Rangefinder advice

Status
Not open for further replies.

chains1240

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2010
Messages
381
Location
West Michigan
I am looking for a good rangefinder that will not break the bank. I have looked at a few of the lesser expensive 500 yard models but the box shows that they will only range 300 yards on game. I am looking for a model that will range out to 500 yards on Deer and coyote. $200-300 tops. Thank you everyone.
 
A guy I hunt with went through several range finders that after a year of field use would be near worth less.
He likes the upper end Nikon.
One of the executives uses a Leica that is dead nuts accurate.
But at a great cost.
 
Ive done a lot of research and bought one a few weeks ago. Its the Nikon Monarch Gold, gets the highest reviews I could find for the money. 1200 yards.
 
Well, I used a buddy's Nikon a few years back for a month or so. I think it was a Nikon 550 or something, but I can't remember for sure. I remember it was around $250 at the time. It seemed very nice, and I really liked it. I had no problem getting ranges on stuff 500 yards away. Now I mostly ranged tree's or other landmarks, not animals, but it worked great. I really was impressed with it and said I was going to buy one.

I ended up never buying one, and decided to get one this year. After doing some research I just decided to borrow one again and take readings at my hunting spots then keep a journal with the ranges of my most popular hunting sights. I figured this will work great and save me some money.

I had a buddy that let me borrow a Bushnell Yardage Pro Sport range finder. My initial impression upon picking this thing up was that it felt like a cheap kids toy. It just felt super cheap. However, it worked and for what I needed to do worked fine. As soon as I went to use it, I noticed that it seemed to take a while to get range readings, and it had to be on something solid like a tree base, or a target, or a animal or something. You couldn't get a reading off of the ground or a leaf or anything like that. I also noticed that quite often you had to hold it on the object you were ranging for several seconds as it didn't seem to range them immediately. The next thing I noticed is that I would range the same exact thing and it would tell me 97 yards one time, then 100 the next, then 97 again, then 100 again. It just seemed to vary slightly on the same object at the same distance. It made me wonder how accurate it was and which reading was correct. So overall, this thing did work, but it didn't work nearly as well as the Nikon, it felt cheap, and it had difficulty ranging several things I tried to range. These are fairly cheap however, so if it's all you can afford it's better than nothing. Otherwise, I'd get something quite a bit nicer.

So those are the only two I have experience with, and those are my experiences. I'm sure there are a lot better options out there than both of them though, but I don't have any other advice as I've not used any others.
 
Now my shooting passion is long range prairie dogs and Bullseye pistol. Definitely don't need a rangefinder for the Bullseye but those pasture rats keep moving from mound to mound and if you're off in your range estimation by 25 yards at 550 yds+ you just missed. And thats not even going into trying to figure out the wind switches.

I had the opportunity to try out the 1000 yard models of Swarovsky, Leica, Leupold, & Nikon for about a week two years ago. Now bear in mind I'm writing this from my office and my notes and distances are at home so I may be off slightly but it won't be by much.

I tested them in the fall so I didn't have the high sun that really messes with lazer rangefinders. First thing I discovered, they range better at midnight than at noon-no sun to mess with the lazer.

The best was the Swarovsky as you would expect. It ranged a lone prairie dog on a short cropped pasture at over 850 yards and a stop sign at over 1200. It may have ranged dogs further but that was the maximum range in the dog town we were shooting. I didn't like the large translucent ranging dot or the effort required to click the ranging paddle.

The next best was the Leica. It would range a single dog out to just over 700 yards. I really liked the precise aiming square, but as this was the older box type Leica it also had a harder ranging button than I liked.

Coming in third was the Nikon, not by much over the Leupold, but probably about 40-50 yards. I liked the ranging crosshair much better than Leupolds, and the ranging button pressed easily so you didn't wind up moving off the target because of it. If I remember right it would range a PD at 350 or so.

Coming in last was the Leupold. First off, I hated all the busy info all around the viewing area. My personal preferences, but I want to know how far it is. I don't care if they think I need to know the true ballistic range, temp, moon faze and all the other superfluous info. This may be of interest to some but it turned me off to such a degree I would have purchased the Nikon if they were equal otherwise. The selection of crosshair options went way too far, it's just not needed. On the plus side, I liked the ranging button and size better than either the Leica or Swarovsky.

So what did I buy? None. I waited for another year because I heard Leica was coming out with a new generation, with a 1200 scan. Thats the one I got. It has ranged single prairie dogs at 811 yards. That was the longest (small) target I have tried so far.

I would have liked to be able to love the Leupold, as I haven't used anything but their scopes for nearly 30 years, but the abilities of their rangefinder was just not up to the requirements I needed.

FWIW
 
Stork,do you remember which model Nikon that was?
If it can range a PD at 350 yards then it's more than good enough for me to use deer/hog/coyote hunting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top