I was in the market for a new rangefinder, and was checking out the reviews here. Mostly interested in rangefinding capabilities, and didn't really need Bluetooth connectivity as a must have. I do have the 4DoF Kestrel, and figured I could just put in the range numbers manually. I heard a lot of good remarks about the Leicas and the Razor 4000 being able to range accurately to extended distances. The Razor is a completely new design as I understand and I was curious as to how much better it would perform compared to the older models which, in my limited experience, were kinda lacking (I have one of the older ones). I had the opportunity to compare both of these units side by side, for a couple days, and my experience was surprising for me at least. Just FYI, This is not a microscopic analyzation like some folks here would do. A lot of the shooters here use their equipment to the fullest capability, that is not me. Yet. I needed something that could range accurately past 1000yds to help me learn all the stuff you guys already know. Here are my comments.
Opening the boxes. The leica comes with a standard carry pouch, the Razor comes with a hard case for carry. Both come with batteries, CR2.
Both are pretty easy to set up, even for me. The video tutorials that Doc has posted make it real simple for the leica. Paring the Leica with the Kestrel is simple watching Doc's video. it really is that easy.
Actual use. Both will range the big stuff to increadible distances. The Leica has a significantly smaller reticle with finer lines than the Razor. Both are adjustable in brightness. Both have really good glass with adjustable diopters. I couldn't see much, if any of a difference in that respect. The beam lens on the Leica is MUCH smaller than the Razor. I followed the advice of others here and determined where the beam was in relation to the reticle. Both were surprisingly centered, the Leica was offset slightly lower and left, the Razor was actually pretty centered. Knowing this made a big difference in performance of both units at longer distances. I did not use a tripod when ranging, and I wanted to know how the shakey factor figured in when using it in the field for hunting. I was ranging small rocks of various colors and distances and other objects with different surfaces (around 20x20 size) at distances up to 1100 yds. both were returning almost the same ranges with in 1 or 2 yards. Both had several hits and about the same "no range". With both units, you could range something, pull off of it and go back and get a repeatable reading. The Leica's smaller reticle made it easier to pick out and range accurately small objects between other objects at different distances. The razor was actually very good at this as well, but you really needed to know where the beam was in the reticle. I found that with the Razor I could turn it on its side and re range, and compare the readings and get something just as accurate as the Leica, but it was just slower. Interesting point is the Leica manual says it ranges hairy animals out to 500 m. So, in a nut shell, looking at range finding capabilities only, I got pretty much the same ranging performance out of both units, just the Razor was somewhat slower to use. Also, I was ranging both units in bright mid day sun, early morning haze, and morning overcast conditions. I personally liked the Leica reticle a little better because it was smaller. The physical size of the Leica is smaller than the Razor, so for me, the Razor was much easier to hold steady, and I think that the Razor has a better gripping surface. The connectivity capabilities of the Leica when pared with the Kestrel isn't something I needed, but after using it, I WANTED it. If you are really good with all of your gear, you could manually input data pretty quickly as others have said, but the connectivity makes it SOOOO easy and fast. When connected with the Kestrel, you hit the range button on the Leica, and it cycles through range, elevations, and wind. Dial your scope to what it says, and you're good to go. Some folks have remarked that it cycles too fast through the numbers, for me it was just fine. To sum things up, Both units have more capabilities than what I discussed here, and I would make use of them as I learn more. Both units had pretty much the same ranging performance, just the Razor was a little slower to use to determine a firing solution. In my opinion, I would give a very slight edge to Leica. The Leica is over Double the price of the Razor, so that could be a deciding factor since they both (to me) range about the same. I have read several posts here concerning range finders that contain the words "since my Leica died" I don't know what the lifespan of the Leicas are, or if they are prone to failure. The Razor has a lifetime warranty. Feel free to comment, just keep in mind I don't have the practical experience many of you do and am learning this stuff as I go along.
Opening the boxes. The leica comes with a standard carry pouch, the Razor comes with a hard case for carry. Both come with batteries, CR2.
Both are pretty easy to set up, even for me. The video tutorials that Doc has posted make it real simple for the leica. Paring the Leica with the Kestrel is simple watching Doc's video. it really is that easy.
Actual use. Both will range the big stuff to increadible distances. The Leica has a significantly smaller reticle with finer lines than the Razor. Both are adjustable in brightness. Both have really good glass with adjustable diopters. I couldn't see much, if any of a difference in that respect. The beam lens on the Leica is MUCH smaller than the Razor. I followed the advice of others here and determined where the beam was in relation to the reticle. Both were surprisingly centered, the Leica was offset slightly lower and left, the Razor was actually pretty centered. Knowing this made a big difference in performance of both units at longer distances. I did not use a tripod when ranging, and I wanted to know how the shakey factor figured in when using it in the field for hunting. I was ranging small rocks of various colors and distances and other objects with different surfaces (around 20x20 size) at distances up to 1100 yds. both were returning almost the same ranges with in 1 or 2 yards. Both had several hits and about the same "no range". With both units, you could range something, pull off of it and go back and get a repeatable reading. The Leica's smaller reticle made it easier to pick out and range accurately small objects between other objects at different distances. The razor was actually very good at this as well, but you really needed to know where the beam was in the reticle. I found that with the Razor I could turn it on its side and re range, and compare the readings and get something just as accurate as the Leica, but it was just slower. Interesting point is the Leica manual says it ranges hairy animals out to 500 m. So, in a nut shell, looking at range finding capabilities only, I got pretty much the same ranging performance out of both units, just the Razor was somewhat slower to use. Also, I was ranging both units in bright mid day sun, early morning haze, and morning overcast conditions. I personally liked the Leica reticle a little better because it was smaller. The physical size of the Leica is smaller than the Razor, so for me, the Razor was much easier to hold steady, and I think that the Razor has a better gripping surface. The connectivity capabilities of the Leica when pared with the Kestrel isn't something I needed, but after using it, I WANTED it. If you are really good with all of your gear, you could manually input data pretty quickly as others have said, but the connectivity makes it SOOOO easy and fast. When connected with the Kestrel, you hit the range button on the Leica, and it cycles through range, elevations, and wind. Dial your scope to what it says, and you're good to go. Some folks have remarked that it cycles too fast through the numbers, for me it was just fine. To sum things up, Both units have more capabilities than what I discussed here, and I would make use of them as I learn more. Both units had pretty much the same ranging performance, just the Razor was a little slower to use to determine a firing solution. In my opinion, I would give a very slight edge to Leica. The Leica is over Double the price of the Razor, so that could be a deciding factor since they both (to me) range about the same. I have read several posts here concerning range finders that contain the words "since my Leica died" I don't know what the lifespan of the Leicas are, or if they are prone to failure. The Razor has a lifetime warranty. Feel free to comment, just keep in mind I don't have the practical experience many of you do and am learning this stuff as I go along.
