[ToddM]

Yep it's unfortunate that 99.9% of the reviews of rangefinders don't test archery range accuracy the way Nestly did, probably because most of them are gun focused and +/- 1 yard accuracy even at most hunting distances for a gun is more than enough. I really think that with precision archery pushing longer and longer distances having a rangefinder that reads in tenths of a yard, and that is accurate to sub yard can be a big advantage. I'd love to see how the SIG 2200MR fares on such a test, since they claim +/- 0.1 yard accuracy under 100 yards. The leupold above certainly did very well, I think that unit is +/- 0.5 yards so it certainly performed up to its spec.

Even for the gun crowd though at long ranges, accuracy is key, all anyone seems to care about is how far they range. Some companies list a % of error after a certain yardage, the Leica I think is 0.5% over 1000 yards. If you're some of these extreme long range rifle shooters, that 0.5% at 1500 yards is +/- 7.5 yards. Even for a 338 Lapua, if you are 7 yards off at 1500 yards, that's an ~10 inch miss just from rangefinder error.

 

[hmbuttercup]

redfield raider 650a is awesome and about $160

 

[nestly]

Haven't shot IBO 3D in years. When did they start allowing rangefinders at 3D tournaments?

ASA started including known distance classes about a decade ago, which is part of the reason that ASA is constantly setting new attendance records.
IBO leadership is still living in the 1980's and 90's and refuses to add known distance classes, which a part of the reason IBO attendance continues to fall and will soon be at the point of un-sustainability.

 

[igorts]

I had multiple rangefinders and my teammates used different ones so I had access to many.
Earlier leupolds had issue with reading from black. New ones have no such issue, reading fast and visible.
Vortex are slow.
Sig is not giving correct reading.
Bushnell shows 7 yards for any target in fog and 9 yards in rain.
Leica I tested were precise but no compensation for the angle and 1yard incremental.
So I go for Leupold.
3 different models show a distance within 0.1 to 100 yards.
More than impressive


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nestly]

I also have a Leupold and would never buy one again. I sent the first one back because it would not range a real deer standing in front of me at 30 yards (It did range a known target distance correctly but I never had the chance to measure an incline with it). Since the range finder was several months old when this happened. I had to call Leupold and was told by Leupold to range something more reflective. After a few choice words on my part about the main use of a range finder, they had me send it back and gave me a new one. Great, only this one ranges a light target at 30 yards (measured with steel tape for 30 yds at my range on our field course) for 33 yards and a dark target at 30 yards for 36 yard. The inclinometer is way off from my real inclinometer.

I suppose that there are a certain amount of lemons for all of them, but I certainly wouldn't have given up easily. I'd have pushed for a yet another replacement, or pushed for a refund.

How do you test a range finder in a store with uphill and downhill targets at a known distance) before buying one?

Unfortunately, you really can't unless you already have a rangefinder that you know is accurate to compare it with. Carried my Leica D8 into Bass Pro and Field & Stream when I went shopping for the Leupold... unfortunately for some reason stock is really low in my area and I couldn't find a RX-1200i to test, so I ordered it online. Had it not met my expectations, it would have been sent back just like I did with the Sig Kilo.

I received a private message that said all I have to do is to set my sights to my range finder.

Yeah, I don't understand the reasoning of those who are so quick to settle for an inaccurate rangefinder, even if it didn't have the problem with reading light and dark targets differently. Maybe it's the way they use, but a rangefinder with a 2-3 yard error is not going last very long for people that are serious about 3D/Field competition.

 

[nestly]

Nestly, nice review

Thanks.

Weather permitting, I'll be shooting a Field round tomorrow on pretty hilly course. I'd like to range each target with both the Leica and the Leupold for distance and angle and record the results, but I'm sure that's going to slow down the group too much so I'll probably just do it for a few select targets.

 

[rockyw]

I tried several Leopold's today at Cabela's. Only the highest price one would read a black target. Same with the Vortex.

 

[Deertracker11]

Nikon Prostaff. Very accurate on all subjects and on black targets as well

 

[Lammas]

I used to think so too, even as die hard Leica fan as I am, I still like the Sig better.

lol....I really wish I hadn't read this reply!!

 

[HoosierPuncher]

I'd stay away from Halo (read different or not at all on dark targets)
I also had bad luck with Sig Kilo1250. It was off between 0.8 to and 1 yard between 20 and 80 yards, which is outside of the published spec and it also wouldn't read some black 3D targets at all. It also failed to return any distance at all when there were multiple objects at different distances, even when it was set on "LAST" mode, which is supposed to only read the most distant object. No personal experience with Nikon or Vortex, but I'm pretty sure the Leopold's with DNA are the most accurate and reliable for hunting/3D.

.

Ya bought one, it's junk. After 50 yards your looking at a 2-4 yard difference and it takes a while to get that range.

 

[Super 91]

lol....I really wish I hadn't read this reply!!

