-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
New LRF offerings at SHOT 2022?
- Thread starter RadioActivity
- Start date
Not having put any money into a system like this, I’d like onboard ballistics and pay extra for it.
My $200 vortex rangefinder has it with a couple preloaded profiles for crying out loud. Pay the AB royalty fee and move on. Seems like feeding the kestrel atmospherics into the LRF would be much simpler (and optional).
While we are dreaming I’d love it to talk to a clip on device but disturbed reticle isn’t as important because not enough scope manufacturers offer it yet.
Agree on the power side, more is better. if it can range 1,200 - 1,500 yds during the day reliably then that’s powerful enough. I like the idea of the optional constant on and doubling it as an IR pointer
Just my thoughts as someone looking in from the outside but wanting the capability
My $200 vortex rangefinder has it with a couple preloaded profiles for crying out loud. Pay the AB royalty fee and move on. Seems like feeding the kestrel atmospherics into the LRF would be much simpler (and optional).
While we are dreaming I’d love it to talk to a clip on device but disturbed reticle isn’t as important because not enough scope manufacturers offer it yet.
Agree on the power side, more is better. if it can range 1,200 - 1,500 yds during the day reliably then that’s powerful enough. I like the idea of the optional constant on and doubling it as an IR pointer
Just my thoughts as someone looking in from the outside but wanting the capability
I think this is solved by giving it a usb C port to allow for updates as necessary. Could also use this to preload projectile profiles easier.
I guess I don't see a situation where I would want range but not ballistic info. Could always turn it off though too.
Sounds like we are describing a tiered marketing approach!
I don't own a RAPTAR but the way they have ballistics built in seems to have a pretty good user experience. I'd be curious what updates you need for the 5700 and why?
There's others here who have more firsthand experience then me for sure but it seems like the more that can be wrapped into a single device, the better. To me, that seems like laser and ballistics solver with a port for updates / ballistic profile updates. I think all the issues arise when systems have to talk to each other so most of that is mitigated by keeping all of it in one system.
Totally agree on BT and really don't want that if possible
Everyone jokes about ModULarITy but it is nice to a certain extent.
How would you seamlessly set up a rifle to range, adjust and shoot day or night out to 1,200 yds? At this point it sounds like RAPTAR, Kestrel, dial and shoot. Kestrel is an extra step at night and I'm not a fan of waving around a Kestrel in the dark.
ETA: wouldn't a laser that just ranges and communicates still need updates as the device it connects to updates? Seems like not much is avoided here if you want full functionality of the system
I view the industry as mostly static at this point is my issue. All of my devices are running systems mostly 7-8 years old with minor updates....and I didn't care to replace them.
My rig of this kind has a RAPTAR-S and a Revic scope specifically to enable that kind of engagement. Seeing turrets at night or working with them in the absence of light sucks badly.
The SB MTC does it well and the revic will tell you turret settings in the optic. MANY times you find you can't just christmas tree the solution because the illumination/magnification that works best on your night optic isn't compatible with seeing the christmas tree. .
Howdy,
I just joined as I have recently read your posts on the Radius. Good feedback and constructive criticism.
I am part of the core engineering team that developed the Tracking Point precision guided firearms and the Radius rifle mounted rangefinder among many other electro-optics.
We developed the Radius from sketch to production in about 14 months and sold about 6000 of them including the Brownells transfer. I think it was a very good product, but as with all new products, it wasn’t perfect. It could have been much more, but corporate - political climate and economics killed the future enhancements and new product spinoffs. For a large company there was not enough buyers to make that price range profitable.
I would like to bring it back in a new, lighter, more robust form which would require a higher price. Not Wilcox dollars, but maybe half.
Let me know your thoughts, questions, interests, suggestions, gripes, etc.
Thanks!
-RMR
I just joined as I have recently read your posts on the Radius. Good feedback and constructive criticism.
I am part of the core engineering team that developed the Tracking Point precision guided firearms and the Radius rifle mounted rangefinder among many other electro-optics.
We developed the Radius from sketch to production in about 14 months and sold about 6000 of them including the Brownells transfer. I think it was a very good product, but as with all new products, it wasn’t perfect. It could have been much more, but corporate - political climate and economics killed the future enhancements and new product spinoffs. For a large company there was not enough buyers to make that price range profitable.
