• Having trouble using the site?

    Contact support

  • Not receiving emails?

    We're currently aware of an issue with our email provider and working to fix it as quickly as we can! Appreciate your patience here!

    View thread

Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

#51
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

I can't wait to finally not take two readings,Arrrrrgh. How much is the PLRF 10? I will start collecting cans now! Maybe I will have enough in 2 years recycling them. Ha! Sure hope that rifle sells Cali_tz. Can you "borrow" that PLRF 10?
 
#52
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

The PRLF10 is out of state, and this is a set of people you don't want to 'borrow' from permanently
wink.gif
It's interesting... that the only 'gadget' these extremely experienced shooters had was a PRLF 10. They don't use droid apps, angle indicators, Kestrel this or that... but they make use a LRF, and the PRLF 10 is what they chose. That speaks volumes to me about what kit works in the field and what doesn't.
 
#54
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Hi guys, I was out today on the mountain in my city so I had a nice view of distant buildings and people walking around and was ranging using the PLRF05, conditions were mainly sunny with a few clouds and it was about 2:30pm. I ranged people at 950 to about 1250yards in a park, I also got my longest range with this unit to date it was on a churh steeple that was grayish in colour and I got 4 readings in a row of between 4965yards and 4969yards, so in summary this unit ranges way better than the top 3 usual suspects Zeiss,Swaro, Leica.
Elmer
 
#55
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elmerdeer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi guys, I was out today on the mountain in my city so I had a nice view of distant buildings and people walking around and was ranging using the PLRF05, conditions were mainly sunny with a few clouds and it was about 2:30pm. I ranged people at 950 to about 1250yards in a park, I also got my longest range with this unit to date it was on a churh steeple that was grayish in colour and I got 4 readings in a row of between 4965yards and 4969yards, so in summary this unit ranges way better than the top 3 usual suspects Zeiss,Swaro, Leica.
Elmer </div></div>

Sounds like it ranges better than the PLRF 10.
 
#56
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Wonder if it's from the .3x1.5 beam of the 10 to the 5 being .4x2.4 helping it make long hits, think that's why the Bushnell arc's work so well with a giant strong beam. or maybe an upgrade in the tiny parts.
 
#57
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Elmerdeer, thanks for the update, and keep posting more results. I am liquidating a bunch of stuff to fund the PRLF05.
 
#58
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: J.Myers</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wonder if it's from the .3x1.5 beam of the 10 to the 5 being .4x2.4 helping it make long hits, think that's why the Bushnell arc's work so well with a giant strong beam. or maybe an upgrade in the tiny parts. </div></div>

Well.....I wouldn't go that far. I'd like to see what the same situation would be for the 10 if you can find a straight line long enough for it.
 
#59
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

I've got one with my name on it at the US disty (thank Sendero for the hookup)... should be shipping out by end of Nov. Hopefully, if the Swiss stay on time, which you think they would be their very nature.

We tested a Zeiss binocular ranger finder this weekend. We could get to 1600 and change on an AR500 white steel target (24x24"), but no further. Sighting my retroreflector target, the Zeiss would measure out to a mile, but that requires being on the business end of the range distance with a 2'x4' board with a bunch of 3M retroreflector material on it. And a radio to coordinate with the shooter side. Can't wait to get rid of all the fuss/muss and just point the Terrapin at whatever and get the slope adjusted range. Sweet.
 
#60
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

I expect to receive the Vectronix Terrapin (PRLF05) a week from today, and will post a review in our shooting conditions and requirements soon. This will be ranging high California desert brush/dirt and painted steel, maybe some coyotes, out to 2000 yards max. We simply cannot practice ELR without one, esp if the alternative is burning 338LM rounds trying to correct for milling errors at ranges beyond my current consumer grade LRF.
 
#61
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

I have got a Demo set of the new Swaro rangefinder binos.
I'm going to give them a work out tomorrow shooting bunnies on a big farm, so should be able to range sheep etc at good distances.
I don't have any rangefinder binos & want to get a set.
I will be keen to see how it goes in the feild instead of around town.
I was trying it around town & it was struggling, so was my CRF1600, I grabbed my PLRF10 to see if the weather conditions were effecting things
crazy.gif

The PLRF worked incredibly well as usual, it really is in another universe to the "normal" lrfs.
It isn't until you do side by side comparisions that you start the understand how much better they really are.
 
#62
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Thanks Kiwi, good to know. I'd be curious as to how the 05 compare to the 10 ...
If the 05 can range a 12x18 piece of white painted steel out to 2000 yards plus, I'll be quite happy.
 
#63
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Kiwi Greg,

Very interested to see what your thoughts are of the Swaro LRF binos are against the Terrapins out on the farm. I am currently struggling to make the choice between the two and this looks like a cut and shut case.

How did it go for you?

Ben
 
#64
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

For me the true test is rainging on flat ground and getting accurate readings .I was rainging 600-1040 yard targets with my Swaro range finder and getting all sorts of readings due to the flat nature of the land we were on -big beam divergence and plenty of false readings.I am very interested in the Terrapin aswell and would like to know how it goes on flat land while rangeing small targets
 
#65
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

That's interesting because my current Bushnell 1500 didn't seem to have problem identifying wrong targets on flat landscape. Or perhaps it had enough problems ranging such that it would reject all return signal until it was strong enough, which only occurs with a big enough object at a close enough range.

Yes I will report on the performance of this Terrapin. I won't bother comparing it to the Bushnell, because it should be order of magnitude difference.
 
