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
Swaro Rangefinder Feedback
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="bkondeff" data-source="post: 586596" data-attributes="member: 10444"><p>Again I thank you all for the thoughfull responses, especially Broz, as you obviously have done some work on this.</p><p> </p><p>I am a banker so stats, reference numbers, and ratio's are part of my daily life so I do understand the concept of the smaller beam, but am confused why so many say the Swaro unit is more reliable than the beam divergence number seems to reference. I get that the Swaro may provide an incorrect reading, but why wouldn't the Leica provide any at all when the Swaro will?</p><p> </p><p>Back to the main question in my second post that I do not seem to have an answer to yet. <u>What, if any, other factors play into the consistency of readings, especially at long range, other than beam divergence size. Is there differences in laser quality, or maybe does optical quality come into play?</u> </p><p> </p><p>With this question answered I feel I would be in a position to make a more informed decision. </p><p> </p><p>PS Thanks for some feedback on the costs of the Vectronix units as my google search yesterday showed them much much more expensive.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="bkondeff, post: 586596, member: 10444"] Again I thank you all for the thoughfull responses, especially Broz, as you obviously have done some work on this. I am a banker so stats, reference numbers, and ratio's are part of my daily life so I do understand the concept of the smaller beam, but am confused why so many say the Swaro unit is more reliable than the beam divergence number seems to reference. I get that the Swaro may provide an incorrect reading, but why wouldn't the Leica provide any at all when the Swaro will? Back to the main question in my second post that I do not seem to have an answer to yet. [U]What, if any, other factors play into the consistency of readings, especially at long range, other than beam divergence size. Is there differences in laser quality, or maybe does optical quality come into play?[/U] With this question answered I feel I would be in a position to make a more informed decision. PS Thanks for some feedback on the costs of the Vectronix units as my google search yesterday showed them much much more expensive. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Swaro Rangefinder Feedback
Top