New LRF offerings at SHOT 2022?

[RadioActivity]

I haven't kept up with LRF developments since the 3500.com and Vectronix dropped. I see since then new offerings from Vortex, also with AB software, but I can't decypher real world ranging horsepower between Sig, Vortex, Leica. Is it safe to say that the Kilo 8K is the current under $2k option to buy?

Has anyone seen any news of new LRF offerings that challenge something like the Sig Kilo 8K at SHOT 2022?

 

[Feniks Technologies]

We are nearing the limits for 905nm lasers. To stay eye safe, the power can’t be of any good amount.

So now we will be seeing small performance upgrades via softwar. However, it’s still a 905nm laser. Most other upgrades will be with non ranging features like onboard AB.

To see a significant increase in ranging performanc, you’ll have to step up to a 1550nm laser and that’s a significantly higher price tag.

 

[Stag556]

I still can’t believe a company hasn’t come to market with a weapon mounted LRF that doesn’t come with an $8k price tag. I own a Raptar and love it but my simple brain doesn’t compute how Sig and Vortex can pack all that tech into a set of binos but can’t get it into something mountable on a rifle. I get the added cost to make it take recoil but with binos on the realm of $2k with all that tech, at $3k, I’d be a buyer in a heartbeat for BT, AB, etc.

The resurgence in popularity of the Radius would seem to dictate there is definitely a market for something.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I still can’t believe a company hasn’t come to market with a weapon mounted LRF that doesn’t come with an $8k price tag. I own a Raptar and love it but my simple brain doesn’t compute how Sig and Vortex can pack all that tech into a set of binos but can’t get it into something mountable on a rifle. I get the added cost to make it take recoil but with binos on the realm of $2k with all that tech, at $3k, I’d be a buyer in a heartbeat for BT, AB, etc.

The resurgence in popularity of the Radius would seem to dictate there is definitely a market for something.

There always seems to be a “market” for something until you break it down.

Of course we’d be a buyer for $3k. I’d be a buyer for a Ferrari for $20k.

It would have to be an entirely new start up. Sign and such likely won’t after seeing what happens to Sico. Which is huge risk for an already established company. And even greater risk for a new company.

Also, consider what the “market” is? It’s primary night hunters. Who already have options of a thermal with built in laser. So, that’s already competition you won’t beat. The casual/average consumer will buy the built in.


Now, take a company like Wilcox. Let’s say they could make a baby raptar that would sell for $4-$5k.

That would be a horrible decision as it would take away from their normal raptar sales. Combined with the cost to bring it to market, and it’s now a terrible idea.

You can also find normal raptar ES for $3k. You’re not going to get a weapon mounted laser with AB for $3k anytime soon. Hell, binos with AB are almost that much currently.


Short answer: companies aren’t opting to not make it because they hate making money.

 

[Stag556]

There always seems to be a “market” for something until you break it down.

Of course we’d be a buyer for $3k. I’d be a buyer for a Ferrari for $20k.

It would have to be an entirely new start up. Sign and such likely won’t after seeing what happens to Sico. Which is huge risk for an already established company. And even greater risk for a new company.

Also, consider what the “market” is? It’s primary night hunters. Who already have options of a thermal with built in laser. So, that’s already competition you won’t beat. The casual/average consumer will buy the built in.


Now, take a company like Wilcox. Let’s say they could make a baby raptar that would sell for $4-$5k.

That would be a horrible decision as it would take away from their normal raptar sales. Combined with the cost to bring it to market, and it’s now a terrible idea.

You can also find normal raptar ES for $3k. You’re not going to get a weapon mounted laser with AB for $3k anytime soon. Hell, binos with AB are almost that much currently.


Short answer: companies aren’t opting to not make it because they hate making money.

The Sig Kilo 10k with AB Elite onboard sell for $2100. My question is simply why is there such a barrier to implant that kind of tech into a weapon mounted LRF? The same tech from Wilcox is $8k. The new Envision, according to their reps at SHOT, will be $8k.

I’m no engineer, don’t claim to be but it’s simply a curiosity thing. If it can get crammed into a set of binos, why not into a box the size of a cigarette box or larger?

That’s all I’m asking. Thanks for the lengthy reply.

