Range finders

[Vince]

Yeah I realize this and there is a couple out there like the Zeiss victory and Bushnell elite 1600 that claim 900 on non reflective targets. I'm really looking for real world first hand experience on if they reliably do this.

I can tell you, based on my limited experience with two Zeiss rangefinders, that they are pretty true in their range estimation. Mine goes out to 600 yards on non-reflective targets, which is what it's rated for. I went with a Zeiss after using my hunting partner's and finding I liked it.

[mudpig]

Not long ago I went searching for a new rangefinder for my then new Savage 110BA in 338LM. Doing a lot of research and discovering the really good rangefinders where going to always be out of my price range, I went with the Newcon 2200. I've been extremely pleased with this unit. I've had it out on Military known distance machine gun ranges in the area and the numbers have always been accurate.

http://www.adorama.com/NELRM2200SI.html?gclid=CPfih5iX2b0CFc1afgodtxkAbg

[chukarmandoo]

I use two rangefinders one for archer and one for long distance shooting. I use the leica 1600 for long distance shooting its a dang good one. Just point and shoot instant readings.

I have a Leica 1600 and it is a good one. Wouldn't trade it. At first I didn't think so but I soon found out it was user error. It has a very small beam and it has to be on target. The center of the square is not necessarily the sight picture. I took it to Montana with me bird hunting just to get used to it. I was ranging Antelope that were silhouetted on the crest of rolling hills and I've come to credit that to the narrow beam. I think its like a rifle, its only as good as the user.

[yobuck]

I have a Leica 1600 and it is a good one. Wouldn't trade it. At first I didn't think so but I soon found out it was user error. It has a very small beam and it has to be on target. The center of the square is not necessarily the sight picture. I took it to Montana with me bird hunting just to get used to it. I was ranging Antelope that were silhouetted on the crest of rolling hills and I've come to credit that to the narrow beam. I think its like a rifle, its only as good as the user.

The narrow beam has advantage over units with a wider beam such as the swarovski. i dont agree using one requires the skills shooting does.
But no doubt the more solid the hold the better they work. A tripod makes all of them perform better as it reduces user error. Some guys will
sandwich them between 2 sandbags to reduce tremor. ive not tried that but im sure it would be a benefit for longer distances.

[chukarmandoo]

I just mean that it is a precision piece of equipment and like a rifle if you don't understand how it really works then you can become very disappointed real fast. There is a learning curve there to really get all of the potential out of these. Once you get it, it will be very accurate even out past its stated range. I have ranged a bull elk at 1579 yds. Trees, rocks, bldgs. out to 1900 yds. With difficulty I'll admit, but I can get a reading.

[Luke45]

How about the Vortex Ranger. Their scopes are pretty impressive, especially for the price.
yep i have a vortex ranger and its great, range non reflectives out to about 750 (hillsides, trees, brush) and reflectives quite a bit farther. and they have uncondtional lifetime warrentee