I would like to bring it back in a new, lighter, more robust form which would require a higher price. Not Wilcox dollars, but maybe half.
Let me know your thoughts, questions, interests, suggestions, gripes, etc.
Thanks!
-RMR
I think there are a couple camps that people fall into with their LRF. They probably haven't changed a whole lot from when you did the Radius project...
1. Best available (buy a Wilcocks or similar) and are willing to spend $7k+ to incorporate all the goodies. 1550nm LRF, AB, Full Power IR laser / illuminator in the smallest (and rugged) form factor.
2. Budget (used Radius) that is currently selling for about $1k used. Big, heavy and range readout only (905nm I believe).
3. Somewhere in between (goldilocks).
What's crazy is no one is filling the budget or goldilocks voids and Wilcocks has earned their name with some so there are a lot of people left wanting. I do think there is a real number of people who would upgrade their Radius or be new customers because the Radius didn't have what they wanted the first time. Below are the bare bones of what I think would be needed in order of importance.
Housing: Durable unit that isn't a brick. 12 oz seems like a good compromise but the lighter the better
LRF: Laser that doesn't suck. Having not used one I don't know exactly what this means but I'd say reliable 1,500 in the day is minimum
Ballistics: Applied Ballistics capability (even if it's an add on). At the very least, ability to link to Kestrel. Not sure what the cost would be to add atmospheric sensors but that's worth exploring and would leverage AB to the max. Maybe an external atmospheric sensor suite to keep the unit durable
NV Capability: IR designator would be really nice but you'll have to have a MIL/LE version with full power IR to make this worth incorporating. If this isn't an option then save all the weight you can so guys can piggyback a LUNA 3 or KIJI 3. Maybe sell this with a filter like LUNA depending on your risk tolerance (or talk to them about making a LUNA 4)
CNVD Compatibility: I wouldn't put a huge premium on this but if you can incorporate the ability to talk to thermal units for a reasonable price, you would make a lot of friends. Popular units would be UTC Xii, Voodoo M, Theon LR / eXLR, and maybe some iRay stuff (I said it). NVision might surprise us with a clip on unit at some point too. There are a number of dedicated thermal scopes that would be in play here too. Might be too large of a task but I think it is worth exploring
Cost: I think this unit has to be closer to $2k than $6k. Lots of variables above to play with
Everyone will have their own personal preference and I tried to limit mine as much as I could. Personally, I would pay up for a 1550nm unit that has AB and is in a small housing.
You probably are aware, but the market is very different than it was in 2016 as so many more people have thermals and night vision. Exciting times!!
My wants would be the 1550 laser, Bluetooth compatibility, AB (could be through the kestrel or some other means) and a solid mounting option that holds a zero fairly well.
My personal need does not lie with NV items so I’d be ok with that being left out.
Not sure what’s realistic to keep a price point half of Wilcox but would be cool to see another entry into this market.
I agree that modularity is the answer. Make a great (1550nm?) weapon mounted LRF that doesn't have any kind of display but has a comms port into which you can plug your choice of a basic display, a display that has built-in AB (or the solver of your choice?), a display that can bluetooth to your Kestrel, etc. That way there is never a need to "update" your LRF, just whatever display/solver you want to use.
I find that when you drop a rifle with a weapon mounted LRF its the friggin LRF that hits first every damn time. Its like buttered toast...its never face up.
I would make it metal - flat out, full stop.
A 905nm laser rangefinder has a an ir laser in it already. It might as well stay on and pulse only when you rangefind.
It should still have the display - not every situation has a phone involved.
There are options coming to the market and I'm gonna say the price has to come into a realistic box again. The sig 5k laser has more sophisticated and expensive assemblies in it and is $650. A $3k 905nm weapon mounted jobber isn't going to work.
As @reubenski said, needs to hold zero, and be rugged. The original Wilcox MRF prototype was about half the size of the RAPTAR, and that was ideal for a weapons mounted LRF. I liked it for it's basic function of being an LRF and nothing else. 1550 laser, good readable display, etc.
