Are Rangefinders Actually Needed?

[Eargesplitten]

This might be a dumb question, since I have only ever hunted small game and birds in the past. I'm budgeting out hunting gear for rifle hunting this winter, and trying to figure out what I need vs what would just be nice. I don't have a definite budget at this point because my income is unstable, I'm throwing out a lot of job applications to try to fix that but the job market is not good right now. I had always thought of a rangefinder as a must-have but now I'm questioning that. Would binoculars with some kind of reticle to help you determine distance be good enough? I've seen those advertised but I don't know how useful they actually are. My area is mostly <200y shots which would be at most a couple of inches off from dead center on the reticle so it wouldn't be needed there. Even if I went above treeline I couldn't see myself trying anything farther out than 300-400 yards just due to a lack of skill on my part. But, on the other hand, I don't know what 300-400 yards looks like, so it would be good to know when something looks closer than it is.

For reference, I'm in the CO high country in a pretty heavily wooded area, so unless I went out to the eastern plains or south towards the San Luis Valley I wouldn't have the opportunity for real "long range hunting" shots even if I had the skill to hit them ethically. And I'm hoping to get OTC tags for a nearby unit just so that I can go out and be snug in my bed at home by the end of the day.

 

[Boltgun]

Your maximum point blank range (MPBR) is the furthest you can shoot without introducing adjustment into your point of aim for bullet drop. (Basically the farthest you can just point right at a target and shoot.) For most common calibers/rifles this will be around 250 yards depending on some variables. (Zero distance, target size, etc.)

If you can reasonably stay within your MPBR, you don’t need one. But that means if you’re not sure if the target is 230 yards or 270 yards, you pass on the shot. Guys hunted this way for a century, so it can definitely be done.

You can also use a reticle to measure and calculate distance, but it’s a (tough) learned skill, takes time, and is less accurate.

In my opinion, it sounds like money spent on ammo, training and hunting would be more beneficial at this time. When you find yourself needing to take longer shots, get a rangefinder and some good training.

 

[TaperPin]

Back before rangefinders we practiced judging range by eye a lot. That was the limiting factor to all long range hunting. Everyone knew how to pace off distance, and even that had to be practiced to either adjust your stride to match a yard, or pace off so many steps and add or subtract a fudge factor to make the distance real yards. I’d go as far as saying practicing range estimation was more important than shooting. Most anyone can be taught to shoot 400 yards easy peazy, but it’s much harder to teach range estimation within +/- 25 yards, at least for some of us.

Guess a range and pace it off. See an animal and pace it off. That doesn’t cost anything. However, it only takes about two dozen trips out through 500 yards of sagebrush to put a rangefinder on the top of your Christmas list.

 

[Valumpessa]

If you plan to shoot out to 300-400 yards I would highly recommend budgeting for a rangefinder. Even with a good dial or BDC reticle scope you could easily wound or completely miss an animal thinking its 300 when in reality its 400. On my rifle that's the difference of a 6 inch vs 20 inch bullet drop.

I've been using the same vortex ranger 1000 I picked up 5 years ago used for $150. Works great in the 500 yd and under range.

 

[handwerk]

Yes

 

[steelheadmike]

Unless you know are really, really good at judging long distances (100-400yds), I think it would be foolish to hunt without a rangefinder. Because of how are brain calculates the distance to an object, it can be very difficult to judge a distance where you cannot see flat ground the whole way. If you're off even as little as 50yds, you stand a good chance of wounding that animal.

There's plenty of rangefinders out there that are quite reasonable that would work far better than nothing.

 

[199p]

The short answer is yes even if you can borrow one.

Just walk around and guess how far away stuff is then range it'll be amazed at how far the average person is on guessing distance.

I tried learning to get better at it. I never got confident enough not to use one.
Bullet drop even from 250y to 300y is a lot even with "flat shooting" rounds.

Especially worse in open ground

 

[Kurts86]

A Sig kilo 1000 is $110 on Amazon. I can’t see not having something with them that cheap and the value they provide.

 

[jjjjeremy]

You can get a solid range finder on the classifieds for well under $100. You don't need one for shots under 250-ish yards, but you need one to know if you've exceeded that distance.

 

[elkmaster]

This might be a dumb question, since I have only ever hunted small game and birds in the past. I'm budgeting out hunting gear for rifle hunting this winter, and trying to figure out what I need vs what would just be nice. I don't have a definite budget at this point because my income is unstable, I'm throwing out a lot of job applications to try to fix that but the job market is not good right now. I had always thought of a rangefinder as a must-have but now I'm questioning that. Would binoculars with some kind of reticle to help you determine distance be good enough? I've seen those advertised but I don't know how useful they actually are. My area is mostly <200y shots which would be at most a couple of inches off from dead center on the reticle so it wouldn't be needed there. Even if I went above treeline I couldn't see myself trying anything farther out than 300-400 yards just due to a lack of skill on my part. But, on the other hand, I don't know what 300-400 yards looks like, so it would be good to know when something looks closer than it is.