 

[LV Precision]

Vortex just put that tech into the military contract they just won. It'll likely be some time until it trickles down.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

The Sig Kilo 10k with AB Elite onboard sell for $2100. My question is simply why is there such a barrier to implant that kind of tech into a weapon mounted LRF? The same tech from Wilcox is $8k. The new Envision, according to their reps at SHOT, will be $8k.

I’m no engineer, don’t claim to be but it’s simply a curiosity thing. If it can get crammed into a set of binos, why not into a box the size of a cigarette box or larger?

That’s all I’m asking. Thanks for the lengthy reply.

I’ll dig around for a better reply.

I’m assuming stability through recoil is no simple task though.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

The Sig Kilo 10k with AB Elite onboard sell for $2100. My question is simply why is there such a barrier to implant that kind of tech into a weapon mounted LRF? The same tech from Wilcox is $8k. The new Envision, according to their reps at SHOT, will be $8k.

I’m no engineer, don’t claim to be but it’s simply a curiosity thing. If it can get crammed into a set of binos, why not into a box the size of a cigarette box or larger?

That’s all I’m asking. Thanks for the lengthy reply.

Also, keep in mind, all those mentioned except the sig are 1550nm lasers where the sig is a 905nm. That’s not a small jump in price.

But, the next question would be, why not do a 905nm (like the radius).

 

[The King]

Recoiling lasers isn’t a big deal - every IR laser made for the weapon mount does this.

Sicos problem is they made a giant ass laser that wasn’t all that waterproof and didn’t hold a zero.

Give me a setup the size of a pack of playing cards that can continuous fire the laser so it’s also an IR target designator and do it at $1500 and they will come. This is doable.

I suspect our answers will come from the new maztech/ magpul collaboration. Stay tuned.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Recoiling lasers isn’t a big deal - every IR laser made for the weapon mount does this.

Sicos problem is they made a giant ass laser that wasn’t all that waterproof and didn’t hold a zero.

Give me a setup the size of a pack of playing cards that can continuous fire the laser so it’s also an IR target designator and do it at $1500 and they will come. This is doable.

I suspect our answers will come from the new maztech/ magpul collaboration. Stay tuned.

That’s the price of current high end hand held 905nm lasers.

Honest question, you think (or know) the reason is because they just don’t want to do it/sell them?

If it’s doable…..why isn’t it donable so to speak? I honestly don’t know enough about laser technology and development to make anything except basic financial decision assumptions.

 

[chevy_man]

That’s the price of current high end hand held 905nm lasers.

Honest question, you think (or know) the reason is because they just don’t want to do it/sell them?

If it’s doable…..why isn’t it donable so to speak? I honestly don’t know enough about laser technology and development to make anything except basic financial decision assumptions.

I would guess it's 99% they don't think they would sell.

Lots of these companies run around copying ideas and refining them. It's great for the consumer.

Until a weapon mounted system becomes mainstream, nobody thinks there's a market. The current market at $8k+ isn't ever going to be mainstream, and with low sales numbers others take notice that they don't sell.

 

[Rob01]

I haven't kept up with LRF developments since the 3500.com and Vectronix dropped. I see since then new offerings from Vortex, also with AB software, but I can't decypher real world ranging horsepower between Sig, Vortex, Leica. Is it safe to say that the Kilo 8K is the current under $2k option to buy?

Has anyone seen any news of new LRF offerings that challenge something like the Sig Kilo 8K at SHOT 2022?

How far do you really need to range or plan to range and shoot? Most of the LRF out there today will do what 99.999% of shooters need. I know I sure as hell don't need a 10,000 yard LFR. Even if you do the usual "cut in half the max number for true usable range" then anything over 5,000 yards is a waste and a 3000 yard will probably do what most need. Might be cool to say "hey I got a 75,000 yard LRF" but using it mostly out to 1000-1500 is a waste.

 

[Stag556]

That’s the price of current high end hand held 905nm lasers.

Honest question, you think (or know) the reason is because they just don’t want to do it/sell them?

If it’s doable…..why isn’t it donable so to speak? I honestly don’t know enough about laser technology and development to make anything except basic financial decision assumptions.

I don’t know the reason. Wish I did.

I bought a non-AB Raptar because I got into the team matches with mostly UKD targets. I had a Radius and it was a paperweight for me, would never work properly so I dropped the coin on a Wilcox. I don’t even own any NV gear currently to use it to its fullest extent.