#66
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Just got the Terrapin PRLF05. First impression is that it's quite solidly built. Suggests it can take a beating. Definitely weighs more than my Bushnell 1500. There is no cap or cover for the eyepiece, nor the laser/lens end, fwiw. The image is sharp through the 5X eyepiece. FoV is 8deg, or 142mil.
Has Tripod interface (1/4").
Says you shouldn't change environmental temp too drastically as it could cause condensation inside. However, in the specs says that it can stand 'Immersion' for 1 hour at 1 meter. Again, fwiw. Operating temp is -31F to +145F.

Can do distance in meters/yards/feet. Has a selectable distance gate so you can simply ignore target clutter from close up... manual shows distance menu like 100 (eg yds),200,300,400, etc... for this gate setting.

Illuminated reticle is in 10s MILs (with 5 mil halfway points), with 30 MILs above the crosshairs, +/- 30 MILs to left/right of crosshair. Distance/reticle are read out in RED segment LED type of display.

That's it for the out of box experience. Now outside to test it a windy full sun day. Will report back with some comparisons to the $500 Bushnell Elite. I am hoping it's night and day here.

Oh, range specficiation is as follows:
at visibility 30km, 2.3x2.3m target size, albedo (reflectivity) 0.6, detection probability is 90% at 1800 meters (1968 yards).

That albedo factor may be hard to achieve... human skin at this IR wavelength (905nM) is roughly 40-60% depending on ethnicity if I recall correctly. Darker skin is less reflective of IR.
 
#67
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Terrapin (Vectronix PRLF05) initial test results:

Turns out it's hard to find good long distance range scenarios in a suburban environment. So I went out to our intl airport where things are bit more opened up. It is howling wind-wise here in California today... I was trying to hold the units steady while being buffeted by gusts up to 30-40mph.

As expected the Bushnell is merely a childs toy compared to this Terrapin. The max range I could find with the Terrapin was 3182 yards, to a building, and at that distance it was like one out of four times it would find that range, the other times it reported a fail to range. Remember the max spec is 2400m (2624 yds).

For a smaller target, I ranged a small palm tree top (those really tall palms you see in LA alot) at 1812 yards, which was quite encouraging. The smallest target I ranged was a roof vent fan at 300 yards, which the Terrapin optics would resolve every time, but the Bushnell seemed to only find something at 550 yards behind that. It seems like it will nail pretty much anything out to 2000 and change yards. Mind you this was on full (albeit winter-ish) sun whose infrared emissions obviously interfere with the 905nM IR emitted from the laser diode on this unit. I am going to retry some of these tests at night and see how much better can be done, or on cloudy days.

The Terrapin has a 5x viewfinder and the Bushnell a 7x. Initially I thought wow that will be a problem. But after a few comparison trials, I find the Terrapin viewfinder much easier to look through. It's not an eye relief issue, not sure what it is, but the whole field of view pops right at you with your eye snug up on the rubber eyepiece, while on the Bushnell it's sort of fatiguing to find the right place for your eye. And the aimpoint on the Terrapin is way smaller than the Bushnell, which implies and seems to deliver a much more discriminating selection of target vs background.

I didn't have the oppty to range people or animals today. No oppty presented itself. This weekend i'll be out on high desert BLM land so I can report further. I'll post a picture comparing the sizes of the Terrapin and the Bushnell.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
#68
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

The Vectronix PLRF's are definately the best of the laser range finders for ELR shooting but deciding which one you need and whether you "do need" the more expensive models has always been a tough choice for me.

If money were'nt an issue the PLRF 10's would be my choice. A friend has them and whilst they work incredibly well they cost about the same as a good custom rifle plus scope. His justification for getting them was if I have spent all this money on the rifle and scope ... what is the point of not having an ability to range a target at the distances I want to try to take my skill out to. He is right. In theory. He would be "right" in practise too, if we had unlimited access to safe shooting to 2500 metres and could test our skill at multiple targets of oppertunity. This though does'nt really happen.

Many might be suprised in the US but there are tracts of land in the UK where we can shoot at these distances, but the type of land is usually Moorland and this is not usually "target rich" with ideal rocks/boulders presenting themselves at frequent intervals. What happens is that you need to set up a target and usually to clear the height of the Moorland grass or heather some form of A frame with a hanging steel target is used. This means it has to be set up and means you are usually driving some form of quad or other vehicle to the target area and then on to the firing point.

Then when you consider how we usually go about "shooting" on the day we usually dress back to 1000 yards first and then 1760 ( a mile ) and then 2000 yards and then 2500. Everyone may do this differently but some sort of similar "pattern" is likely and when you do your shooting like this it is perfectly possible to get away with a less expensive option than the PLRF 10's. I use Lieca Geovid Bino's which can range out to 1200 yards and measure the distance in increments from each firing point. Granted my mate can use his PLRF's to do a full distance check but there is no real practical difference ... except the cost.

The PLRF 05's may be the ideal compromise to this "cost" v "need" equation but you can probably still do as good a job with a cheaper system if you had to. For the money my mate has invested in his PLRF 10's they are probably his most expensive/least used piece of kit given that the "sites" for doing this sort of shooting are not that numerous and once you have "mapped" them there really is'nt a need to repeat the process.

Obviously he get's a fair bit of use from the PLRF's but actually most of the use is pinging crows or other vermin which farmers have given us permission to clear over their land. Due to topgraphy most of this shooting is usually under 1200 yards ... and given the cloudy skies of the UK my Geovids work quite accurately when we shoot together and when I check with his readings. I also find the extra magnification on the Bino's and their quicker use of not needing to interchange between kit a lot simpler. Especially when we are looking for foxes which are a lot harder to see when keeping close to cover.

