mad as h*ll range finding in the snow

[Broz]

Broz,
I was testing mine last night after sunset and off of the dirt off the side of a mountain at 1400 yards it was measuring almost instantaneously. I kid you not. I was impressed how fast I was getting my distances displayed.
Good luck!

No way mine would do that. It would make that little dotted rotational circle, blink 3 times and then give you the number. I will send it in with a list of the problems and complaints and see what I get back.

Thanks! Jeff

 

[jwp475]

In my experience the Lieca give readings faster than the Swaro. Under less than ideal ranging conditions it was no contest the Swarovski was night and day better. Bright sunny conditions in the SW desert the Lieca at time would not range past 600 yards and the Swaro was consitently getting 1000 + on the same day and conditons.

 

[reed]

hopefully somebody gets some good side by side field time on the swaro and the new zeiss. Would like to hear the outcome.

Travis

 

[jwp475]

hopefully somebody gets some good side by side field time on the swaro and the new zeiss. Would like to hear the outcome.

Travis

+1....

 

[Pdvdh]

The Swaro is currently available as a demo unit for $789 from Camera Land - one of our LRH Forum sponsors. Comes with full warranty. These are demos that are displayed at Shot Show and other outdoor conventions like SCI. Good as new and no risk because the full factory warranty is included. That's how I purchased mine a year or two ago.

I think Jeff has a lemon Swaro also. Mine gives ranges as quickly as I need them. I spend way more time confirming my dope after I have the range than I do waiting for the range to appear. It sure beats pacing off the distance!

I'm glad you're going to put them through an extensive field test Jeff, and can't wait for some feedback, but not using your current Swaro. I think it's gone t_ts up.

 

[esshup]

Jeff:

Just a thought. The manual says the batteries are good for 2000 readings (I believe). Have you tried it a with known good new battery?

 

[Broz]

Jeff:

Just a thought. The manual says the batteries are good for 2000 readings (I believe). Have you tried it a with known good new battery?

First thing I did last fall was buy extra batts for the PDA, Kestrel, and Swaro. Carry them in my bag with me all the time. I bought a twin pack of good ones for the swaro and that was the first thing I changed. Makes no difference.
But thanks for the thought.

Owning the old Leica and having been in the field with the new CFR, I can tell by the statements some have not used the newer one. If you ever get the chance I would try it. But please don't do it indoors at a sports store. Those animals are already dead and it will tell you nothing other than you don't know what the heck you are doing. I will have the new Leica CFR maybe by friday and My swaro will be called in and shipped for recondition tomorrow. I know a good friend that may lend me his new ziess. I am on a mission now. I am going to start designing test charts or a" log" if you will, to record my results. I will get good data.

Jeff

 

[greentimber]

The beam divergence on the swaro is actually a flat rectangle measuring 2.2 MILS wide by 0.5 MILS high. That's about 6ft wide by 1.5ft high at 1k yds. That's from one of the Swarovski technical managers.

I love mine, but I would like to see the beam & aiming point much smaller.

 

[Broz]

The beam divergence on the swaro is actually a flat rectangle measuring 2.2 MILS wide by 0.5 MILS high. That's about 6ft wide by 1.5ft high at 1k yds. That's from one of the Swarovski technical managers.

I love mine, but I would like to see the beam & aiming point much smaller.

I think we need to research that. My manual says "2 mrad" indicating it is a circular beam. I will research more but I believe this is correct. Also Swaro told me it was about 6' circle at 1000 yds. I believe you are thinking of the Zeiss or the Leica.

Jeff

.

 

[ss7mm]

I questioned both Leica and Swarovski on this and only Swarovski responded.

They told me the Swaro beam was circular and was 2 mrad. They told me the Leica was .5 x 2.4 mrad.

So.....the Swaro appears to be taller but it also seems to be narrower.

I can tell you this, if you don't have it rock steady when ranging at loooong ranges, it won't matter which one you use as the results won't be correct.

 

[Broz]

I can tell you this, if you don't have it rock steady when ranging at loooong ranges, it won't matter which one you use as the results won't be correct.

Definatly, we have a small tripod for it and I like the fact Swaro put a tripod mount on the bottom.

Jeff

 

[britz]

Jeff, I just purchased a new CRF 1200 last fall and it has a hard time ranging deer sized objects past 500 yards in bright sunlight. Bright days it will have a hard time ranging a tree line past 800 yards. Best reading I got was a tree line at 1350 yards right at sunrise and 900 yard deer at sunset. It is a good range finder, but from what I am hearing not as good as the swaro. (I had to draw the line somewhere when buying the toy, but I kinda wish I'd have gone swaro).

Also, in your defence, there is a big difference in the practial use of the scan models and the CRF's. Thescan has a very very hard to push button, and the crf is relitively light. I used a 900 scan for a year prior to the crf and it was really shacky to use freehanded. But I think the ranging ability if held steady would be the same between the scan and the crf (900 and 900 or 1200 and 1200). Glass quality is the same and the CRF is waterproof whereas the scan is only water resistant.

I hope swaro treats you right.
Mark.

 

[Broz]

Mark that is interesting. I have a friend that I mentioned before that is a LR hunter. The day I recieved my Swaro it was eveing and I called him up. I was on my deck while talking to him and ranged a tree at 1485 with out putting down the phone. He was impressed, as was I so he sold his Leica CRF to his dad and promptly ordered up a swao. His first trip to the range (he still had both) he soon learned he hated the delay the swaro had and Leica was ranging everthing as well or better than the swaro and much faster. He sold the swaro and bought another Leica CRF. He also has a newcon that will put them both to shame on distance, but admits the newcon is to heavy, bulky and the glass is not near as nice as the Leica and Swaro.

My point is, there seems to be a pattern that not all units of the same brand are created equal. I really believe this with scopes, I know as far as the middle price scope go it seems that if you get a good one, hand on to it. I will exclude Nightforce from this statement every one of them we own is awesome.

Also an interesting point was brought up earlier in this thread that the reticule sight can be off a bit. You may want to check that as it sounds your is not up to par with the CRF's I have used.

Jeff

 

[britz]

Thanks! I will have to try that with a metal disk in the sun as someone else has said. Better get it done before the warranty is off! lol.