Just surprises me that there are only a few players in that space and the price is astronomical. Maybe one day in the future. Who knows.

 

[charnicus]

I don’t know the reason. Wish I did.

I bought a non-AB Raptar because I got into the team matches with mostly UKD targets. I had a Radius and it was a paperweight for me, would never work properly so I dropped the coin on a Wilcox. I don’t even own any NV gear currently to use it to its fullest extent.

Just surprises me that there are only a few players in that space and the price is astronomical. Maybe one day in the future. Who knows.

I really think it’s because this is .001% of the market overall. Even less so to companies not in the game.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I really think it’s because this is .001% of the market overall. Even less so to companies not in the game.

That’s what I’m thinking.

How many units would sell if you had a $3k laser that had onboard ballistics and was wearing mounted?

100,000 units?

1,000,000 units?

Likely far less. As 100,000 or more units would make it a fairly smart move……if you didn’t spend a ridiculous amount on machines and such.

 

[The King]

I think part of the issue is Silencercos failure was SO intense.

It’s combined with ass sucking on the part of the Burris eliminator etc.

The ideal solution is a scope mounted unit you can replace with ballistics built in that talks to the scope. REVIC could make such a thing for example.

I shoot the RAPTAR-S with ballistics and it’s fucking amazing what it does on UKD stages with a tree reticle. Click, shoot. Click, shoot.

Where things fall apart for folks with UKD and something like the RAPTAR is they think it’s the easy button and it is. But don’t fucking forget to rebuild your position behind the rifle and check on the wind again. It’s not the reticle in Halo.

That said, things are coming. I can’t talk about them yet though.

We ARE getting to peak 905nm performance, and said peak performance of pretty much ranging anything within 2km is 99% use case friendly. Also I have hopes for a cheaper 1550nm laser before too long.

 

[Steel head]

How far do you really need to range or plan to range and shoot? Most of the LRF out there today will do what 99.999% of shooters need. I know I sure as hell don't need a 10,000 yard LFR. Even if you do the usual "cut in half the max number for true usable range" then anything over 5,000 yards is a waste and a 3000 yard will probably do what most need. Might be cool to say "hey I got a 75,000 yard LRF" but using it mostly out to 1000-1500 is a waste.

My current unit does out to 2000 awesomely and out to 2600 on a tripod in decent conditions.
I’d really like to get something that will do terrain, trees and rocks out to 4000-4500.
I use Google earth for those distances now and it does ok but would prefer a LRF to get it.

 

[Alpine 338]

There are more units out there, but only available to military unfortunately.

 

[The King]

My current unit does out to 2000 awesomely and out to 2600 on a tripod in decent conditions.
I’d really like to get something that will do terrain, trees and rocks out to 4000-4500.
I use Google earth for those distances now and it does ok but would prefer a LRF to get it.

Heh. I do have a 40km LRF. It’s cool. Makes a BANG noise when it fires.

I have found I like to have overhead on my laser to know I’m gonna get some lol. I don’t want to lase something like a bear humping a hippie in black velvet clothing and have it give me nothing.

I could accidentally hit the bear for gods sake!

 

[RadioActivity]

How far do you really need to range or plan to range and shoot? Most of the LRF out there today will do what 99.999% of shooters need. I know I sure as hell don't need a 10,000 yard LFR. Even if you do the usual "cut in half the max number for true usable range" then anything over 5,000 yards is a waste and a 3000 yard will probably do what most need. Might be cool to say "hey I got a 75,000 yard LRF" but using it mostly out to 1000-1500 is a waste.

I think it's more about what you're getting for your money. The Sig seems to be feature packed, but if that laser isn't accurate or giving consistent returns, you're going to want to find out it's drag coefficient as you launch it in hissy fit. Spending 1500 bucks on something and it working "sometimes" or "most of the time" or worse yet working but being inaccurate, is no fun. I'm just trying to spend my LRF money wisely.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

My current unit does out to 2000 awesomely and out to 2600 on a tripod in decent conditions.
I’d really like to get something that will do terrain, trees and rocks out to 4000-4500.
I use Google earth for those distances now and it does ok but would prefer a LRF to get it.