In a military role the PLRF 10's or 15's work great and are absolutely essential... but for a civi form of shooting I can easily get by with what I have. Having said that though I would love to try out some PLRF05'S.
 
#69
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Just to verify that LRF's would work better in less than full sunlight conditions, I just took the PRLF05 out around dusk. I ranged several houses up in the surrounding mountains at 3900+ yards... they had their house lights on so I just pointed the aiming circle there and I got ranges every single time, not one failure.

I pointed the aiming circle to the right of a set of house lights to see if the PRLF05 could range trees (these are pines typically) and amazingly the display immediately reported 4429 yards. I tried two more times but failed to get a range. Again the max spec is 2600 yards. I am very impressed with this units performance.

To respond to Peter's post, and thanks for your feedback. Here we have different shooting conditions. On BLM (public land that is open for various uses) land, we have long distance conveniently loaded with shooting targets on steep hillsides. We put our steel on these hillsides and go all over to practice shooting at different angles and distances. We can easily achieve a full mile, within a two hour drive from the house. And if we try I suspect we can layout a 1.25-1.5 mile shooting distance. But first we need to master 1760 yards, which we have not.

For these scenarios, I tried and tried using the Bushnell and a retroreflector (poster board with 3M retroreflector sheets), but it's both difficult to get accurate range by piecing together various piece-wise distances that the Bushie can handle, plus it's a huge time sink and we only have so many daylight and low wind hours to practice the craft. Yes we had a Zeiss bino LRF that had 50% better ranging performance than the Bushnell, but that still did not get us out past 1200-1300 yards when the target is a AR500 steel painted in white, and remember we are shooting at many different angles, not just across flat land in a straight line, where piecing together distances could work equally well. For us, we have found a serious practical difference between piecing together shorter range measurements and just getting the real number in one measurement.

We require a true mile plus LRF, and this PRLF05 seems like the only thing in the price range that can do it, and the added bonus that it gives you slope corrected range is even better. Now I have NOT tested this on our steel targets... I'll do that this weekend when I get out to the actual BLM area. This unit is $2K to your front door, the PRLF10 is like $3.5K from what i understand. Given that a Leica is around $1800-2000 (googled for some pricing), this PRLF05 could be an incredible alternative. Try ranging with your Leica's at dusk... see how far they can go, I'd be interested in seeing what happens.
 
#70
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Thanks for the reports!

I had always been unsatisfied with my Swaro RF. I'm getting a PRLF05 next year now. $2200 is almost affordable, LOL, well much more than $3700 anyways.
 
#74
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

tested a bit more today. Ranged the top of a vineyard on a ridge at about 3pm, the sun was facing me and low in the winter horizon. I could not get any range readings, not surprised and this vineyard was far, couldn't see it without the 5X mag of the viewfinder. Hard to ask a Class 1 laser to send photons out 2 miles, then be able to detect some reflected portion of those photons apart from sun photons at the same wavelength.

I remeasured around 4:45pm, after the sun just went down over the mountains. Still plenty of light, but not direct light into the sensor. Re-ranged a grove of trees at the vineyard... 4500 yards. Ranged everytime.

Did some more house ranging up on the mountain side. Some half of them don't range, as I suppose the large windowed walls are specular and throwing the laser beam elsewhere, instead of back to me. So I range trees right next to those houses and I get solid consistent readings in the 3000 to 4500 yard range. I didn't know pine and live oak leaves were so reflective of IR.

Anyway, very satisfied with the performance of this range finder. It's a seriously performing piece of metrology eqpt. Hats off to Vectronix! If you were thinking of spending anything above $1000 for a LRF, and you want to optimize your chances of ranging whatever target you are looking at out past a mile, right now this unit is the only clear choice.
 
#75
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Ch'e ... the Terrapin is manufactured in Switzerland, and thus I wouldn't think there is any problem shipping directly to you in NZ. You just need to find yourself a dealer or call Vectronix directly I would think.

I am not familiar with the export law on this or any other rangefinder.
 
#76
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cali_tz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ch'e ... the Terrapin is manufactured in Switzerland, and thus I wouldn't think there is any problem shipping directly to you in NZ. You just need to find yourself a dealer or call Vectronix directly I would think.

I am not familiar with the export law on this or any other rangefinder. </div></div>

He'd have to go through someone local, you couldn't ship it to him from the usa as I believe its still covered by ITAR. I know the last time I tried to purchase a vectronix plrf 10 from the 2 companies in the US. They both did minor background checks on me.
 
#77
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

interesting. For this PRLF05, I went thru no such inquiry whatsoever. And there was nothing on the bill of sale or any other doc of no exporting or any limitations whatsoever.

fwiw.
 
#78
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cali_tz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">interesting. For this PRLF05, I went thru no such inquiry whatsoever. And there was nothing on the bill of sale or any other doc of no exporting or any limitations whatsoever.

fwiw. </div></div>

Interesting. And the capabilities you list are right there with my plrf10. Sounds like if you don't get a "c" model you'd be stupid to not pick up the 5 over the 10 or 15.
 
#79
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Perhaps. Until we did a side by side test, it would be hard to know that for sure. One thing is seems clear and that is this unit is a whole different level of performance than anything in its price class. Next time I train with the folks that have the PRLF10, I will definitely do that comparison.

We have a discussion amongst some of the engineers among us, one who designs military laser range finders, on how Vectronix is pulling this trick off.
 
