I just bought my first rangefinder, a used Nikon 1200. I was expecting around 500 yards for a soft target. I just ranged some round bales in the field behind my house. It appears to be getting solid, repeatable distances on all the bales in the field. The furthest is 940 yards. Would the round bales be similar to a game animal? Also, are these occasionally wrong, or would they just not give a distance if it was out of range? That happens when I try to range something way out there. I'm certainly not complaining but it is showing distances quite a bit farther than I was expecting. Thank you.
Nikon rangefinder question
- Thread starter North of 58
- Start date
Nikon Travis M.
Regular
- Location
- Alberta, Canada
The bale is a fairly large target for the laser to hit so it should have no issues. On a game animal I'd be expecting about 600-650 to be 100% honest with you. If it cannot read you will simply getting a blinking cross hair in the eyepiece and in my experience they are never off by more than a yard when it does target. As far as the max distance, I've had that same unit out on a Saskatchewan prairie and we hit a VERY highly reflective telephone pole out at 1650 yds. I'd never claim that to be repeatable as we were in perfect conditions just messing around with it but for the most part our yardage distances are conservative and repeatable each and every time.
Hope you enjoy it, besides being a touch big its a great unit!
Hope you enjoy it, besides being a touch big its a great unit!
nowarningshot
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Most often the model designation of Rangefinders refers to the distance they are to work too. That would appear to be 1200 in this case. 1200 might work, most likely on some very reflective item, like the plywood on the side of a building, a boulder, or a highway sign.
In reality, whatever the Model range they claim, consider half as the real world dependable limit, especially on a non reflective, rather small object, like a game animal. Even 600 is a loooong way out there.
My old rangefinder was a Nikon, worked fine until the airbag in my crash. Now it is not fog proof anymore, but still works fine in a controlled setting like a range.
In reality, whatever the Model range they claim, consider half as the real world dependable limit, especially on a non reflective, rather small object, like a game animal. Even 600 is a loooong way out there.
My old rangefinder was a Nikon, worked fine until the airbag in my crash. Now it is not fog proof anymore, but still works fine in a controlled setting like a range.
Thanks for the reply, Travis. Good to hear from someone who knows. 600 is further than I'll shoot at something with a heart beat, but it should be fun to shoot random targets with. It is both a bit larger and lighter than I expected. Nice, simple to use unit though.
Thanks NWS. It is an education to use one. I opened a back window and ranged the bales out back to test. The day before a watched a very large coyote hunting mice around a bale at what I now know was 605 yards. A very, very long way, but not as far as I estimated.
Hi Sheephunter. 600 is fine with me. My first thought when I realized how far the coyote was is that with some longer range practice I could reach him with my 223 WSSM or 270. My second thought was yeah, I might hit him but calling to close range would be more certain.
