rangefinder
- Thread starter wpc
- Start date
Leica make a decent one that isn't too outrageous, bushnell also. I have a pair of bushnell fusion ARC binos, a little higher but dual purpose.
You need to define what is affordable to you first.
Then you have to have to consider 'game' often isnt a reflective surface and therefore most range finders are far less effective at ranging it. I am willing to bet a vectronix will do it but you have to consider 1900 affordable to get to that range. http://www.eurooptic.com/vectronix.aspx
Using a mil-based reticle to estimate the range can be hard with came as they dont tend to be a consistent size which throws a lot of varibility into your range estimation.
I love my bushnell tactical elite 1600 arc but I would expect it to get a return on anything short of maybe an elephant at 1500 yards.
Then you have to have to consider 'game' often isnt a reflective surface and therefore most range finders are far less effective at ranging it. I am willing to bet a vectronix will do it but you have to consider 1900 affordable to get to that range. http://www.eurooptic.com/vectronix.aspx
Using a mil-based reticle to estimate the range can be hard with came as they dont tend to be a consistent size which throws a lot of varibility into your range estimation.
I love my bushnell tactical elite 1600 arc but I would expect it to get a return on anything short of maybe an elephant at 1500 yards.
The bushnell 1600 arc claims 1600 yards on reflective surfaces I have used mine to get accurate ranges on game sized rocks past 1000 yards but you have to be very stable and I wouldnt expect to get an accurate range on a game annimal past 1000 although I really dont intend to be taking any shots on animals that far out so if I cant get an accurate range I know I need to be closer. I think the bushnell is around 500-600 and might be a good place to start. I am sure some other people will have suggestions as well.
What kind of animal can you reliably hit the vital zone of at 1,500 yards? You might be asking for much more than you need.
I will say that i replaced my Leica 1600 with a terrapin and it was less about range and more about ranging smaller game and doing it in tougher conditions (like fog). Looking back on it, i really liked that Leica.
I will say that i replaced my Leica 1600 with a terrapin and it was less about range and more about ranging smaller game and doing it in tougher conditions (like fog). Looking back on it, i really liked that Leica.
Leica 1600, on a tripod I've ranged a 36"x48" white target @ 1762yrds. $799 new pretty much everywhere.
http://www.gseven.com/
Again as stated above, all depends on definition of "affordable". This will be my next purchase in the long range arsenal.
Again as stated above, all depends on definition of "affordable". This will be my next purchase in the long range arsenal.
Leica, Swaro and Zeiss are the only three brands to consider at your price point. I own a Leica and could not be happier. All three will do the job. The big things I considered were; size, time to range, dealer support, glass quality and durability. I dismissed all the features having to do with aiming solutions.
Something I had not considered was usability. My 9 year old son picked up my rangefinder and could use it within 10 seconds. Push this button to turn it on, push it again to range. It was small enough to fit in his hands and he was able to range objects out to 900 meters without a tripod using scan mode, which he happened upon by mistake. I don't think you can go wrong with any of those three brands. Spend the money and you will be happy.
ETA: The downfall with the Leica is you don't get a way to tripod mount it. You can come up with improvised methods, but for this kind of money you should be able to get it built in.
Something I had not considered was usability. My 9 year old son picked up my rangefinder and could use it within 10 seconds. Push this button to turn it on, push it again to range. It was small enough to fit in his hands and he was able to range objects out to 900 meters without a tripod using scan mode, which he happened upon by mistake. I don't think you can go wrong with any of those three brands. Spend the money and you will be happy.
ETA: The downfall with the Leica is you don't get a way to tripod mount it. You can come up with improvised methods, but for this kind of money you should be able to get it built in.
Last edited:
Bushnell ARC 1600. I've gotten water towers at just shy of 1,900 yards and got rocks/stumps at 1,460 yesterday in adverse conditions.
I’d look at something used. The Leica 1600s are still pretty relevant and can be found for $300-400. I used one for a few years and could get readings at 1200 all day, 1500+ in slightly favorable conditions.
Based on my experience which included comparing the three, together same time/target/conditions, etc., the Nikon 4000 will do as much, range wise, as the Vectronix X and the Sig 2400ABS. However, it only provides range and angle. Then the shooter (or spotter) must enter that information into either their own or another's ballistic solver. Frankly it has an unbeatable reticle and for around $400 it's a real doer...
If the range requirement isn’t 1,500 all day, I’d pick the Leica personally. I felt like I could be more precise with the reticle on the Leica than the Sig line. But seeing 338’s reply above makes me believe that the Nikon 4000 would be a better option than either the Leica or Sig 2000.
Forgot to add photos... Remember these are from reflective targets. I have found that it's safe to theorize:
Similar threads