#80
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

To be honest it looks like the 1 generation before the current PLRF10.... i.e. the one I've got. The dimensions are about right(though the case is redesigned to be cheaper). But I bet the guts are very very very similar.
 
#81
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

I ordered my 05 the same time you did Tony. Mine will be here tomorrow by 12:00. Jeff on here (Broz) has a PLRF 10. I'll try to get together with him to do a side by side. Should be interesting.

Wade.
 
#82
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

That's funny... wonder why I got mine on Thursday and I am in California?

Please do compare with Jeff's PRFL10... let us know what you learn.

Too bad my previous company got absorbed into a bigger one. We had great tools for measuring laser light power, and a great optical engineer who could have helped figure out Vectronix is doing that the others aren't. Remember this is a Class 1 Laser device, which means you can literally stick the thing in front of your eye without any negative effects. Yet it can send out and detect a photon scattering back from 4500 yards. Sick.
 
#83
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

On the import to NZ and to here in the UK I suspect the 05 has been aimed at the civilian market and without military orders which would bring the equipment into the restricted export criteria for some countries the PLRF05's should remain free from the law enforcement or military only "user" ID checks needed for the 10's and 15's. In my experience the "c" version with the none detectible/signature wavelength is the one that seems to get you "red flagged" if you order them.

Over here the only difficulty we have is that the agent's are more concerned with juicy FIST contracts rather than taking the time to deal with individual "civi" orders. My mate had to pester one guy to death before he caved in and sold him one. Doing a "group buy" might be a good way to improve your chances of attracting interest.

To pick up on the point about indirect sunlight conditions being able to offer longer ranging with my Geovids ... this is true ... but only when pinging something substantial like a cliff face or forest ridge. I have had hits showing up to 1800 to 1950 yards. Nothing though in the 2000 range. Perhaps the digi display has a cut off on the "2" s.

To ping the metal plate I find I am usually required to operate within the 1200 yard to 1400 yard maximum range. If you strategically site the plate with a backstop "bank" behind it and measure the distance from the plate to the bank ... you can increase the ability to get a reading at distances beyond the manufacturer's max range and subtract the difference to the plate.

The point you make regarding slope and difficulty in patching distances together to work well with the balistic calculations required for a shot is interesting ... but it may simply be attributable to the over all dificulty of shooting at ELR.

Comparing the results from the PLRF 10's and my "interval" method we are no different on true distance but when "mapping" the sites we use we thought from our results on elevation variances that the balistic software might be the issue. They can only predict though what you put in and in that respect we found the slope calculation quite important. Or so we thought.

Initially we found by altering this as a variable the true data for the shot could be found ... in the same fashion as altering the BC of the bullet ... infact though what we finally got to grips with which was causing the variances was firstly the time of day and "conditions" for the shot and then the extreme spreads on the load and sometimes the bullet concentricity. Our measurements on distance and slope were actually quite correct from the start.

My mate and I both shoot for GB in F Class and regularly use a tunnel range near us to test for grouping and Extreme Spreads on a chrono for our 7mm F Class rifles. I try to get the ES down to 8-10 fps on a 3150 fps load. For the World Championships we were using a Verne Junke machine to test the 180g Bergers for concentricity variations and boxing those which were the lowest or most consistant. Personally I did a few but found the task very dull as the Berger 180 VLD's had very consistant readings straight from the box. There were only one or two which needed to be disregarded. So I handed the machine back to my mate and left it at that. Never used them as I think I only did about 50 but decided out of curiosity to load them up for shooting at a mile.

Using a group of these bullets with my match prep'd cases I found the elevation spreads at a mile really came down and was able to do some very satisfying "cold bore" or "initial 10 rounds" groups.

What became apparent was that the further out you go the more these variables really matter. If you prep the rounds like this and take your shots before the barrel starts to foul badly it was possible to get consistant elevation enabling regular hits on the target in low to little (early dawn) wind.

Once the sun came up for a while because where we shoot is over peat soil which holds a lot of water, the pressure changes from evoporation would soon start to affect the elevation variable on the group. The same happens on Stickledown range at Bisley as this too is heather and peat ... shoot at 8.30 am to 9.00 am and you can do a "possible" in the first detail at 1000 yards ... if you are squadded in the third detail at 10.30 am dropping down out of the V bull is a regular occurance.

So what you say about shooting at the ideal time and if you have the right load developed, then the need to have a ranging system which can do it all in one quick hit rather than loss of time from having to do it in sections is very true and makes a whole lot of sense. For my part I am more or less shooting at "known" distance during these hours but if I had the chance to have multiple targets and needed to range them I think the PLRF 05's would be my choice too.

The "distance" thing though is likely to be very close if you have to do it in multiple measurements so long as you do it right and it is more likely the time of day that changed the results from those found with a quicker system which enabled shooting more in the early hours/calm conditions.


 
#84
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Hi guys I am glad evertone is liking the Terrapin just like I am! I have a question that I am waiting for the answer too from my distributor, but if anyone knows or can find out about it can you post it. What size is the aiming circle in mils? Cause if we know this we might be able to use it as a backup ranging system if conditions are not good enough to range in.
I think the aiming circle is 2 mils and the dots in between the lines are 1 mil but its just a calculated guess.
Thanks
Elmer
 
#85
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

@Peter, thanks for sharing that information. It resonates alot with my experience. Past 1600 yards for me the trajectory starts to depart from my Shooter predictions. I have not yet characterized the problem, but I have a plan for doing so. I suspect my biggest problem is SDs are not tight enough, and a 30fps variation from one round to the next could cause enough elevation variation to miss steel completely.

