Ranging Game in the Field Can be Tough

[Chris in TN]

Moving over to a range finding bino makes ranging in the field much much easier. I would never spend money on a hand held range finder again. The difference to me was huge.

Beyond that it’s just about learning the rangefinder you have. Figuring out the cone of it and understanding that most of the time you shouldn’t be trying to range the exact target or animal.

I’m looking forward to seeing more entrants into the RF binocular market.

I’d love to see an actual quality 10x50 or 12x50 under $500.

 

[BBob]

Figuring out the cone of it and understanding that most of the time you shouldn’t be trying to range the exact target or animal.

This. I almost never try to range the actual target or animal. When laser rangefinders first came out they weren’t very good and you could almost never get a read on a small target or an animal so we all learned to range trees and bushes for the range. Some trees and bushes are far better than others. Darker denser objects (like a dark dense oak tree or dense juniper) are generally better than light colored objects. Go experiment, you might be surprised at the accuracy and range you get out of the different objects out there.

Bushnell was the first viable affordable unit on the market. They were pretty limited on range and were terrible on small objects so you learned quickly what made a good target to range and how to maximize the range you could get. Swarovski had their unit at the time which was much better but very few of us could afford it. It was metric only and wasn’t available all that long and got discontinued.

 

[General RE LEE]

It’s funny that you can have the best rifle with accurate hand loads and a reliable scope, but it don’t mean a hill of beans unless you can accurately range your target. I’m going to look into RF binos.

 

[Fireflyfishing]

I’ve been using rangefinding binos the last couple years and have no issues now.

 

[JGRaider]

Anxious to see Vortex' new bino/RF. I'm betting Razor HD glass upgrade, Geo ballistics, and maybe a 12x version. My 3 yr old Fury AB has been excellent.

 

[mgacf]

This exact thing was a huge problem on a Sig RF I had. You can range the top of a telephone pole to verify. Put RF in scan mode and start outside the pole, move slowly left and right, and then up the pole and eventually above it. If your reticle is properly aligned with the laser you can notice it easily when scanning left to right of the top, and up and down. My Sig wasnt even in the circle reticle, as it turned out to be at 6:30 slightly outside of the circle, which will obviously give you false readings in the field lots of times. The idiots at Sig CS claimed it was "within spec".

This is something I overlooked early on. "Checking the zero" on a rangefinder is the first thing I do now. The guys at Revic put me on to this. They may be within spec, but still favor one side of the reticle.

 

[mgacf]

Anyone else have issues getting an accurate range with a rangefinder on game? In the heat of the moment with one hand on the rifle and another trying to range target while shaking, it’s very easy to range stuff in background behind target. Happened to me tonight on a hunt. I picked up in my rangefinder the tree line behind the deer, dialed and whiffed first shot. Shot was high. I reloaded and ranged again to realize I dialed wrong distance. I had to dial down and connected on next shot.

Just had this same thing happen last week. Glad it stuck around for a second shot.

Narrower beam and steadier holds are the only things that will make it more accurate imo. I have a BR4 right now for that reason. Still, I would prefer a smaller beam yet.

According to the spec sheet, the Sig Kilo10K has the smallest beam size. I have a pair but prefer my Swaro 14NLpure. I don't like giving up the glass quality.