I think there would be a strong market for such a basic unit, especially if price reflects the basic model.
It would be easy to develop a modular system that keeps the features of the basic model, like display and ranging system, and provide an extended casing, much like some military comm equipment, where they expand features by adding slices to the case. You could do the same to appease those wanting extra features like AB, BT, etc. by adding options, and overall development and manufacturing cost can be kept lower to make the system more affordable for the end user.
Also. Inclination feature/option as there are those of us who are not Flat Landers.
Thanks for all of the feedback.
as with any project, there are those who make the rules and those who do the work. They don’t always agree.
Holding Zero: The biggest pain in my butt was the base mount. My bad, but if you epoxy a visible laser to an Elcan Spector DR (as we did) you’ll find that it doesn’t hold zero any better than the Radius, but we could have done better.
The radius LRF is designed from scratch: no purchased modules as they cost too much and have licensing fees attached.
Talk again soon,
-RMR
as with any project, there are those who make the rules and those who do the work. They don’t always agree.
Holding Zero: The biggest pain in my butt was the base mount. My bad, but if you epoxy a visible laser to an Elcan Spector DR (as we did) you’ll find that it doesn’t hold zero any better than the Radius, but we could have done better.
The radius LRF is designed from scratch: no purchased modules as they cost too much and have licensing fees attached.
Talk again soon,
-RMR
Make it have AB ballistics and be tracir compatible. Make it have a remote display cabled or wireless whatever so the main unit can be mounted on a forend rail and the display can be closer to shooter.
I have 2 radii they work great. Did sell one to free up funds used to have 3.
But Raptar is my jam at 8x the price. If you made something similar at less dollars and included tracir etc it would sell well
I hope to post a graphic this weekend showing how difficult it is to hold zero on a small range finder mounted on a rifle. Basically if you have 3.5 to 4 inches of lever arm to adjust the optics in the rangefinder, .001” of adjustment equates to 1” of beam movement at 100 yards. Ranging at 1000 + yards requires you to be in the shade so that thermal expansion of the mechanism due to the sun on your left or right shoulder doesn’t move the adjustment.
Yes, returning to zero after shooting is the goal. Very hard to do, but not impossible. We used a light, military 300 Win Mag for most of our shock and recoil testing.
Then there is beam divergence. The size of the elliptical IR beam at 1000 yards is huge. much bigger than your target, so you are better off ranging at a large space in front near your target.
We we’re required to use 905nm. 1550 was not an option in the product requirements.
Thanks for all of the interest. I’ll post more specifics in a few days.
Oh, almost forgot: yes, internal adjustments only is key. Besides the the risk of bumping the lrf against some object and knocking out zero, some people think optics are a handle to pick up your rifle. That is something I would have never thought possible. Don’t do it.
-RMR
Yes, returning to zero after shooting is the goal. Very hard to do, but not impossible. We used a light, military 300 Win Mag for most of our shock and recoil testing.
Then there is beam divergence. The size of the elliptical IR beam at 1000 yards is huge. much bigger than your target, so you are better off ranging at a large space in front near your target.
We we’re required to use 905nm. 1550 was not an option in the product requirements.
Thanks for all of the interest. I’ll post more specifics in a few days.
Oh, almost forgot: yes, internal adjustments only is key. Besides the the risk of bumping the lrf against some object and knocking out zero, some people think optics are a handle to pick up your rifle. That is something I would have never thought possible. Don’t do it.
-RMR
Last edited:
So I did some preliminary weight calculations substituting 40% glass filled Ryton (engineered plastic with properties similar to aluminum) and I’m pretty confident that 10-12 Oz is achievable with a Radius type optical design. Just an estimate.
I am currently working on a new mechanical adjustment system that I have done before on subsequent projects that should be much better at holding zero. My personal goal is +/- 0.4 MOA. Is that a good goal? what do you think is acceptable? Let me know your thoughts.
thanks!
-RMR
I am currently working on a new mechanical adjustment system that I have done before on subsequent projects that should be much better at holding zero. My personal goal is +/- 0.4 MOA. Is that a good goal? what do you think is acceptable? Let me know your thoughts.
thanks!
-RMR
Last edited:
Similar threads