From my chron's of my reloads over the past couple years, it seems difficult if not impossible to get sub 10 ES. If I could get two sigma spread down to 10fps, I think that would be a big step forward. Now that I have the correct range variable solved, this ES/SD tightening is the next big step forward in long range accuracy. I note that match 308 ammo (FGMM2) has ES in the 50-60fps region... so claims of sub 10 fps ES are hard for me to imagine achieving.
 
#86
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: elmerdeer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi guys I am glad evertone is liking the Terrapin just like I am! I have a question that I am waiting for the answer too from my distributor, but if anyone knows or can find out about it can you post it. What size is the aiming circle in mils? Cause if we know this we might be able to use it as a backup ranging system if conditions are not good enough to range in.
I think the aiming circle is 2 mils and the dots in between the lines are 1 mil but its just a calculated guess.
Thanks
Elmer </div></div>

Under these conditions, it seems like you just have to back to your scope reticle for that.
 
#87
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Well, mine showed up and I'm tickled! Just ranged a oil tank at 4632 yds (3) times in a row with no misses and a moving helicopted at 1784 yds. This is a beautiful clear and very sunny day. Needless to say, I think to $2000 is a bargain!
 
#88
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Cali,

I think I can help on the reloading aspect to bring down the ES but firstly, are you using a .308 to try to shoot consistantly at a mile ?

If you are using a .308 then I think you are doing great to get predictable readings out to 1600 ... this is way past what I think a .308 can do, albeit if they are shot at high altitude in thin air then the distances can be extended.

Working on the basis you are shooting a .308 is your chambering a custom one with a tight neck requirement ? I assume not as you make reference to factory issue target ammo.

If working on a Sammi chambering the way I would go about reducing your ES is firstly try and get some Lapua cases which use the "small" primers as opposed to the large rifle primers. These seem to be the cases of choice with guys in our F/TR team.
They seem to handle pressure better and the primer pockets are
lasting quite a bit longer.

From what I hear some of the guys are also going for long drop tubes on their funnels to compress the powder tighter when pouring in the powder after being weighed. Exact "load" details I can acquire but as I shoot F Open I have'nt got them to hand. Also, some of the top guys just use a 155g bullet as they mainly develop a load for 1000 yards. There are guys using the heavier bullets though and I can speak with them as to what they use. I expect the loads to be on the high side though so work up to them once I get details.

Most of us shooting at the level of reducing ES to a 10 fps figure are using scientfic scales to weigh out the powder.
This is probably the main difference. Compared to using a beam scale or from using electronic scales provided by the traditional re-loading companies, even their top of the line models, there is a big difference.

You want the scales to accurately measure to one tenth of a grain. Forget the sealed cabinet models that go to one hundreth as these are too time consuming. A set which can be used to one tenth and which has a refresh calibration facility for "0" and which has a spirit level built in to ensure they are level (the feet adjust for height and cant)are all you need. Then a set of test weights which are also properly calibrated for checking with and you are good to go. You need to use them in a draft free room and you need to make no sudden movements and need to clean the brass measuring bowl of any build up of powder residue as this often leads to the "0" grain setting becoming "0.1".

You can tell when you have the right type of scales as when you move near them in a quick fashion the reading will jump. They need to be that sensitive and accurate.

You also need to clean the funnel used to pour the powder into the case regularly as "static" can catch a single grain or two as can powder residue and this sort of thing will throw off the results. A tap or two to make sure all the grains have entered the case goes without saying ( hopefully ) but it is suprising how easy it is to forget.

The next bit of gear we use is a dentists ultrasonic for cleaning the cases. Any reloaded fireformed brass needs to have the inside clear of all powder residue. To save money on expensive cleaning products I use cream of tartar powder and usually about a third of a table spoon to go into the pyrex glass jar which can be suspended into the water in the main tank of the ultrasonic and filled with hot water and stirred. The glass jar can fit in 17 or 22 cases so I keep my 2+15 and 2+20 seperately batched and once cleaned and rinsed I turn them upside down for 30 mins to get rid of most of the water before putting them into a tumbler with corn media to dry them off.
I give them usually an hour and don't mix the batches of cases.
I will go on to describe batching in due course but once you have a set which give such low ES you keep them together.

You might find after bringing them out of the tumbler you need to tap them a fair bit to ensure all corn media is out and then check to see if the inside of the neck is still polished. Usually they can be but sometimes after a few firings they go dull. If so I have a wire loop I made which holds a barrel patch and I insert this to polish the inside of the necks.

All of these steps should bring you down to a good 20 fps ES and to drop lower the key to it is neck tension. You need to do a light skim kneck turn on the cases, trim them back to a consistant length, and experiment with different collet bushings to develop a kneck tension which is light enough to avoid the risks of soft seating so you avoid pulling a round if seating the bullets into the lands but not so tight as to bring up the ES. Basically as light as possible on the neck tension is what it takes for really low ES.

Batching the cases on weight never seems to do the trick for me. I have sets of 2+20 which give me 10 fps spreads and they have some with odd weights in them but many are the same. It is trial and error. I usually batch mine by chrono testing in groups of 5 which I then add together to make up a collective batch. I do so because once you have a bit of fouling in the barrel the spreads will move up but if they do a string of 5 in the 10fps range they work as good as they possibly can when shot in strings of 2+20. I also try to reload them quite soon before firing them as a cold weld can develop and then the spread becomes bigger. Usually for me this is the night before but for speed you can do the powder and place the loads in vials to simply drop into the case when required. It is the bullet seating time which needs to be controlled and pre measured powder loads save a lot of time if doing your rounds the night before a comp.

