sig sauer kilo 2000 rangefinder

[An Idahoan]

Most the people I talk to don't use the ballistics on the leica because they are 'one size fits all' type ballistic programs, which might be close enough out to 400 or maybe 500, but not much more than that for most people.

There is no way I'd rely on the Leica built in solution. But the 1600-B has a screen where it'll read out the barometric pressure and temperature, which can then be used in whatever program/app you're using. The value there I suppose is only needing a stand-alone anemometer (like a Kestrel 1000) versus a Kestrel 2500. But the difference in price there is negligible compared to the price difference between the Kilo and the 1600-B.

 

[codyadams]

There is no way I'd rely on the Leica built in solution. But the 1600-B has a screen where it'll read out the barometric pressure and temperature, which can then be used in whatever program/app you're using. The value there I suppose is only needing a stand-alone anemometer (like a Kestrel 1000) versus a Kestrel 2500. But the difference in price there is negligible compared to the price difference between the Kilo and the 1600-B.

Ya, it is somewhat cumbersome needing 3 tools to take a long range shot, I may one day reduce it to 2 by getting a kestrel 4500 with applied ballistics or if I'm lucky, a G7. But with what I have now, I can make shots, so it will be a while before I justify the money for a kestrel, and even longer before a G7...but maybe one day...my shooting grocery list is NEVER empty, just my wallet ha ha

 

[scottyd2506]

when I was talking the other day about my friends Bushnell 1 mile vs my Kilo 2000, they where very close. Both of us ranged my 24in x 24inch cardboard at 1750-52 yards.
Mine would also range his small steel 16in plate (plain white paint) at 1755. he could not read it, Then we moved to the corner of field to get a mile reading, the reflective cardboard was not perpendicular to us. so I had a hard time getting a reading but got a few at 1766.9. The Bushnell would not read it.. That being said the Bushnell is a good piece and all most would need.
Trees for the kilo have to be big to read over 1200 yards, just clicking on a bunch of small tress does not work..

 

[JackinSD]

Anyone that is looking for a tripod mount for the Kilo 2000?

Try here: LRI SIG KILO 2000 Tripod Mount – LRI Outlet Store

Made by Chad Dixon at Longrifles, Inc.

 

[Rich Coyle]

Yesterday I took the Sig out to check it again. I ranged a sheep at 750 and a bull at 1250.

 

[450hunter]

JackinSD,

Thanks for the tripod link.

 

[JackinSD]

JackinSD,

Thanks for the tripod link.

You're welcome.

 

[Wachsmann]

Well I think when these first came out Sportmans was running the around 400.00 dollars but I could be wrong. Today I was in the store and they were 499.00. I will probably have to get one off the internet than my local Sportmans Warehouse

 

[Joe Hendrix]

My wife purchased a Sig Kilo for me as I believe she was sick of me watching Youtube videos featuring LRF reviews. Actually, it was my birthday. Everything was great out of the box and I even purchased a new battery before field testing this thing.

Just for information, I am a newbie here and to long range shooting, long range hunting, reloading, etc.. The LRF was the final piece of kit I needed to start my practicing in anticipation of long range hunting. I have a 7mmrm I built in my garage, I bought a Kestrel 4000 off of eBay, and run the Shooter App on my cell phone. I also hand loaded some Amax for this rifle which I use to shoot out to 1000 yards.

I took my kit and my family to a ranch west of Corning, California where grassy rolling hills afford me the opportunity to take some longish shots. The family and I posted up on top of a grassy knob and set milk jugs between 300 and 900 yards (varying increments were used: 428 yds, 559 yds etc). I used the Kestral/Kilo/Shooter App combo. My boys called shots from the spotting scope and after confirming my zero at 300 yards, we marched all the way out to 900 yards. The sound of the Amax hitting those jugs was enough confirmation of the hits. I used 2 shots at 900 though because I don't think I was watching my bubble. It was overcast and approximately 77 degrees. We had a cross wind at 90 degrees from right to left which varied between 1 and 3.5 mph.

The LRF did a really good job ranging the grassy hills the jugs were set on. The longest range I was able to obtain (on a tree) was just over 1300 yards. I used the AMR setting and Density Altitude for my dope and it was also on scan mode which I dug a lot. It seemed to allow me to verify my range by panning it back and forth over the terrain to confirm my target.

The Kilo fit well into my vest pocket and was super fast and easy to use. It felt really good in my hand and did not snag on anything when I pulled it out of my pocket and around my binoculars. I liked the magnification and the glass seemed good tome. The return time was killer. I don't have anything bad to say about this LRF and only have experience with entry level range finders so I don't really have much to compare to or with.