Yeah, I just tested the Leica Range master CRF 2000-B next to the Kilo 2200 and the 2200 was my preference. I'd give the nod on optics to Leica by a fraction, but one button on the Kilo and all the minor details the nod goes to the Sig.

 

[5MilesBack]

ASA started including known distance classes about a decade ago, which is part of the reason that ASA is constantly setting new attendance records.
IBO leadership is still living in the 1980's and 90's and refuses to add known distance classes, which a part of the reason IBO attendance continues to fall and will soon be at the point of un-sustainability.

THAT ^^^^^ says more about all those new people shooting ASA than it does the IBO leadership. When you get skilled archers shooting together, the only thing that separates them is judging distances. And when you get at the national podium level, that doesn't even guarantee a separation.

But you're right, the 80's.......where men were men, and men had to judge yardage. Things weren't just handed to them. They had to work for it.:wink:

It's kind of like the quote from former President of the USGA (golf) after the 1974 US Open, where Hale Irwin won with a score of 7 OVER par. And he (Sandy Tatum) said........"We're not trying to humiliate the best players in the world, we're simply trying to identify them". 3D should always be unknown yardage IMO, and should go out to well beyond 50 yards to "determine" the best 3D shooters in the world, the USA, each state, or even locally.

 

[nestly]

THAT ^^^^^ says more about all those new people shooting ASA than it does the IBO leadership. When you get skilled archers shooting together, the only thing that separates them is judging distances. And when you get at the national podium level, that doesn't even guarantee a separation.

But you're right, the 80's.......where men were men, and men had to judge yardage. Things weren't just handed to them. They had to work for it.:wink:

It's kind of like the quote from former President of the USGA (golf) after the 1974 US Open, where Hale Irwin won with a score of 7 OVER par. And he (Sandy Tatum) said........"We're not trying to humiliate the best players in the world, we're simply trying to identify them". 3D should always be unknown yardage IMO, and should go out to well beyond 50 yards to "determine" the best 3D shooters in the world, the USA, each state, or even locally.

Several years ago I would have agreed, but not now. Known distance classes is the only segment of 3D that's growing. Unknown is declining at an astounding rate. Yes, I too like the additional challenge of judging yardage... no I'm not willing to ignore the fact that virtually all hunters carry electronic rangefinders today and also prefer to use them in practice and competition as well.
You could have made the same argument in the past for sights vs no sights, recurve vs compound, fingers vs release... etc. "REAL MEN" shoot recurves with wooden arrows and bare fingers, but if thinking had not evolved, recreational and competitive archery would not exist today except for a couple hundred die-hards.

 

[rockyw]

Known distance classes is the only segment of 3D that's growing.

I have never shot ASA, I like the IBO and I like the unknown yardage format. With that being said I also believe the IBO is missing out and should include known distance classes to help increase the IBOs following. I don't know if its they don't care about a falling attendance or if they are being stubborn and just don't care to change. Maybe they will get the idea to give people more choices sometime soon.

 

[5MilesBack]

Several years ago I would have agreed, but not now. Known distance classes is the only segment of 3D that's growing. Unknown is declining at an astounding rate.

Like I said, that says more about the people that make up our society and this "new" generation of people than anything. Probably part of the "participation trophy" crowd. Nobody wants to actually do anything that's hard anymore, when there's an easier option available. But that's not me and never will be. I still split a lot of wood with a maul and/or sledge and wedges, even with a 27 ton splitter sitting next to the wood pile.

If crowds really are dwindling at IBO events, I might just have to try to attend some as I prefer to stay away from the crowds and the "all day" rounds.

 

[big44a4]

Any experience with any of the sig models regarding the angle comp? I've heard the Leica doesn't do angle compensation inside 100 yards which is no good for archery and can't see anything on sig website about that....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Super 91]

The new Leica models do, just read which do and which don't. The Sig Kilo 2000 and 2200 both offer angle compensated distance.

 

[big44a4]

The new Leica models do, just read which do and which don't. The Sig Kilo 2000 and 2200 both offer angle compensated distance.

Contacted sig and said "could have issues inside 100. To be safe their AMR for sure works over 100 but could act funny at closer distances."

Anyone have experience with Nikon arrow ID rangefinders?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Skyborne]

Trying to figure out the difference between the:
Nikon Monarch 7i VR
VS
Nikon Arrow id 7000 VR

Obviously the Arrow is for archery, but can't see why the Monarch can't be used for archery also. When I looked at the specks they appear to be the same range finder. Am I missing something??

 

[dajogejr]

Trying to figure out the difference between the:
Nikon Monarch 7i VR
VS
Nikon Arrow id 7000 VR

Obviously the Arrow is for archery, but can't see why the Monarch can't be used for archery also. When I looked at the specks they appear to be the same range finder. Am I missing something??

Two things...dug up a year old thread to ask a question instead of add to the convo...
2nd, My guess is the Arrow is calbrated for arrow speed ballistics and accounts for angles (up/down) and ranges accordingly.

Not trying to be a jerk, just forum etiquette..

If you have a specific question, start your own thread. If you have something to add to an existing thread...have at it.