You also need a pretty good chrono which ideally works on infa-red so you can use it in a tunnel range if you have access to one.

Loads like this will shoot a single hole at 100 yards not much bigger than the bullet diameter if you have a good barrel and have found the right powder/seating depth/primer combo.

I suspect many will be laughing now at what a PITA regime this must be. I know how they feel as I strangely hate reloading like this as it is an absolute "ball-ache". Some go further and weigh all their bullets then Verne Junke them for concentricity and some trim the me-plats too.

You can crawl up your own a** with all this anal retentive attention to detail but when you have a calm condition and you're shooting with the worlds best ... if they have done a better job on their ammo they are likely to win the comp. It is only when the conditions are severe that the wind calls will make all the difference.

I have to confess I am not the world's greatest at following what I know is required. As any who know me will testify I am often just as happy to have a good laugh and a drink the night before a comp and then do my ammo in the early hours. Sometimes I get the bit between my teeth though and am thorough and it does pay off.

I did a 2+20 at 800 yards and put in a 100.14 which is 14 rounds in under 5 inches and 6 less than 10 inches and I have done 100 .6 at 1000 and not many have cleaned 2+20 at 1000 yards.

These sort of spreads though are only feasible IMO with case capacities up to the 70-80 grain limit. You won't get this low with a .338 and above, there is just too much powder to enable you to do so. I also believe you have to have "the right barrel". I have had a few barrels that can do this but equally I have had some where I simply cannot get lower than 20 fps or maybe the upper teens. There is no accounting for how you get a good barrel but you can see how guys who have a great barrel suddenly start to pull up the rankings in the year that they use them ( or years as the case may be ).

If you do try these techniques and invest in the gear to enable you to do so then you might get a mile working with the .308 but personally I think once the rounds go subsonic it is a lucky dip. The transonic period can easily alter flight and elevation and ideally you would be more consistant with a round which was still supersonic at a mile.

Good luck though in having a go at this ...


 
#89
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Thanks alot Peter... I made that comment about the 308, but there I tap out at 1200 yards and we hit mostly OK. Mostly my ELR attention is focused around my 338LM, Lapua brass, 300 Scenar (adding 250 to the mix based on recommendations), 215M primer, N570 powder. I use an RCBS 1500 and 750 to double check each charge. Significant digits go to 0.1 grain, but I am not sure what the accuracy of that 0.1 grain is. The two scales don't always agree with each other, seems like they are at least 0.5 grains apart from agreeing.

I don't have alot of data, but weighing cases did seem to make a difference for my 308 ES. Haven't tried it at 338 since I am using all Lapua brass, which hopefully is tightly controlled at the factory.

I do polish brass, but don't ultrasonic even though I have one. Do you think that addtil step is required or optional?

Maybe a better scale would do the trick. Though on my scales, with the N570's huge kernels, each kernel is almost 0.1 grains, and often adding/subtracting one kernel ticks the scale 0.1 grain either way. So what I am trying to say is whatever the error in the scale is, assuming it's a consistent bias, I should be pretty close to 0.1 grain amongst rounds, even if I don't have the exact charge being read on the display. Certainly my scales do modulate if with a wave of the hand causing an air pressure wave. But just walking up to the display, no it does not change. Definitely not that sensitive.

If I had to bet, I'd say it was the variable neck tension. It seems the burn rate in these powders is so peaky that different tensions in the neck would release the bullet sooner or later by microseconds and cause different pressures buildups. I think turning the necks is probably what I need to try next.

Anyway, good advice, I'll try alot of it and see what happens. The other thing is chron'ing 338LM rounds is a hella expensive way to get data... I try to shoot at the target at the same time, but I should bite the bullet and spend $100 reloading just for chron data gathering and get a bit more scientific. It's funny that people claim 3fps ES though when even the Oehler chron (I use CED) is at best 2fps itself when the measuring sensors are max distance apart. I think to get true 3fps ES, you have to guarantee that your chron is ~1fps max variation. At 3000fps, that is 0.03% error rate.
 
#90
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Right, now I see what you are shooting I can help more.

Your .338 LM with a 300g SMK and VV570 is probably using around 94.0 grains or there abouts which is a lot of powder and getting the ES down on case capacities of this magnitude is'nt easy. The fouling created by the slow burning powder works against you. If you can get your SD's down to 15/20 fps so that if there is a climb in velocity caused by fouling and pressure it is a gradual one and the variation round to round is within this tolerance then you can start to make progress.

570 is double based and is cleaner than 170 but at the same time is slow enough and in sufficient quantity will cause pressure and velocity increases and accuracy to tail off and it is important to figure out "when" and by "how much" this is likely to happen.

I would start by preparing just 20 cases which are weighed and batched, trimmed to length and have the lightest of skim neck turning done to assist with concentricity on the neck and to enable a slightly lighter neck tension. If you have got match dies which can take Bushings for the neck tension then great. If not then we would need to work with light skimming of the neck in "stages".

I would start the load development by shooting five prep'ed cases on a clean barrel and checking the ES over a chrono.

Don't worry about group size and don't be worried about shooting them at 100 yards. If the rounds show a ES jump in the 30 plus fps within 5 rounds we need to try the next 5 cases with lighter neck tension. If the cases are new then take 2 thou off the case neck diameter by turning the neck. So if the loaded case neck diameter is say .370 without any turning then a light skim should take it to .368 and then if this needs cutting again then go for .366 ( don't take the .370 as a known figure for none neck turned loaded brass, it is just a guess ). The idea being to come down in 2 thou increments.