I am sure this was not the most comprehensive review but for the price of this thing I am really super stoked (and confident) to deploy it for my upcoming hunts.

I threw up a couple of pics to show the terrain and of my wife shooting (she broke jugs from approximately 400 to just under 700 yards. Don't ask why her boots were off.

 

[codyadams]

My wife purchased a Sig Kilo for me as I believe she was sick of me watching Youtube videos featuring LRF reviews. Actually, it was my birthday. Everything was great out of the box and I even purchased a new battery before field testing this thing.

Just for information, I am a newbie here and to long range shooting, long range hunting, reloading, etc.. The LRF was the final piece of kit I needed to start my practicing in anticipation of long range hunting. I have a 7mmrm I built in my garage, I bought a Kestrel 4000 off of eBay, and run the Shooter App on my cell phone. I also hand loaded some Amax for this rifle which I use to shoot out to 1000 yards.

I took my kit and my family to a ranch west of Corning, California where grassy rolling hills afford me the opportunity to take some longish shots. The family and I posted up on top of a grassy knob and set milk jugs between 300 and 900 yards (varying increments were used: 428 yds, 559 yds etc). I used the Kestral/Kilo/Shooter App combo. My boys called shots from the spotting scope and after confirming my zero at 300 yards, we marched all the way out to 900 yards. The sound of the Amax hitting those jugs was enough confirmation of the hits. I used 2 shots at 900 though because I don't think I was watching my bubble. It was overcast and approximately 77 degrees. We had a cross wind at 90 degrees from right to left which varied between 1 and 3.5 mph.

The LRF did a really good job ranging the grassy hills the jugs were set on. The longest range I was able to obtain (on a tree) was just over 1300 yards. I used the AMR setting and Density Altitude for my dope and it was also on scan mode which I dug a lot. It seemed to allow me to verify my range by panning it back and forth over the terrain to confirm my target.

The Kilo fit well into my vest pocket and was super fast and easy to use. It felt really good in my hand and did not snag on anything when I pulled it out of my pocket and around my binoculars. I liked the magnification and the glass seemed good tome. The return time was killer. I don't have anything bad to say about this LRF and only have experience with entry level range finders so I don't really have much to compare to or with.

I am sure this was not the most comprehensive review but for the price of this thing I am really super stoked (and confident) to deploy it for my upcoming hunts.

I threw up a couple of pics to show the terrain and of my wife shooting (she broke jugs from approximately 400 to just under 700 yards. Don't ask why her boots were off.

That's cool....because I was born in Red Bluff, I know that area well. I now live in Wyoming, but still have family out there. Small world I guess. Good to hear your opinion!!

 

[mtnwrunner]

Okay, since you said not to ask, why were her boots off???

Sounds like you have done your homework---good shootin.

Randy

 

[xTheShootistx]

Optical quality, glass, sharpness

I joined this forum to ask one simple question that seems to be being danced around by , you guessed it, brand loyalists.

Nearly the entire thread looks like an advertisement for Sig.

The question has been asked several times, and not one person, answered it.
Danced all around it, moved on to the next subject, and then it was "Oh it will range at 3000 yards and it's better than Leica"

That doesn't make it better than Leica.
What about the optical properties? Can anyone answer this? Or is that asking too much?

You see ,
I , and others, tend to use the rangefinder as a spotting tool as well. So optical clarity, fidelity, contrast, and overall image quality SHOULD be something to consider.

Who here has compared the optical qualities to that of a Leupold, Leica, or dare I say Zeiss?

I can tell you that the image quality of the three above mentioned rangefinders is top notch, tier one . Sharp as a razor.

I hunt with a .30 caliber airgun firing a 44.75 grain projectile and often go out to 150 yards on live targets. So basically, people like me could care less if a rangefinder can range a sky scraper at 2000 yards. I can't eat a sky scraper, or grandpa Joes barn that I ranged at 1700 yards.

The Leica and the Leupold will both range a rabbits head at 150 yards and give you jaw dropping image quality. 3 days ago a ranged a 5 foot alligators head , in water at 122.7 yards with a Leupold rx1200i. I know lots of you guys go out much further on much larger targets. But in my opinion, in my first post here, Image quality, sharpness , optical quality, matters.

So who here has compared the latest greatest rangefinders image quality to some of the known good glass??