The real “value” in better lasers (specifically the 1550 kind) is that other 1%. Though I’d say it’s closer to 10%.

If you shoot often we are all very familiar with the frustration of not being able to range a skylit target, or when the sun is bad or in your eyes and things get hard to range consistently. And obviously ELR all but requires very good LRFs.

And it doesn’t matter if it’s a bottom dollar or the most expensive Vortex/Sig/Terrapin-X…….a 905nm laser can only do so well. Even with a small beam, you need power to cut through bad condition. Anyone claiming otherwise is either exaggerating their laser’s capabilities or they don’t range in tough conditions often.

A vector 21 was one of the best decisions I ever made. But as Rob said……everyone needs to evaluate what they really need.

My main point to anyone reading, it’s really not about the maximum range, but the amount of power a laser has, followed by the beam size. And the upgrade isn’t usually to extend the range, but to increase the performance/success rate of your current range.

 

[superde]

Ever since the PLRF10 was removed from the market, there has been nothing that works as well in that price window for handheld or otherwise. I have used a bunch of different laser rangefinders, but they all disappoint, and have huge aiming circles or whatever. Wasn't it a 905nm laser? It is sooooo much better than anything else since. Actually considering buying a 10 year old one that may die tomorrow, because I miss it.

 

[Steel head]

Ever since the PLRF10 was removed from the market, there has been nothing that works as well in that price window for handheld or otherwise. I have used a bunch of different laser rangefinders, but they all disappoint, and have huge aiming circles or whatever. Wasn't it a 905nm laser? It is sooooo much better than anything else since. Actually considering buying a 10 year old one that may die tomorrow, because I miss it.

Yea
Those were awesome
Definitely need to fill that gap.

 

[Rob01]

I think it's more about what you're getting for your money. The Sig seems to be feature packed, but if that laser isn't accurate or giving consistent returns, you're going to want to find out it's drag coefficient as you launch it in hissy fit. Spending 1500 bucks on something and it working "sometimes" or "most of the time" or worse yet working but being inaccurate, is no fun. I'm just trying to spend my LRF money wisely.

Buying anything is about that but the ones you mentioned all seem to get good reports and work well. Can you have a bad one? Yup but those companies will get it worked out. They all have good lasers and you just need to look at the features and buy the one that works for you. How far and in what conditions do you plan to range with them?

 

[79steeler]

99% of shooters cant hit at 2,000 yards anyway so why ya need a rangefinder that does 8k is beyond me? Ya calling in airstrikes?

 

[The King]

99% of shooters cant hit at 2,000 yards anyway so why ya need a rangefinder that does 8k is beyond me? Ya calling in airstrikes?

When you are moving it’s good to be able to plan how much closer you want to get to a distant target to shoot.

I may be biased though - I have steel at 2k lol.

And frankly those top numbers blow. if it says “8k” you can count on 2k.

 

[Baron23]

but the amount of power a laser

Don't forget receiver sensitivity....which is how range has gotten extended with a regulatory fixed max limit on output power.

 

[Steel head]

When you are moving it’s good to be able to plan how much closer you want to get to a distant target to shoot.

I may be biased though - I have steel at 2k lol.

And frankly those top numbers blow. if it says “8k” you can count on 2k.

I always immediately cut half of claimed then start judging from there.
I’m fortunate to have out past two miles easily right now I use a leupy 2800rx and I think it’s pretty decent for the $$$$ but my range and rifles have outgrown it.

 

[Evintos]

99% of shooters cant hit at 2,000 yards anyway so why ya need a rangefinder that does 8k is beyond me? Ya calling in airstrikes?

Bright sunny days and non-reflective targets (animals) diminishes LRF performance. Not necessarily shooting the animal at that range, but using it to gauge terrain/location to close the distance. I've seen up to 50% reduction in ranging capabilities of older "850-1000yd" LRF devices when used on animals vs reflective steel targets. When I got my first "1 mile" LRF, I was super impressed. Then the capabilities of commercially available products got better and better to the point where now a lot of them are advertising 4,000yds on reflective targets.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

99% of shooters cant hit at 2,000 yards anyway so why ya need a rangefinder that does 8k is beyond me? Ya calling in airstrikes?

Again, people are fixated on the longest range. Which is why companies push the range as marketing….case it’s works.