If the next 5 are shot on a clean barrel ( not squeeky clean just free of fouling ) and don't reduce in ES then stop the cutting on the case and try for a lighter neck tension if you have match dies which can take neck bushings.

Clean and prep the 5 cases which were last used and had 4 thou off and try them using the normal die bushing for the normal none neck turned round and see if the cases have sealed the bullet or whether it is too loose. If so try those with 2 thou off the neck.

If both have the bullet so it is not hand loose than try them both again in a clean barrel for each 5 shot group. Eventually you will see the ES drop and tighten up at least so that the SD's are not a full 30fps apart.

Now there is one thing I should say about slow burning powders. They are very prone to causing carbon rings just into the lands. One piece of equipment I really rate but they are expensive is a bore scope. I use mine to tell how the rifle has cleaned up. Shooting 7mm in a 76g load in a wildcat 7mm Boo Boo using H1000 would on certain barrels cause these ( some barrels it did'nt and those clean fouling barrels were usually the best ) but cleaning with a wire brush and then copper/fouling remover often had these over looked if numerous rounds had been fired. The bore scope could show you exactly how the barrel had cleaned up. I prefer clean lands and am prepared to leave some coppering in the grooves but like the barrel clean of unburned powder. This combo usually means that the rifle still groups well from a cold bore. If you clean it down to no copper in the grooves the barrel usually needs a few "blow offs" to get it settled ... but it is the fouling and unburned powder which will cause accuracy to tail off.

So if you have used your .338 for some time you might well have a carbon ring in the barrel just into the lands and these are huge bug bears in terms of causing elevation and fliers. So with that in mind and if you can stretch to one ( about 800-900 dollars I think - maybe cheaper second hand ) I would get one for the .338LM.

Then once you are sure the barrel is carbon free do the round testing described above.

Once the SD'a are down to the best you can do without taking too much off the neck the next thing is to try for seating depth and velocity banding to see how it groups at say 300 yards.

Get the two best at this distance and do a ladder test at 1000 to see how they perform. Try to keep the bandings within 50fps for the loads and the SD's within 15-20 fps and then once the best candidate is found do a string of 20 rounds on a distance target at 1000 yards and chrono them if possible. If not chrono the round at the start and at the finish. You might well experience an increase of 100 fps due to fouling.

Armed with this knowledge and the elevation changes at 1000 yards you can develop a table for expected increased velocity and resulting drop in elevation for say a 10 round count and then 20 rounds.

Unless the bore on the barrel is a very generous military style bore designed to cope with mud etc cleaning the barrel reasonably regularly for shooting at a mile should bring down the elevation spreads. Runing a wire brush through after each 2+20 should keep the fouling at bay. Some wide bore barrels however seem to work better with some fouling in them. Those barrels though are not inherantly accurate though and are usually indicative of a cheap factory hammer forged barrel. Ideally for good results at ELR the barrel should be a fairly tight bore from a good name.

A gunsmith with a set of pilots for his reamer ( in .338 ) would be able to tell you the bore size for the barrel.

Ultimately once all this is done you ought to be able to have good elevation at 1 mile. That is an ideal distance for this calibre. The bore scope will keep you right and let you know how good or bad the barrel is fouling up and I suspect that this is likely your problem.

Forgot to add, I would definately clean the cases with your ultrasonic. The cleaner the case the more unifrom the burn of the powder and the less friction variable there is on neck tension.
 
#91
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Peter, thanks that is fantastic advice. Will study and adopt it. I have read alot on the internet and various forums about loading for accuracy, but never ran across such a specific discussion as yours above. Will take some months to try this track, but it sounds quite plausible.

The rifle is a Steyr SSG08 and I think probably meets some military specs for keeping operable in mud/snow/etc... fwiw. Also, what is your concern for fouling... seems like the cold bore out of this rifle is a flier, and the rest group well. That is a very general statement, but I don't clean the rifle except for once every 50 rounds or so.
 
#93
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

wow! you smoked my farthest measurement with the PRLF05. So much for that 2400 meter specification.

What actually were you ranging... not that tall bldg looks like but something just to the right of it?
 
#94
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

The white powerplant behind it. I moved the rangefinder as I took the pic. I did range it three times, all within 2 yards never missed once. These are awsome!
 
#95
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

The Steyr will be a generous bore and from what you say the liklihood is that your cleaning regime takes the fouling and coppering out so well that it needs a round down it to settle the barrel for subsequent shots. If it groups well after that then you know the sweet spot for the velocity and seating depth and it only remains to work on the ES/SD's.

As I say, sometimes the specific military barrels I have come across work best with a little fouling but a bit of a brush through with a wire brush in between the 50 count to keep fouling from getting too heavy might help maintain the sweet spot.

My comments on fouling come from trying to get the ES down on rounds using slow burning powder. This usually was a problem when I had a barrel which seemed more prone to it.

A few examples might help. In 2006 I won our first national league F Class championship shooting a 7mm Boo Boo with 73.4g of H1000 and that barrel never seemed to foul or copper badly. I shot it out in Canada at their Nationals. I then ordered two other barrels both in 7mm Boo Boo and both did suffer from fouling. The next year my shooting slipped and the league was won by Dennis Groom who was mainly shooting a 30-338 LM wildcat ( necking the .338 down to .30 and using .240g SMK's). That barrel he had never seemed to copper or foul badly and the following year he had shot it out and built another rifle in the same calibre.

