I am considering getting a range finder for hunting. Looking for economical options as id like one for myself and one for The Boy. I am not interested in long range shooting. They will be used for squirrels with a 22, bow hunting, and deer with a rifle under 200 yards. I see a few under a hundred apiece but as I've never even looked through one I wouldn't know what was better. Not sure they can be used for squirrel sized game or if leaves would give false readings or even if someone can see a small animal like that in a tree against a dark background of leaves or a bright background or sky. I won't pay more than 300 for both if it gets higher than that I'll just keep hunting the way I've been doing it for 30+ years lol
I know the 200 yards is really max distance and yeah for a deer rifle it's sighted in to be on at 200 so no real need. More for shooting 22 to its maximum range on squirrels. I put a couple scopes on our 22s with mil dots but haven't plinked much with em yet. The range finder is more that I want one so I might get one but its not important enough to go broke getting a couple
At 200 yards I personally wouldn't spend the $ on a rangefinder.. I have never owned one.
He also said for bow hunting. And for his kid I agree if just gun hunting for me but others don't have my experience.
Sig kilo 2000 is what I bought because it's accurate picked up much better than my Leopold rx 1000 I used to use. I think it was in the low $225 ish range. Best I have found for the price.
I found one on Amazon. Don't remember the brand. Bout 100 bucks. I know that isn't any help, lol but what I figured out is get one with lighted display. Mine works great, but if it's low light you can't read the numbers on the screen
In my experience with range finders you need to get one that claims almost double the distance you want it to read. I had a 600 yd range finder that had trouble with deer at 250 to 300 sometimes depending on light and other factors.
Have used it on groundhogs, and have ranged squirrel while sitting in the deer stand. It is waterproof and I believe it is shock proof. I have dropped it out of the tree stand a couple of times and it still works. Eric
I use mine for a lot of things measuring acreage, target setup pretty accurate compared to my old wheel/counter great for turkey hunts mines a bushnell supposedly good to 600 yds had it for years no issues for me it was a 100 bucks well spent
I agree with Gary that there is no need for one inside of 200 yd for hunting. However, you asked some other questions too. Regarding leaves: Yes, many will read the closest thing bouncing the signal back which is often not the target object in brushy country. Some have a "last target" feature to prevent this type of reading error and provide a reading to the farthest target sending a signal back. You won't be able to get a range to a squirrel in a tree directly, but you should be able to read the distance to the tree trunk. Also, the distance rating is for highly reflective objects like road signs, your truck, and large flat rocks. Reliable readings of softer targets like animals or trees is typically about 1/2 the advertised distance.
Get one for farther than you need. They dont normally work as far out as they say. It will be good for the boy to use. To sit at a rifle range as a kid and shoot a target with nothing around to judge distance and then hunt in the woods and see a big buck 300 yards away and not know how far it is. Plus it will give you something to do with the kid while you sit bored in the woods. You can guess yardage and then use the rangefinder. Last year a bunch of us were shooting 300 yards and we all used different range finders to set the distance. Cheap and expensive ones were all very close.
I use the rangefinder I use for golf. Precisionpros. Only issue it has is it has a wider beam so sometimes it picks up behind the target. Fog kills it though because it breaks thee beam.
I got a Vortex from Academy and I love it. From a gun purchase I had a $100 off coupon.
I only shoot rabbits and squirrels from plinking distances but I do use the range finder if I set up on hogs or predator calling. I range tree trunks near the trail entrances or other places I expect a critter to show up. Like CMJ says you can make a little game out of it and train your eye at the same time
Here is a little different game for you to play with range finder to teach the boy a trick.. Prior to all the GPS stuff. I used to use my range finder or one the boss had. I have small Nikon boss had bigger 1000 yard Bushnell.. I used it to triangulate corners of search grids or start point of transect line.. Can even dial in trap location out in a field by picking 3-4 points to range.. Sure is not as quick as walking to a spot with GPS.. Once your in general location you can get close enough to kick traps out of the snow though. For what I was doing I had a map to work off with distances noted. Anyway some thing to play with more to learn the unit and range to eyes. My little Nikon wasn't expensive and I've had it for years think it's 200 yards. I've used it squirrel hunting more to just range distance of different trees. Then after shoot squirrel maybe range the limb.. As a kid I of course had none of the fancy gizmos.. I learned a lot of my ranging by eye and comparing to things to foot ball field. I carry my range finder deer hunting too. Will look at something say to my self how far is that. Then range it just to see how close I'am.. Where I deer hunt is wooded so 100 yards is long shot. I have head shot squirrels out at 60-70 yards with my 17HMR. I only know that by ranging the limb after the shot.. I really just play with my range finder.
I bought a cheap one 2 years ago for bow hunting. It was under 100$. I wish I woulda saved that to put towards a better 1. It works good for setting the practice target and ranging the bigger trees around when in a stand, but it is hard to get a good reading past 30yards. Trees need to be fairly good sized past 20 yds to get a good reading.(like as 12"+ diameter) It's a little better than guessing the yardage when I have the time to scan with it and get a good reading. I have yet to use it on a live target as I wouldn't waste the time with the unit I have as I would likely miss an opportunity.
if your ranges don't exceed 200 yards , use the money for something else
with a deer rifle I sight in at 200 yards running the 308
less than an inch high or low at 25 and 50
2 inches high at 100
right on at 200
3 1/2 low at 250
I have the Vortex BDC recitals on several scopes this when on the highest magnification gives you hashes to measure with
I probably wouldn't even need to sight in for 200 as I have never honestly shot a deer over 150 but I like to play at the range out to 400-500 so it s a good zero to work with
even many scopes with no hashes at all have a point where the cross hairs get thick
if you measure out 100 yards and make a cut out from a black sheet of poster board use that at the highest magnification to measure the subtenses of your scope
quite often even a basic scope with a cross hair that gets thick , it gets thick at about 6 MOA
19 inches X 95.5 constant / 6moa = 302 yards
18 inches X 95.5 constant / 6moa = 286 yards
17 inches X 95.5 constant / 6moa = 281 yards
there is a less than 3 inch difference between 275 and 300 even with the 308
this becomes a simple go no go , if the deer is not more than filling that 6moa space it is more than 300 yards away by measuring what the subtense of your scope is you know your go no go on taking the shot
once you do the math on a few common size targets like a mans shoulders are about 17-19 inches wide for most people even I am only a little larger than that
a mature deer chest to back is about 18-19 inches
if you know it is a deer say and you just want to know how far it is , ranging it with your scope is handy , when you make the decision of go or no go your just a breath and a trigger squeeze away from the shot. no batteries to go dead no second thing to carry
I really wish more companies would put rang finding like this into binoculars even if you had to close one eye to get the measurement it would further reduce gear carried
I carry binoculars and use the optic ont he rifle to range , not that I ever really range deer
a while back I attended a rifle clinic where we shot to 500 yards and once we had all shot at each known distance a part of the clinic was they told you only what size the target was in inches you were at the 500 yard line and you had to determine the range then fire they mized up where the targets had been while we were down in the pits also so you got back and nothing was were it had been . unfortunately I didn't have the reticle to measure in my optic at the time and was still new to the concept of ranging once you do it some and maybe make up a little cheat sheet or get used to rounding and end simple math
if I didn't feel like multiplying by 95.5 I could just say 18 inch target approximately and it measures 6moa that is about 300 yards 18 / 6 =3 add 2 zeros because 95.5 is almost 100 =300 if it is an 18 inch target and I rounded at 300 yards I still have lots of real-estate to make a hit , a little different on a deer where you want to hit about 8 inches
My wife bought me a Halo brand (around $100) from Gander (when still open)for Christmas a couple years ago. I use it mostly for crossbow and turkey hunting. I generally just mark the distance to trees, etc., for a frame of reference. It's a lot easier than pacing off distances.
I am not terribly interested in exact yards, etc., and it seems to work just fine for me for what I use it for.
I shoot long range, so my rangefinder is way overkill and more expensive than you would need. I'm currently using a Leupold 2800, this and a previous Bushnell 1300 are a couple of the only rangefinders I have ever used where I have actually been able to range farther than their claimed range. As a general rule with most rangefinders, and in particular cheaper ones, figure about half of their claimed range in the field. I'll disagree with a former poster on here, I far prefer black digital readout to lighted readout. Too often in low light you can see the target you are wanting to range through the rangefinder fine when it is turned off, as soon as you hit the button to turn it on the readout lights up red and that is all you can see, everything else goes black and you can no longer see if you are aiming the rangefinder at the deer or at the next ridge beyond it. With a black readout I don't have that problem, and if it is too dark to see the numbers, I can usually point it at the sky after shooting a range and read the numbers against the lighter background. You mention using it for bow hunting, in my opinion a rangefinder is very important bow hunting when you are spot and stalk hunting or doing something like calling elk. If all you are going to be doing is sitting in the same stand all the time, you can pace off and memorize distances ahead of time, when you chase a herd of elk through two drainages and finally have the bull turn around and come charging back to run off the interloper following him, this doesn't work so well. One thing to make sure of (pretty much all the decent rangefinders have this feature, but some of the cheap ones may not) is to get one with an angle compensator. Every brand calls it something different, but basically what you want it to do is tell you the horizontal distance between you and the target when looking up or down hill, rather than the slope distance that you are actually measuring. You want to hold for the horizontal distance (when you start shooting very long range you need to add in a few other calcs, but for reasonably long ranges with either bow or rifle horizontal distance is all you need worry about) between you and the target, if you are looking very steep either up or down hill the slope distance will be considerably farther and holding for it will cause you to shoot high.
Bushnell makes very good quality laser rangefinders, their optics usually suck, but the actual laser rangefinder inside is first rate. Their price is generally reasonable, so if you can live with the optics they are a good choice. Leupold are more expensive, and after the first leupold rangefinder I had I absolutely wouldn't recommend one for years, currently I own their top of the line one and couldn't be more happy with it, not sure how their cheaper models are however, wether they have improved enough to be worth their priced value or not. Sig have practically all very good reviews and everyone who has one loves it, I haven't personally used one, however. Vortex has a very nice top of the line rangefinder, and I have used another one of theirs that was very good, on the other hand I have used a couple and had clients with more that were pretty much garbage, research the exact model you are planning on getting is the best advice I can tell you on Vortex (or pretty much anything else). I also have an older Nikon that I actually found in the woods that the wife uses, bulkier but it works pretty good. Leica also makes good rangefinders.