If matches and ranges didn’t already give ranges, many would realize how often a $2k laser shits the bed on a small target or really bad conditions.

For example, it’s raining today. At the moment it’s a very thick mist. Semi fog like. Things I could normal see with naked eye at 2000 and in, I can’t see without optics.

Every other laser in the house can’t get past 5-600yds and many are rates for several thousand.

My vector is hitting small things at 2800 or so and then everything inside of it. It won’t hit anything past that (it’s normally good to 7k + on relatively small stuff).

 

[RadioActivity]

I think that's exactly why I'd like the LRF with the best "capability" however it gets there. If we can't push more energy out the front of the LRF, I want the one that is doing the most to extrapolate the return it see's via better programing. Because sometimes there IS brush, sometimes the target is in bright sun, sometimes weather rolls, or there is background scatter in the laser's spectrum.

I am specifically asking about the state of current LRF offerings BECAUSE the naming scheme is just marketing, and there are such things as software updates/pushes, and it seems this corner of the industry is stuck because of COVID production holds.

Failing a new SHOT offering, I ordered the 8K because it seems at this point and time, the most amount of ranging capability for my money.

Speaking of the NVG/IR world, and classification restrictions, imported lasers are not held to such standards. PERST could release one that can be used as a 1mi wood burning kit, but alas...they haven't yet realized that.

 

[superde]

Speaking of the NVG/IR world, and classification restrictions, imported lasers are not held to such standards. PERST could release one that can be used as a 1mi wood burning kit, but alas...they haven't yet realized that.

Hahaha

 

[alex2x2]

There are only 2 types of rangefinders. Vectronix and all the rest.

 

[elwarpo]

Think of the business case. How many people will buy a $3k rifle mounted lrf? 1k, 10k people? Hard to sell 100k units. $10 million to develop and test the system, get it through manufacturing... is the low end. On 10k units that is 1k per unit at least. Now you have to make them, and components will be a lot since you are not making millions of them. Then the company has to make a profit, then their sellers/distributors have to make money. Then there is the governments share, then lawyers share since people will sue... now you start seeing why they are 8k and not 3k.

 

[Stag556]

Think of the business case. How many people will buy a $3k rifle mounted lrf? 1k, 10k people? Hard to sell 100k units. $10 million to develop and test the system, get it through manufacturing... is the low end. On 10k units that is 1k per unit at least. Now you have to make them, and components will be a lot since you are not making millions of them. Then the company has to make a profit, then their sellers/distributors have to make money. Then there is the governments share, then lawyers share since people will sue... now you start seeing why they are 8k and not 3k.

I’m definitely not a business man so I would not refute what you posted. I guess my simple brain says if they can pack more tech into a set of binos than an $8k Raptar, why would it cost so much to just re-engineer that tech to fit into a small weapon mounted box vs a set of binos? But you all may be absolutely correct in saying they just don’t want to. Who knows.

 

[elwarpo]

I’m definitely not a business man so I would not refute what you posted. I guess my simple brain says if they can pack more tech into a set of binos than an $8k Raptar, why would it cost so much to just re-engineer that tech to fit into a small weapon mounted box vs a set of binos? But you all may be absolutely correct in saying they just don’t want to. Who knows.

I agree with you, taking the electronics from a bino is a great way to start. The issue is a business person will ask what the market is, and unfortunately they will see it and put their resources on a project that will bring in more sales.now if you approached the binos company and said " how would you like to sell binos for more money and lower your cost..." you might get more traction. Then you tell them, take the lrf fron the binos, put it in a box with a pic rail and no lenses, they may bite. I really think going after the hunter crowd would be key in getting the potential number of units up.

 

[kthomas]

I think the used market for the SiCo Radius' is proof that there is an interest and need in a weapons mounted LRF that is more budget friendly. Even with all the short comings of a SiCo Radius, I can sell my Radius on the secondary market for over double what I paid for it.

Why other companies aren't doing it, is probably because they see more profits and opportunities in other market segments they are already involved in. And/or perhaps they just aren't paying attention/in-tune with what some people want in regards to a weapons mounted LRF. Just because a current company isn't working to fill this niche, doesn't mean that the niche doesn't or can't exist.

