole a 75 yards and getting readings when the utility pole wasn't in the aiming circle. The darn thing was ranging the wire leading from the insulator on top of the pole to the transformer below. What's with that?
I then used that wire and the power line to "sight in" the circle reticle. Moving very slowly and steadily on the tripod the beam on this unit the beam seems to be centered with its edge at 5 o'clock on the circle reticle and the opposite side (45* line to reticle center) maybe half way to center reticle.
The Leica didn't know the power line/wires were there. Don't know what that means but it sure was cool to be able to range them.
This info is for what It's worth as most shooting/hunting isn't done @ 80 MPH on an interstate highway.
The only "con" so far, which may go away as I become more familiar with using the Kilo is the size of the aiming reticle. It seems simply too **** big and wide. I have come to appreciate the small fine reticle of the Leica and the quite precise reticle of the PLRF - 10.
The beam is advertised at 1.4 Mil diameter. That's 50" at 1000 if I did the math correctly. The reticle seems to be greater than 10 yards. I'll measure more accurately with the Leopold TMR reticle tomorrow.
Saying that the aiming reticle is too large and the beam is somewhat off center may well be a non issue as the very rapid scan rate and more familiarity with its use is a feature that will take some getting used to.
The Kilo will certainly range further than the Leica. My presumption is that within the range limitation of the Leica the 1600 B and Kilo 2000 are equals.
The differences between the Leica 1600 B and Sig Kilo 2000 besides the Kilo not having what I consider to be useless bullet drop capability, the Kilo provides AMR (Angled Modified Range, selectable) while the Leica displays shooting angle. I give more weight to AMR as there is one less input to the computer shooting solution.
The Leica 1600 B displays barometric pressure, the Kilo in this release does not requiring a separate unit for barometric. Seeing as how neither units provides wind speed and any hand held weather station worth it's salt provides barometric pressure along with wind speed this comparison is a wash.
In that the Kilo 2000 with do anything the Leica 1600 B will do plus range reflective objects to the limit of me driving my 375 Allen Magnum is easily met by the SIG Kilo 2000 I'm thinking I made the next step towards ELR shooting without breaking the bank to get'r done.
I'm looking forward to what's next.
