Has anyone here on AT compared their Nikon Archer's Choice with other rangefinders? Was it right on or did it give a different reading?

 

Archer's Choice is the worst rangefinder out there. Why would u ever buy a range finder that is only good for 100 yards?
They just manufactured a cheap, janky rangefinder that's limited to 100 yards, slapped the word "Archer" on it along with a $200 price tag knowing idiots would buy it solely because big daddy Nikon told them it was specifically for Archers.

You are the kid, Nikon is the cop car.

 

I just ran an experiment with the old Nikon 440 rangefinder and a newer "Archer's Choice". Laid a 160 foot tape on the ground and took two ranges with the 440 and two each with the Archer's Choice set a "ANG" and line-of-sight. The 440 was amazing - 10.5, 20.5, 30.5, 40.5 and 50.5 yards at 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 yards. The 0.5 yd "error" could have been the way I was standing at the stake. The A.C. rangefinder "ANG" mode read, 10.4, 21.4, 31.8, 42.4 and 52.4. In the line-of-sight mode it read, 10.5, 22.0, 32.0, 42.0, and 52.5, respectively.

So I called Nikon. They said "Thank you for calling Nikon. Your Archer's Choice rangefinder is accurate within 2 yards. Those are the specs that Nikon provides. Your rangefinder is operating within tolerances. I'm sorry that you are not satisfied with it's performance."

So, they sell you a rangefinder that measures to the tenth of a yard, but isn't accurate to within 5% of the true distance out to 50 yards. That's unacceptable to me, and by the way, here is the link to the specs on this rangefinder. Show me where it says anything about being "accurate to within 2 yards".

http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/...oducts/Product-Archive/Rangefinders/8366/Archer’s-Choice-w%2FAPG-Camo-Case.html

 

I guess my posts come across as a rant against Nikon when really what I'd like to know is whether or not anyone else is experiencing this level of "inaccuracy" with their Archer's Choice rangefinders?

 

No you have a legit question. Sorry I can't help, I only have the Nikon Prostaff 550 and happy with it. Also wondered if I should upgrade for an angle compensating one.

In for responses.

 

My question is does it matter? If its consistent in its readings does it matter that its 2 yards off from reality? Sight in with it and use it to hunt and it doesn't really matter if it tells you 40 yards when it's 38.5 because your 40 yard pin is set at 38.5 yards already. I understand the complaint about the claimed results and actual results but for any practical use it just doesn't matter. I have a bushnell and my friend has a leopold. At 90 yards on mine his says 93 but my 90 yard pin still works

 

I think it matters for a number of reasons. First of all you have a major optics company that reportedly isn't concerned that their rangefinder is fairly inaccurate. Secondly, their "within 2 yards" is pretty poor when you consider that bowhunters deal with significantly more downrange effects on the projectile than a firearms shooter. So if anything, an "Archer's Choice" model should be highly accurate within 100 yards. Finally, the OP paid more for a unit that is not living up to his expectations. I have a Leupold and am glad that I avoided the Nikon brand..........

 

I have to agree with bhutso, if you like it use it, and as long as it is consitant what is the problem. I have the new version of the Archers Choice and i like it alot, will range out to 600 yards, and i have personally ranged trees at 450 just goofing around with it. I never understood why someone would buy the old AC range finders either till they made the new one which is pretty much the pro staff 7 in a different color. but back on subject, if you like it, i would use it and be happy, but it sounds like you are not, so go ahead and sell it and get as much of you money back as you can. But in the end if it is consitant, i dont see the problem.

 

my dad has a archers choice I used first yr bow hunting on rare occasion it went past 100yrds I got a prostaff think its a 3 or 4.i should compare the 2. I think the archers choice is over priced for what you get.

 

I think it's pretty crappy that they only had to make it measure 100 yards, and they can't even do that accurately. I think you have a legitimate beef. I can usually eyeball it and get within 2 yards.

 

If I could eye ball range within 2 yards, I wouldn't even bother with a range finder.

 

It's a legitimate grip if they are advertising a degree of accuracy that it doesn't meet. I have no aurgument with that. I'm not running out to buy one. If I did it would be a leopold simply for the red display in low light but I'm saying if I already bought it and they weren't gonna do anything about it I wouldn't hesitate to use it. Most people forget there was a time when we just stepped off yardage around our stand and alot of times you don't have the opportunity to range a live animal anyway. You have to be able to judge yardage sometimes and there is a margin for error. 30 or 32 yards with most of today's bows is nothing. 50 or 52 is different but if your gonna take a shot that far you better be sure of how far it is anyway. I would still use it. All I'm sayin

 

Hence the name mr man

 

At Nikon's request, I sent the Archer's Choice back to them. Called today and requested status. Their first response was, "we're going to let you buy another rangefinder at a discounted price" which turned out to be around $170. Not!! I respectfully explained to them that they suggested I send the rangefinder back. I had resigned myself to the fact that Nikon had just put out an inferior product and I was going to have to live with it, but no, they send me an email saying return it. After telling them I wasn't going to spend another $170 on a different product (I would have paid up to $50 or so to "upgrade" to a different model), they finally decided to "comp" me a newer model. This is what I expect a good company to do, and they came through - so in the end, I will stick with Nikon for now.