I think that it's time I start to use some of the technology available. I'd like to feel confident to take some of those long range shots that I've passed on in the past. I notice that some range finders say "good to 600 yds on highly reflective surfaces", and much less on deer, etc. Well, I'm not planning on shooting too many highly reflective surfaces! What is a good rangefinder, reasonably priced, for practical rifle hunting out to 400 or 500 yards?
Rangefinders?
- Thread starter Vin4570
- Start date
Probably one that says it's good on reflective surfaces at 1,000 yards. It won't be good for that far on deer because they are not relfective, but you use it to range landmarks like a nice reflective rock where you the deer may appear.
Look at a very good name like Leica. If that seems too expensive save, and watch the EE for an older model from one of the well-off gunnutz who wants to upgrade to the latest model. If you are investing the time and effort in getting good enough at the shooting to ethically take shots at 4-500 yards, you had better not handicap yourself with lesser kit. (I have a Brunton Echo 440, got it on sale at C.Tire for $100. It's as good as it claims to be, which is certainly not as good as you want. I use it mainly to check my eyeball estimates, my effective hunting range isn't really that far anyway.)
Look at a very good name like Leica. If that seems too expensive save, and watch the EE for an older model from one of the well-off gunnutz who wants to upgrade to the latest model. If you are investing the time and effort in getting good enough at the shooting to ethically take shots at 4-500 yards, you had better not handicap yourself with lesser kit. (I have a Brunton Echo 440, got it on sale at C.Tire for $100. It's as good as it claims to be, which is certainly not as good as you want. I use it mainly to check my eyeball estimates, my effective hunting range isn't really that far anyway.)
Last edited:
Good advice...
Leica, Swarovski, Zeiss, and Leupold offer great rangefinders. You get what you pay for.
TDC
I was at the range a while back and my buddy had a Bushnell 1000/1200 or so.
I tinkered with it for a bit to get the feel of it.
Seemed pretty slick.
I brought out my Leice 1200 and whooot.
I could pick a couple of targets with this that the Bushnell wouldn't.
And the Leica was faster to target too.
It sure doesn't seem like much, but hand in hand, one can tell the
difference.
Toss the coin into the hat and the results are noticeable.
I tinkered with it for a bit to get the feel of it.
Seemed pretty slick.
I brought out my Leice 1200 and whooot.
I could pick a couple of targets with this that the Bushnell wouldn't.
And the Leica was faster to target too.
It sure doesn't seem like much, but hand in hand, one can tell the
difference.
Toss the coin into the hat and the results are noticeable.
Jordan Smith
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
The older/cheaper Bushnells weren't up to par with the Leicas and Swaros. The new Fusion RF/bino is comparable to those two, however. I've owned and played with Leica 1200, Zeiss PRF, and Bushnell Fusion 1600, and the Fusion easily takes the cake.
i was looking into a rangefinder for a bit. then i desided to get good with my mil-dot reticle. once you get use to it you dont need to do the math. i can ball park in around 25yrds but just looking. it works great for rangeing my targets when plinking. hunting i wont shoot past 300yrds and with a 30-06 i zero at 200 and i just put the crosshairs on target and touch one off.
Blastattack
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Winnipeg MB
Hmm... Barr and Stroud is where it's at. Not exactly what one would call a "portable" unit, but will accurately range out to 2000+ yards with little effort and some practice.