I don't see why a weapons mounted LRF couldn't do well if it met the following objectives/criteria:

- Utilize existing 905 nM laser technology. No need to chase the ELR crowd and their needs (not at this time anyways, to keep things simple and affordable).
- Robust and small(ish) housing.
- Reliable weapons mounting system (many currently exist, just need to adapt/configure to a housing). Make weapons mounting system removable, to provide different mounting options (picatinny, ARCA, scope mounts, AI key slot, etc.)
- Readout screen, that's adjustable (like the Radius)
- A method to easily zero with rifle scope.
- Keep around ~$1500 USD or less.
- Bonus if it utilized blue tooth technology to connect with existing ballistic solvers, such as kestrels with AB or phones. Many already have their own ballistic solvers, I don't see of the extra complexity and cost to integrate ballistic solvers into the unit.

 

[ChidJ]

I'll just first say, I'm not an engineer or business person. But with all the talk of weapon mounted LRFs lately, I did some looking. The hardware components themselves don't seem super expensive. I think where we start to stack on significant cost over "why can't we just put picatinny female adapter on our monocular" comes in two forms.

Like @reubenski mentioned, it has to be precisely zero-able. How complex that would be, I'm not sure but we all spend a lot of money for scopes that track properly. That and we don't want the unit to get bigger so we gotta pack it in there tight.

Also, while your handheld is probably good for a few drops, as far as I can tell the G forces of harsh recoil over 1000s of rounds is pretty brutal on weapon mounted electronics so you've got to make your zero-able LRF with onboard ballistic computer and legible display shockproof to a new level over the handheld devices.

The Wilcox unit adds a third level of complexity that may or may not be relevant to the discussion but the pointer/designator and illuminators inclusion makes keeping the unit small even more difficult and those devices, especially full power, might generate a lot of heat. Most of lasers that I see available for other purposes of similar power and frequency/wavelength are large (relatively) with big ol cooling fins.

So if a company were to approach this issue, I think it would take some doing especially if some of the methodology/processes is/are protected by patent. Then there's the customer base. I'm no expert but I would be blown away if you sold 100,000 units to the commercial sector before the tech became obsolescent or additionally regulated.

And for perspective, if we consider the complexity of this endeavor vs something like making a suppressor which is just a tube and baffles, the suppressor has more likely consumers, cheaper materials, simpler to manufacture, and probably has similar profit margins per unit. Why not just do that instead if we are out to make money? Just figured I'd share what I'd found out.

TL;DR I think nobody makes a competing product because too expensive in relation to potential revenue generated.

 

[ChidJ]

In the past 14 yrs how many have they sold to civilians? I don't say that knowing the answer or to demonstrate a point, just curious

 

[ChidJ]

Ah, perhaps my wording conveyed a different message than I intended. I'm saying that by the time they sell enough units to make the juice worth the squeeze the product could be obsolescent. I don't think its a ridiculous speculation that if Wilcox didn't have a government customer for a device like the RAPTAR or MRF, they wouldn't make it because the civilian consumer base is still too small and wouldn't buy enough. The math of ballistics won't change but devices will get smaller, materials will get more advanced, etc all the while you are trying to make your money on the device which becomes outdated, if that makes sense. I've no doubt that the device shown gets the job done but if you came out with a device today that does the same thing, I think you could shrink it, make it faster, more durable, better data fidelity in worse collection conditions, etc etc.

Or maybe you couldn't. Like I said, I'm no expert

 

[The King]

Ah, perhaps my wording conveyed a different message than I intended. I'm saying that by the time they sell enough units to make the juice worth the squeeze the product could be obsolescent. I don't think its a ridiculous speculation that if Wilcox didn't have a government customer for a device like the RAPTAR or MRF, they wouldn't make it because the civilian consumer base is still too small and wouldn't buy enough. The math of ballistics won't change but devices will get smaller, materials will get more advanced, etc all the while you are trying to make your money on the device which becomes outdated, if that makes sense. I've no doubt that the device shown gets the job done but if you came out with a device today that does the same thing, I think you could shrink it, make it faster, more durable, better data fidelity in worse collection conditions, etc etc.

Or maybe you couldn't. Like I said, I'm no expert

It makes sense.

There is an underlying premise in there though that should be discussed - this is the idea that the tech is going to keep moving fast and furious.