 

[codyadams]

Re: Optical quality, glass, sharpness

I joined this forum to ask one simple question that seems to be being danced around by , you guessed it, brand loyalists.

Nearly the entire thread looks like an advertisement for Sig.

The question has been asked several times, and not one person, answered it.
Danced all around it, moved on to the next subject, and then it was "Oh it will range at 3000 yards and it's better than Leica"

That doesn't make it better than Leica.
What about the optical properties? Can anyone answer this? Or is that asking too much?

You see ,
I , and others, tend to use the rangefinder as a spotting tool as well. So optical clarity, fidelity, contrast, and overall image quality SHOULD be something to consider.

Who here has compared the optical qualities to that of a Leupold, Leica, or dare I say Zeiss?

I can tell you that the image quality of the three above mentioned rangefinders is top notch, tier one . Sharp as a razor.

I hunt with a .30 caliber airgun firing a 44.75 grain projectile and often go out to 150 yards on live targets. So basically, people like me could care less if a rangefinder can range a sky scraper at 2000 yards. I can't eat a sky scraper, or grandpa Joes barn that I ranged at 1700 yards.

The Leica and the Leupold will both range a rabbits head at 150 yards and give you jaw dropping image quality. 3 days ago a ranged a 5 foot alligators head , in water at 122.7 yards with a Leupold rx1200i. I know lots of you guys go out much further on much larger targets. But in my opinion, in my first post here, Image quality, sharpness , optical quality, matters.

So who here has compared the latest greatest rangefinders image quality to some of the known good glass??

If you hunt with an airgun why are you looking at a rangefinder for long range...your leupold is fine. And no, I'm not a Sig loyalist, the rangefinder is the only sig product I own. I haven't really compared optical quality on my sig to many others, but it seems decent. I doubt the glass is as good as a $1000+ rangefinder, because it's not a $1000+ rangefinder. Dont recall optical quality of it compared to my friends lieca, because at the time I was comparing ranging abilities, because I myself use binoculars and spotting scope for spotting. If my rangefinder can see my target at 1200 yards and range it, thats good enough for me. And if I'm looking for something, I use my tool built for looking for something. I do believe people have mentioned optical quality in this thread, if you read through it.

Or better yet, go to a sporting goods store and look for yourself.

This thread may look like an advertisement for sig, because people are happy with the product. It performs how it says it does, and considering its price point, that's exceptional. So, that's why it looks like people are promoting it. Because they are. Because it works.

 

[scottyd2506]

Re: Optical quality, glass, sharpness

I joined this forum to ask one simple question that seems to be being danced around by , you guessed it, brand loyalists.

Nearly the entire thread looks like an advertisement for Sig.

The question has been asked several times, and not one person, answered it.
Danced all around it, moved on to the next subject, and then it was "Oh it will range at 3000 yards and it's better than Leica"

That doesn't make it better than Leica.
What about the optical properties? Can anyone answer this? Or is that asking too much?

You see ,
I , and others, tend to use the rangefinder as a spotting tool as well. So optical clarity, fidelity, contrast, and overall image quality SHOULD be something to consider.

Who here has compared the optical qualities to that of a Leupold, Leica, or dare I say Zeiss?

I can tell you that the image quality of the three above mentioned rangefinders is top notch, tier one . Sharp as a razor.

I hunt with a .30 caliber airgun firing a 44.75 grain projectile and often go out to 150 yards on live targets. So basically, people like me could care less if a rangefinder can range a sky scraper at 2000 yards. I can't eat a sky scraper, or grandpa Joes barn that I ranged at 1700 yards.

The Leica and the Leupold will both range a rabbits head at 150 yards and give you jaw dropping image quality. 3 days ago a ranged a 5 foot alligators head , in water at 122.7 yards with a Leupold rx1200i. I know lots of you guys go out much further on much larger targets. But in my opinion, in my first post here, Image quality, sharpness , optical quality, matters.

So who here has compared the latest greatest rangefinders image quality to some of the known good glass??

Optical quality!! I said in a previous post that my Kilo 2000 had BETTER optics than my Leupold RF1000 rangefinder. I'm not Sig loyalist- you can see I had some problems with mine- mostly due to battery.. Ranging short range on mine is ify.. 50 yards or less I get readings like 27,3 yards then step back 1 yard and get 24.1 yards
Not the best bow hunting range finder, if that is what you want. my tests how that
It's not the greatest short range finder. but it is not what I bought it for.

but at long range, mine and my friends Bushnell we both ranges targets at 1755 yards and was either dead on or off by 1-2 yards from each other.