For reference, I'm in the CO high country in a pretty heavily wooded area, so unless I went out to the eastern plains or south towards the San Luis Valley I wouldn't have the opportunity for real "long range hunting" shots even if I had the skill to hit them ethically. And I'm hoping to get OTC tags for a nearby unit just so that I can go out and be snug in my bed at home by the end of the day.

yes you need a rangefinder in Colorado. The Rockies have a way of making distance very hard to judge

 

[Elkangle]

I would do about 4 hours of yard work and pay for a used rangefinder in the classifieds

 

[Mykolaivka887]

I don't use them, but I never shoot beyond 400 yards at unwounded game.

 

[SloppyJ]

Yes. If you want to shoot more than 200yds. I hot a set of Kilo10k Gen2s recently and went to a match this weekend. If I didn't have those it would have been a bloodbath at my expense.

You don't have to get range finding binos if you know your dope and have it memorized. However I'm willing to bet that if I called off a 545yd shot with a 7mph wind you wouldn't. Hell, I sure don't.

Again, you don't have to get rangefinding binos but they sure make it a lot easier and faster. Worst case if you're expecting an opportunity over 200yds or so, get some sort of ballistics solver and a decent rangefinder. You can find a pair of Gen1s for around the price of a kestrel and rangefinder so it's a no brainer IMO.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

No, you don’t need one. I would get a high stepping, flat shooting cartridge without a rangefinder though. Then you need to practice at known distances…a lot.

 

[WormSportsman]

Yes. The cost is low and the value of them is very high which makes it a pretty easy yes for me. Is it necessary, no, but it sure makes shots over 200 yards a heck of a lot easier when you know your exact distance.

 

[roadrunner]

Keep your eye fixed to Camofire. Good offerings for rangefinders from time to time at a good price.

 

[Yukon Cornelius]

I took a shot on a bear once. Thought I was 200yds away. Ended up being 400 yds and he was bigger than I thought. I missed. That’s when I bought a range finder.

I don’t like to shoot further than 300yds and I like to know my shooting distances anytime I’m hunting.

It is more important to me since I sometimes hunt with a big thumper that drops like a mortar round.

I also hunt a lot of shorelines and water has a tendency to throw range off for me.

 

[Eargesplitten]

You can get a solid range finder on the classifieds for well under $100. You don't need one for shots under 250-ish yards, but you need one to know if you've exceeded that distance.

Okay, yeah that's much easier to stomach. I was thinking I'd need to be looking at like $500+ for something I could rely on. Even aside from the idea of the rangefinder just not turning on during a chilly, humid day, I was thinking that with cheap ones I would be looking at an unreliable readout, in which case it could be worse than useless.

I've got a reticle with marks to identify 18" wide or 5'10" high targets at a given range, but that seems more designed for human shapes than the shape of any 4-legged animal I would be aiming at so I'd probably have to rely on the mil marks on the sides of the reticle to determine how far I was given the width of the animal, so for $100-200 a rangefinder seems much better if I can rely on something used in that price range.

 

[IDVortex]

I've learned in the mountains, that a 200 yard guess is closer to 400, and a 600 yard assume range is more like 300. Ill always have a range finder. Otherwise you're just assuming.

 

[jjjjeremy]

Okay, yeah that's much easier to stomach. I was thinking I'd need to be looking at like $500+ for something I could rely on. Even aside from the idea of the rangefinder just not turning on during a chilly, humid day, I was thinking that with cheap ones I would be looking at an unreliable readout, in which case it could be worse than useless.

I've got a reticle with marks to identify 18" wide or 5'10" high targets at a given range, but that seems more designed for human shapes than the shape of any 4-legged animal I would be aiming at so I'd probably have to rely on the mil marks on the sides of the reticle to determine how far I was given the width of the animal, so for $100-200 a rangefinder seems much better if I can rely on something used in that price range.

Yeah, you can definitely find a solid rangefinder in that price range. Operate under the assumption that you will only get half of the marketed range. I trust my Vortex Ranger 1300 to 650, my Nikon 1200 to 600, and my Sig Kilo 5k to as far as I can hold steady.

You could use MILs in a reticle to make sure you’re within your distance, but it will take practice, and it will be rough. e.g. “don’t shoot if deer body is smaller than 2 MILs”