That seems unlikely - I have seen practically every unit of this kind at this point and they follow a pretty formulaic approach.

Even my old Raptar-S still gets the job done perfectly, and the 905nM sensor packages available today likely out range any reasonable shoot scenario.

Finally - MANY companies have found the civilian market more profitable than the same military market. The military might buy 250 of a thing and the civvy side 2500.

 

[kthomas]

Ah, perhaps my wording conveyed a different message than I intended. I'm saying that by the time they sell enough units to make the juice worth the squeeze the product could be obsolescent. I don't think its a ridiculous speculation that if Wilcox didn't have a government customer for a device like the RAPTAR or MRF, they wouldn't make it because the civilian consumer base is still too small and wouldn't buy enough. The math of ballistics won't change but devices will get smaller, materials will get more advanced, etc all the while you are trying to make your money on the device which becomes outdated, if that makes sense. I've no doubt that the device shown gets the job done but if you came out with a device today that does the same thing, I think you could shrink it, make it faster, more durable, better data fidelity in worse collection conditions, etc etc.

Or maybe you couldn't. Like I said, I'm no expert

LRF technology from my viewpoint doesn't seem to move that quickly.

And arguably an LRF doesn't ever become obsolete, as long as it still functions. There are many people that are using LRF's that are 5,10, 15+ years old.

Just because a newer unit that can range 5 more yards comes out, doesn't make your current LRF useless.

I think obsolescence is a poor argument against such a device.

 

[CoryT]

Well, if anyone is interested in getting an L3 RULR, I might be able to score a couple demo units at a pretty good price.

 

[ChidJ]

c all. Humor me for a second. Lets say someone introduce something like an "80% surveyor tool kit". Its missing the emitter portion but the circuitry is built to handle certain power levels and that's clearly conveyed. Then consumers can buy the product and put their own emitter in. Now this may not be above board but hey, I'm just in my cubicle brainstorming. More generally speaking, someone produces a device that can utilize a more effective laser and still be legal to sell by building and marketing it for the implicit purpose of dodging outdated legislation.

Maybe obsolescent isn't the right word but if you could obtain a as powerful a laser as the housing can handle vs the piddly "eye safe" lasers, other products in the space would certainly be less competitive.

Another thought I had was perhaps a company could utilize a laser higher on the spectrum that wouldn't interact with the eye in the same way. It could be that lasers in this portion of the spectrum also aren't visible under night vision but if they were and you built a device around this different type of laser, that would also render currently available devices less relevant.

Or just the scale of the thing goes down. Safran has the LRF3013 that weighs 45 grams. Put that in a lightweight housing that integrates directly with the scope mount which could house circuitry kinda like the device Magpul introduced at ShotShow (because who cares about a round counter) so you can see the laser results in the scope rather than on an external display. That could be gamechanging to the point your old device isn't keeping up.

Or nothing could change. It is fun to think about, though

 

[Jumper]

Seems like SIG, Steiner and REVIC are halfway there. Sig with their BDX system, Steiner IFS. Half the integration, ranging -> reticle, is already done with these systems. Whoever can weapon mount the laser or integrate it into the scope would now have all the pieces of the puzzle; range, see the solution in the reticle and shoot. All while in the shooting position. This doesnt account for wind though but the framework is there.

 

[The King]

c all. Humor me for a second. Lets say someone introduce something like an "80% surveyor tool kit". Its missing the emitter portion but the circuitry is built to handle certain power levels and that's clearly conveyed. Then consumers can buy the product and put their own emitter in. Now this may not be above board but hey, I'm just in my cubicle brainstorming. More generally speaking, someone produces a device that can utilize a more effective laser and still be legal to sell by building and marketing it for the implicit purpose of dodging outdated legislation.

Maybe obsolescent isn't the right word but if you could obtain a as powerful a laser as the housing can handle vs the piddly "eye safe" lasers, other products in the space would certainly be less competitive.

Another thought I had was perhaps a company could utilize a laser higher on the spectrum that wouldn't interact with the eye in the same way. It could be that lasers in this portion of the spectrum also aren't visible under night vision but if they were and you built a device around this different type of laser, that would also render currently available devices less relevant.

