Need Rangefinder Advice

MuleyMadness said:
I too have used the side by side and the 900 is NOT superior in ranging capabilities. The optics are better, but like I said, for the price they should be. As far as price is concerned I was comparing it to the 1200 which is definitely superior, at a superior price. I can tell you the Elite can be had, new for 300 bucks if you look around. Lots of guys on here can tell you that Le Baron had them on this year for $287 or thereabouts. To say that the 900 has a huge gap in performance and optics is simply not the case. Are they great yes, but they are not a better performer, and the guy is looking to spend around 300...not around 500 or 600. Anyone who says you need to spend Leica 1200 kind of money, or even 900 money to get a quality range finder is just being a LRF snob ;)
Click to expand...

Well I have also done a side by side comparison of the RX3, Elite 1500 with arc, lieca 1200 and Swarovski. The lieca and swaro are worlds ahead of the Bushnell and the older model Leupolds. But then again my buddies and I are getting into LR target shooting out past 1000 yards and Coyote calling with target rifles capable of long range shots for out here in the prairies. We use Liecas and Swarovski’s. I had an Elite 1500 with arc and traded it for a Swarovski. Farlsincharge had an RX3 and Elite 1500 that he eventually got rid of for the Lieca 1200. I will agree the Elite will be good enough for 300 yards but don’t compare it to the big dog LRF’s. They are not even in the same league let alone ball park.
 
I have a Leica 1200, and it is all I can wish for. It's practical distance is 650-800 yards, and that is more than far enough for any skilled, practiced rifleman. Regards, Eagleye.
 
^^^ same here. I've had a Leica CRF 1200 for three years and love it. Fits in my shirt pocket and works fantastic.

Yes, its more expensive but I'm looking at it as one piece of kit I'm not going to "upgrade" any time soon.

I also want the maximum distance I can get out of a rangefinder, which the Leica reliably gives me time after time.

If I'm watching a deer, or lazing terrain for benchmarks from a shooting position, I want to know that fence is 200, that rock is 427 and that stand of trees is 532 yards; not a "NO READING" for anything beyond 400 yards.
 
wheels said:
Well, I did find it to be the case.. especially in optics. You seriously didn't see a major difference in optical clarity??

Maybe the Elite I was using was a dud, although the Elite's I've looked through in stores didn't look any better.

Agree to disagree I guess.. but like I said, it sounds like the Eilte will more than meet his needs.. just don't be paying full price for one.
Click to expand...

The optical clarity in the Leica and the Nikon products is superior to the Bushnell, that said they really don't range any better. FS
 
The optical clarity in the Leica and the Nikon products is superior to the Bushnell, that said they really don't range any better. FS
Click to expand...

My Leica 1200 and my Geovids range much better than my Bushnell did,and the beam is narrow enough that I can actually tell what animal that I am ranging if there are several in a field.I hated when the Bushnell read the same range when pointed at individual animals that varied by around 100 yards from me.
 
cdnredneck_t3 said:
Well I have also done a side by side comparison of the RX3, Elite 1500 with arc, lieca 1200 and Swarovski. The lieca and swaro are worlds ahead of the Bushnell and the older model Leupolds. But then again my buddies and I are getting into LR target shooting out past 1000 yards and Coyote calling with target rifles capable of long range shots for out here in the prairies. We use Liecas and Swarovski’s. I had an Elite 1500 with arc and traded it for a Swarovski. Farlsincharge had an RX3 and Elite 1500 that he eventually got rid of for the Lieca 1200. I will agree the Elite will be good enough for 300 yards but don’t compare it to the big dog LRF’s. They are not even in the same league let alone ball park.
Click to expand...

Actually I didn't..I said the 1200 was a way better LRF and of course it's not in the Swarovski class. I said overall I find it and the 900 to be equal, and any minimal improvement is not worth the extra money. When I bought I went into the store open minded, and price isn't a consideration, other than the fact that I wasn't spending Swaro kind of money. Best VALUE for a hunting optic was the 1500. As far as only being good to 300 yards that is pretty understated. I have ranged multiple soft target animals past 550 meters in less than ideal conditions and plenty of rock faces, wet grass, etc well past 1100 meters. Probably not enough for someone doing 1000 yard shooting and such but as a hunting LRF it's great.
 
stubblejumper said:
My Leica 1200 and my Geovids range much better than my Bushnell did,and the beam is narrow enough that I can actually tell what animal that I am ranging if there are several in a field.I hated when the Bushnell read the same range when pointed at individual animals that varied by around 100 yards from me.
Click to expand...

Well the Geovids are again, like the Swaro's in a whole other class...even a whole other class than the 1200s...You're talking about big dollar, ultra high end items...the guy said he had 300 bucks to spend, not 3k.
 
Thanks eveyone

Thanks to all who took the time to responsd to my original post. There is obviously a lot of good feed back. I think I will likely settle on the Bushnell Elite 1500 ARC. As I said in the post I have a limited budget and I am just using it for hunting deer (shotgun and bow).

I do have a terrible coyote problem here on my farm and would love to cream the buggers out at 500 yards but that is for another day, time, budget and better rifle skills. LOL.

Thanks again everyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom