Rangefinder question

[rgitzlaff]

In a year I plan on going on my first PD hunt. I have read that it is recommended to have a good pair of binocs for finding the things instead of using your riflescope. It also seems that a decent rangefinder is also quite useful in making first round hits. I do not currently own either of these two peices of equipment. How well would it work to use the rangefinder for spotting the PD's as well as ranging them? Better than the riflescope? I'd like to kill two birds with one stone on this one so I don't have to buy two optical devices, this way I can afford to buy something better. Right now I'm looking pretty hard at a Leica LRF 1200. What do you think? With that could I get away without binocs?

[YoteSmoker]

The rifle scope should only be used to get the critter (any game animal for that matter for SAFETY reasons #1) in your cross hairs after locating one (with the aid of a spotter). You MUST have a GOOD set of binoculars at a minimum! Most range finders have about 8x magnification and are a monocular. They work well after finding the rat in your binoculars prior to finding them in your or usually your buddy's scope. The Leicas sure are nice, but are you going to make shots out to 1200 yards? I already know that answer because you would probably have a couple tripods and a set of BigEyes and maybe a ultimate tripod shooting rest. You will be spending hours of staring through glass. Spend your money there and on a high powered scope with thin duplex crosshairs. Get a rangefinder with maximum range capability that you would likely shoot. For instance, if you're shooting a 223, a 400-600 max would be fine. I personally use a Nikon 800 rangefinder because I can use it for ranging big game as well. The Leica 900 would probably more than fit your needs, I'm guessing, and save you money to put toward your other glass. I really think Nikons are very practical and of good quality for the money. For binoculars, I use a set 8X32 and have another pair of 10X50s. I enjoy glassing and spotting for my friends behind the trigger as much and probably more than shooting myself. A spotter is invaluable and almost a necessity in this game. The reason I enjoy it so much is I almost feel like a sniper picking them out then reading the range and
o'clock positions to help guide the shooter on target and then seeing it all happen in the glass when the bullet connects is priceless! I've only gone prairie dogging by myself once and man did it suck. Kinda like fishing, setting downriggers, and driving the boat at the same time if ya know what I mean.

[rgitzlaff]

YoteSmoker,

Thanks for the advice. In that case, could you recommend me a good but affordable binoculars for glassing the PD's? I've done some looking but the sheer quantity of different binocs out there is staggering, with prices all over the board.

[Ackman]

A rangefinder is nice to have but not necessary. Used as a monocular it's no replacement for binoculars. If your guns have any kind of muzzle rise, definitely put brakes on them. Even a .223. They let you watch the whole show which is what it's all about. Also with no muzzle rise you can estimate the shot and easily see a miss, then correct. The whole thing is much more fun and you don't need a spotter.

Lots of time is spent looking through binoc's and it's definitely worth paying extra for good ones.....your eyes will thank you. Mine are 10x50 Leica. You really don't need something that expensive but they're sure a pleasure to use.

I don't agree about not using the scope to find targets. Many times you'll take a shot when cranked to full power and there'll be nothing else in the field of view. You may want to use binoculars. Or often you'll just zoom back to 6 or 4 wide field of view and scan for another one. There's nothing unsafe about it - that's how it's done. You're in the middle of nowhere to begin with and nobody around to even see, plus you already know what's out there. If anyone's in the field of view or anywhere nearby, you've no business shooting there anyhow. The variable scope is a useful tool for finding targets.

[TinMan]

I went on Heck and Vince's Rookie Hunt in 2005 and had the great pleasure of using a pair of Leica Geovids. Simply amazing. To my eyes, I could spot pd's easier with the 7x Geovids than my 6.5-20 Vari-XIII scope, simply because the color fidelity was so much better. I could pick out the color difference between the dirt and the pd much easier. I could not justify Geovids, but that experience led me to buy the Leica 1200 Scan. Last year I brought a cheap pair of binocs to pd country, and wound up using the 1200 instead of the binocs because they were much better optically. I later bought better binocs - Minox HG's - because I found a killer deal on them ($550). To me they were significantly better optically and for color fidelity than the Nikon Monarchs I was thinking about getting. Since I get to go pd'ing only once a year, I couldn't justify Leica, Zeiss or Swaro's. I agree with Ackman, but it is handy to have a rangefinder. I would buy the Leica RF first and get some good binocs next year. Hope this helps.

[T.Zimm]

I was also very fortunate to go on Heck and Vince's Rookie shoot last year. You will HAVE to have a rangefinder. Binocs are nice to have, but the rangefinder is a must. At ranges over 250 it all blends in and unless you do "eyeballing" daily like Heck does, you just wont be able to tell how far it is. I would buy the best rangefinder you can afford so you wont have to do it again for awhile. :) One other thing; After staring through a scope in the bright sun and wind for ten hours a day, you will sure understand about good/bad scopes! To say I learned a lot would be a huge understatement. Thanks Heck!

[agne53]

I have the previous model leica rangefinder 900 yd variety. And it does a very good job and the glass in the leica products is tremendous. My father ended up getting the 1200 yard model and after using it I wish I would of went that route from the beginning. You might not be ranging to 1200 yards but from my observations I have found that I will sometimes get a better reading with the 1200 when you are ranging a larger object at 750+ when compared to the 900 model. I do not have any experience with the new models that came out in the past two years. As for binoculars I have a pair of 8x30 Steiner predators that I like very much. You can generally find them for around $200 and they in my limited experence have done everything that I need them to do very well. I have toyed with upgrading then to a higher end stiener, leica, zeiss. But I keep coming back to the fact that the added expense is money that could be spent on powder and bullets.

[OrneryCuss]

Rather than the Leica, I would recommend getting the Bushnell Elite 1500 and a nice pair of binoculars.

You should be able to do both for not much more than what you will give for the Leica and the Bushnell will outrange the Leica in almost all instances by as much as 600 yards.

When you get your Bushnell test it on a single story light colored building at 1500 yards. If it won't hit that range from a tripod in normal lighting, send it back and tell them you want one that works as advertised. Once you get one that hits that 1500 mark, you are good to go. Do not leave it in the heat of a truck cab in July, or you will get green worm tracks on the display. I think it is the LCD cement melting. The lines don't seem to hurt the performance, but they are ugly to look through.

Spend the money you saved on some good wide angle binoculars.

[Rick in Oregon]

Mostly good advice so far....I've been at the rodent sniping game since the late 60's, and in that time have formed my own opinions too. You've got a year to get it together, so do it right the first time.

I disagree that scanning for targets using your scope is a good idea. You'll find in no time that a good set of bino's is critical. Better FOV, less eyestrain from looking with one eye all day. I use 10x42's, right now they're Leupold Wind River's, later they'll be Leica. ($ issues as usual) Buy the best you can afford ONCE. Using the rangefinder only is also not a good idea; you need both.

Rangefinder: I've used and owned most of the good ones, the star of the show of course is the Geovids, but they were loaned. I've settled on the Leica LRF-1200. True, you won't shoot that far, but it doesn't hurt to have the extra margin, especially for open country mule deer or antelope hunting when not using them for rodents (I'm NOT saying I'd shoot a game animal that far away either).

For a scope, I'm completely biased towards Leupold, own a safe full of them, but I'd suggest again buying the best you can afford, and a variable for sure. One trip will tell you that you made the right decision. Leupold, Nightforce, Nikon quickly come to mind.

I spend a little over a month per year (cumlative) sniping PD's, ground squirrels and rock chucks, so have over the years gravitated to these choices based on what has worked for me and those I've hunted/shot with. Everybody has their own idea of what works for them, but just buy the best optics you can afford, you'll be glad later, as you'll be hooked after that first trip.

Here's my typical bench setup for long range rodent sniping:

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g66/packrat1/P4081639.jpg

Buy smart, and that first trip will be something you'll remember for the rest of your life. Have a great shoot, be sure to give us the gory details when you get back. :)

[Ackman]

A rangefinder is nice to have but not necessary. Used as a monocular it's no replacement for binoculars.

I should have said that rangefinders aren't a NECESSITY. Mine is a Leica 1200. Even though it's always in the truck and gets used a lot, for years and years we got along fine without them. They're not cheap. If you can afford one then definitely get it. But if it came down to choosing between a rangefinder and cheap binoculars or no rangefinder and good binoculars, I'd say buy the good binoculars. You spend literally hours looking through binoculars and there's a difference. Really good binoculars are a joy to use

[rgitzlaff]

Okay, since it seems like there is somewhat of an agreement that a good set of binocs should be my priority before the rangefinder, what can I expect to spend for a decent pair? From what I have seen prices range from $50 - $2,500. I want to try and keep my budget down to $400-$450 total for RF and Binocs. Thanks.

[Rick in Oregon]

In that price range, look at the Leupold Wind Rivers and Burris. Pentax and Nikon also deserve a look. There's some very good buys in that price range.

If these will be dedicated just to PD shooting, I'd go with 10X. However if they'll be used for varmint and big game hunting, I prefer 8X for better FOV and less 'wiggle' during long periods of glassing for game.

John Barnsess did a piece a few months ago on bino's in this range in either Rifle or Handloader.....you may want to check that out too.