Or just the scale of the thing goes down. Safran has the LRF3013 that weighs 45 grams. Put that in a lightweight housing that integrates directly with the scope mount which could house circuitry kinda like the device Magpul introduced at ShotShow (because who cares about a round counter) so you can see the laser results in the scope rather than on an external display. That could be gamechanging to the point your old device isn't keeping up.

Or nothing could change. It is fun to think about, though

I had this discussion this month oddly with a scope maker. It was along the lines of "make it so the LRF module can be serviced by the end user/replaced."

Similar but not the same idea. I see what you mean though. A home build laser system - aka 80% system where the end user installed the laser would be legal AFAIK.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

I think people really are underestimating the difference in 905nm and 1550nm for non elr.

As mentioned above, hitting a small skylit target is much more valuable IMO than all the other stuff.

I could be absolutely wrong, but I rarely see people using their laser enough to really tell a difference. And you likely won’t (and don’t need to) tell the difference if you’re that shooter.


This brings us to another problem for marketing.


If a consumer spends $3-$5k, they are going to expect that laser to hit everything they point it at.

That’s just not gonna happen with a 905nm with something like 10 watts. I’ve used them all. Before I picked up a vector 21, I had a terrapin-x. Good laser. But put a small target on a hill or terrible conditions with sun in your face…..you’ll want to toss it in the garbage.

In those conditions, my 21 goes from small targets at 4-5k down to 2500-3000. But the price difference is substantial.



Would the market be ok with a 905nm weapon mounted laser with no ballistics and as soon as a little fog or bad light rolls in…..turns into a 600yd laser for $3k?

Maybe. But I doubt anyone is taking that risk.

 

[Alpine 338]

Lots of options out there, you just have to be honest with yourself as to what your expectations are vs. how much you are willing to pay.

I had an SWR Radius for a short period of time. Yes it worked, but I could obviously see that the mounting system was a big failure. At times I could range out to 1200+ yards, but realistically it was a 800 yard unit. Accuracy of ranging small targets in tight spots like a target set back in a gap between two trees, or as @Feniks Technologies mentions, ranging skylines targets was problematic.

Here's a unit for $229.99 with free shipping. It says it's a 700M unit, that works in fog, rain, etc. Most likely made in China.

700M Professional Laser RangefinderDefault Title

Laser Rangefinder for Hunting- Laser Rangefinder Be prepared for each shot. This Laser Rangefinder will help you decide how far to hunt, plus it is great for archers, paintball players, competitive shooters, bow hunters, gun enthusiasts, and police. Also used by military forces around the world...

lemonchik.store

When @wigwamitus had the first group buy on the RAPTAR, I jumped onboard, and glad I did, as it does everything I want it to. Range small targets, skyline targets, secluded targets, targets with snow in the ground, etc. No Problems.
The only thing I wish is I could have a slightly smaller unit without the IR features, which I don't need for matches with UKD targets. And obviously with a smaller price tag would be nice. That's why I was so pumped when I got a chance to get behind a Wilcox MRF Prototype, in a small package with just the features I needed, and hopefully a reasonable price. However, the MRF evolved into the MRF Xe with more features and a price tag nearing $8K.

The beauty of the RAPTAR is I can range a small target, through the trees, at a great distance reliably. If things are tight, I may get two or three different ranges, as an example; it will give me the distance of the trees at 100, and then the target at 1400 yards. Works great!

 

[_Windrider_]

That’s what I’m thinking.

How many units would sell if you had a $3k laser that had onboard ballistics and was wearing mounted?

100,000 units?

1,000,000 units?

Likely far less. As 100,000 or more units would make it a fairly smart move……if you didn’t spend a ridiculous amount on machines and such.

i dont need onboard ballistics. i just want a good LRF that gives me range, angle compensated range and angle and maybe a compass heading for fun. And then just feed it to whatever device im using. But i def want it overpowered and this eye safe shit is gay.

 

[kthomas]

i dont need onboard ballistics. i just want a good LRF that gives me range, angle compensated range and angle and maybe a compass heading for fun. And then just feed it to whatever device im using. But i def want it overpowered and this eye safe shit is gay.

Onboard ballistics just makes it more expensive and complicated.

I think a solution that bluetooths to our already existing ballistic solvers (we all have kestrels with ballistic solvers or apps on our phones) is a more elegant and cost effective way of accomplishing this.