This second barrel he could'nt get to work as well due to fouling and he had to keep cleaning it to get rid of the fouling in between details. That year the title went to Greg Thompson who was shooting a 7mm-270 WSM and he had some great results and this calibre became the standard calibre most of us still shoot. It works so well because you can use slightly faster powders and these can be brought down to very low ES.

Now compared to normal standards every rifle above probably shot excellently. The difference of dropping to a four in these comps is very significant. But every rifle probably still held 2 moa at their very worst and likely lower than that at around 1.5 moa which is just enough to give you too many 4's. These would be 9's on the US targets as your 10's are our 5's.

So from my perspective fouling is an issue but if you are shooting a rifle which has a larger bore but groups say at 1 moa at 100 yards and does'nt seem to suffer as much on fouling then you won't see it as an issue.

The test loads for 100 yards most of the above guys were developing would be shooting .25 moa or less. To do this you need a tighter bore but at the same time if it fouls then the groups will open up. Getting a barrel which can do .25 moa after say 10 rounds at 100 yards without fouling badly is the sort of barrel you can win a title with.

However these type of barrels will have little or no tolerance slackness to cope with mud and other military issues. It is horses for courses really ... but these type of barrels work very well at shooting tight groups at a mile if the conditions are right.

A military barrel works differently. They like a little fouling as it brings in the group but like everything too much fouling causes problems. I liken it to a blocked chimney. It is as if there is one bullet which seems to act as a chimney brush and after the build up of carbon it pushes it out. The effect is it drops low and usually to a four but I have seen them go lower. This phenomenon of having a round drop out of the bottom is a very common one in F Class ... although the targets are tight ... but you know the guys shooting are not pulling the round and you know that the ES or SD could'nt simply account for such a drop. The only thing therefore that seems to be in common with this is "slow powder" and a barrel prone to carboning up.

Hence my comments ... and until someone can explain why this sort of thing happens better than my carbon explanation ... I think it is probably true. Time after time I have had a four go low and then with no alteration I am back in the bull. Others have had it too. At 1 mile it is very noticeable ... going high is usually a gradual thing built up from heat and velocity gain ... but rounds dropping unexpectedly out of the bottom are a real "head scratcher" when you consider how carefully each round has been loaded. Lol ... it is one of shootings great mysteries ...
 
#96
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bigsky23</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The white powerplant behind it. I moved the rangefinder as I took the pic. I did range it three times, all within 2 yards never missed once. These are awsome! </div></div>

damn that's impressive. esp since you took this range in daylight... kudos to Vectronix.
 
#97
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

@Peter, yes why those rounds drop out when one knows everything is controlled so well, the shooter is well practiced... that just boggles my mind for a plausible explanation. Maybe it is your carbon explanation, but I would think such a buildup wouldn't be cleared in a singular event but be swept away continuously and more or less evenly with each round, and reach some sort of equilibrium. I am also thinking now about your comment on faster powders make for lower ES/SD... I was thinking the opposite, as perhaps they peaked less quickly and this pressures were more stable. Dunno. When you get down to the nitty gritty, this is one of those cross discipline problems requiring chemistry, physics, optics, mech eng, etc...
 
#98
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

Barrels which don't foul badly probably do so because they are cleared as you have said ... the ones that do foul up ... well it is anyones guess as to why rounds can drop low when the condition does'nt cause it.
 
#99
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

I went out today to try and find some long distance ranges on animals and was able to range the farthest animals I could find easily. They were the black angus cows in the pic. I also included a couple of deer I saw today was ranged however they were only 340 yds away.
29pzpjl.jpg

2v7t8w9.jpg

2wpumig.jpg
 
#100
Re: Got my Vectronix Terrapin & compared it t my Swaro

more PRLF05 update. Today I was out in the California high desert, typically brown, mostly dry soil, dead grass, occasional boulders, and some sage brush.

And where I was very hilly. So ranging here means rather low reflectivity compared to our urban tests above. Also, the target areas tend to be sloped at around 45 degrees or so.

In this environment, my Bushnell would range 500-700 on dirt/rock, and maybe 600-800 aiming at a 24x24 piece of steel. A Zeiss bino RF got to about 1000-1100 on the same piece of steel, if I recall correctly.

The PRLF05 ranged 100% of the time any piece of dirt, rock or brush, out to about 2400-2500 yards, now just like the spec says. Once I got a range of 3318 yards to a farther ridge, but could never repeat that. Conditions were bright sun, totally clear skies. Now, all the distances from our steel target that I wanted to setup that were invisible to our other LRFs, are 100% repeatable and consistent. What a pleasure it is to shoot this way... one press and boom 1780 yards. Beautiful.

My shooting however didn't match the brilliance of the PRLF05 but that's another story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

StealthOwl
SOLD Mint Vectronix Terrapin PLRF-05 Laser Rangefinder, Complete Kit
Replies
9
Views
2K
bcharleswalker
B
S
Vectronix Vector X vs Sig Kilo10K Gen 2 Initial Impressions
Replies
18
Views
2K
GBMaryland
GBMaryland
m1match
Spotters Sig Kilo10K Gen 2, AB Quantum app, Sig BDX app first impressions and comments
Replies
5
Views
568
CSTactical
CSTactical
2Twenty3
Need help deciding on binos
Replies
43
Views
2K
Scopeye
S
P
SOLD Vectronix PLRF25C BT X2
Replies
16
Views
1K
nvg.expert
nvg.expert
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts