SWAROVSKI 'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

[Shawn Carlock]

SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Has anyone else picked up the new Swarovski lazer rangefinder? I just got one and am very happy with it. It is small, has an adjustable focus and really does read futher in poorer conditions like advertised. I have gotten readings of 1400-1500 yards on a decent target and a reading off the tripod of 1542 yards on a white metal building. while the white metal building was a great target it was shot at noon on a clear day, less than ideal ranging conditions. I was suitably impressed. I just wondered if anyone else has had similar results.

 

[RedAllison]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

SC back in April I was in Wyoming at an invitational meeting (member of a buying group) that featured several gun and optics maker. The Swarovski boys were estatic because they had a prototype of their new rangefinder. We used it there in the shooting complex in Cody, WY and it was superb. Typical Swary performance and quality!

I have had a Leica LRF 800 (that will read a hint over 900 sometimes) for several years and love it. But if it plays out you can bet there will be a hawk on its replacement,
RA

 

[Mikecr]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Being that most people a right eye dominant, it looks to me that the eyepiece is on the wrong side.

 

[rifletuner]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

More info and pricing available anywhere?

Fergus

 

[Shawn Carlock]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Fergus,
Most everyone I have talked to since I got mine, that was interested, got the same story. They are not available until after the first of the year sometime. The small order that was delivered US was snatched right up.Complete info at Swarovski's website. If you happen to stumble on to one, you can count on paying 800.00 + for it.

 

[Randy in Va]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

How far does it work on Non White Metal buildings like most of us shoot?

 

[rwleonard]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

A Swarovski rep told me that the LRF will accept the "doubler" eyepiece they make for binos, giving you about 16x magnification. This and a tripod could be useful on g-hogs.

Rick

 

[Shawn Carlock]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Randy,
I have taken readings @ 1074 yards into a brushy hillside, 1291 yards on a med dark grey rock. I have not had a good chance to laz an animal past 800 yards yet. You do get a "fur" reading right at 800 yards on deer.

 

[Guest]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Have had several 1200 Leicas and when I saw the Swarovski model, I sold them. Inital inspection for me, showed they kicked Leica's butt! Now I need to seriously try one.

 

[JustC]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

My Leica 1200LRF succesfully ranged antelope at ~950yds a few weeks back and some readings were obtained further but not verified due to distance to target and us moving closer. I would be interested in the swaro performance,..but if there current pricing structure is applied,..I'll wait till nightforce makes a pair instead.

 

[Ian M]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Shawn,
I will have a unit next week, will keep you informed as I use it in the field. The ones we used last Feb. were very nice. Very sharp image, easy to operate.

Interesting to learn how they will read distance compared to the new Leica binoc/laser unit and also head to head with the 1200's.

 

[Shawn Carlock]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

I took my 338 EDGE over the weekend to shoot some test groups with a new load. I got a reading resting on my elbows into the dirt @ 1140 yards, bright sunny day and clear air. Take 1 step back 1141 yards impressive. Between the lazer and a cosine indicator I was able to put the first bullet within 4" of the center of its intended rock victim (14 degrees uphill makes a big difference at 1140). The Nightforce version of the exbal program on my palm was right on the money. there is just no sub for good equipment in the LR game.

 

[Ian M]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Initial impressions of the new Swarovski vs the Leica 1200
- the Swarovski is heavier but more ergonomic
- the Swarovski has a much clearer, bigger and brighter image - eyepiece is much larger, easier to see through
- the Swarovski has a better operating button, better placed and much bigger
- the Swaro does not come with a carrying case, rather a neat plastic holster and a large padded neckstrap
- the Swaro is at least $200-250 more than the Leica 1200
- the Swaro has a very large red circle vs a small red box for aiming the Leica. Not sure yet which is better in the field till I get time to go head to head. Seems smaller is better but not sure about that till I get a lot more field time.
- the Swaro has a threaded hole for attaching to a tripod etc., Leica does not but does have an aftermarket deelie that enables attaching to tripod
- Leica takes a standard 9volt square battery, Swaro takes a fairly common round battery, no idea what it is called, looks like the one you put into a Surefire flashlight
- both the Leica 1200 and the Swarovski are small enough to easily carry in the field.

Also played a bit with the new Leica bino/laser today, it was able to get a reading off an elevator at just under 1000 yards. The Swaro did also, but the Leica 1200 could not read that object at that distance. Not sure if that means anything, have not had to shoot any grain elevators that I can recall anyhow.

Hope to have a Leica bino/laser shortly.

 

[Shawn Carlock]

Re: SWAROVSKI \'S NEW LAZER RF 1600 YD

Ian,
I just got back from the range with a customer shooting his 338 Edge I just finished. I ranged a rock, light in color, with the sun down but vey light at 1546 yards. I was impressed until I moved next to the rock in a grass & dirt patch and got 1547 yards in to the grass and dirt. So impressed with it I would say it is on a different planet than all of the rest. The Battery is a CR2 camera battery. They cost more but when the low batt light comes on you are supposed to still have 100+ readings. My opinion is that the Leica dosen't even compare. I will be interested to see if you share this opinion after you have had a chance to ring yours out.

Shawn