VINCE71969

Re: Laser Rangefinder Review I couldn't get my hands on one. Also, The Bushnell 800 is the same as the Nikon. Just a different logo.

I just finished my testing of 3 laser rangefinders. The units tested were: Leupold RX-II Opti-Logic 120 XTA Nikon Buckmasters Laser 800 The test originally started out to see which unit was the most accurate. In a straight line test there wasn't any clear cut winner as they all performed admirably. As a result, I had to toughen up the standards and then some differences were apparent. My archery club has a patio with a wooden slatted railing around it. The slats are roughly 8 inches apart and conveniently replicated the approx size of a whitetail's vitals. I placed my Rinehardt block target 5 yards beyond the slats to see which unit would send the narrowest beam and give the precise yardage. To increase the difficulty, I used the "1st target mode" setting and also tested the units holding them vertical and horizontal to the target. This gave me an indication of the shape of the beam that was sent out. The Opti-Logic was the first unit to be tripped up and read the slats at approx. 30 yards in the horizontal and 24 in the vertical positions. Not bad by any means. The Nikon read to approx 34 in each position and the Leupold was the winner, stretching out to the low 40's each way. The next test was light transmission (I say next but in reality it was done before I even got to my club). the Nikon, with it's 8X optics is horrible in this department to the point where I wouldn't use them in the field. Too much game movement occurs at low light where this unit just can't give you a picture of it. Objects that can easily be distinguished with the naked eyes are totally lost when looking through the unit. It will still range a distance but I had no idea what I was looking at. The Opti-Logic was acceptable for low light use. While not great, it didn't disappoint, either. If you could see it with your eye then you could make it out with the unit as well. My one complaint was the distance readout itself. It's an LCD unit located on the back of the unit. Besides removing the unit from you eye so you can see the distance, it isn't backlit and can pose some inconvenience. The Leupold was the best of the bunch. It should be noted that the RX-II uses 6X multi-coated optics where the Opti-Logic is non-magnified. The Picture is crisp and rivals that of a mid-line monocular. If you can remotely make it out with your eyes, it can easily be seen and ranged with the Leupold. Of the three, this is the only unit that makes carrying binoculars less of a necessity as you can glass your area in low light as you approach your stand, and distinguish game in heavy cover. For durability the Opti-Logic comes in 3rd place. It's not that it's bad. It just isn't constructed as ruggedly as the other 2. When handling them it's easily seen. The Nikon comes in second. The entire unit is solid except for a battery compartment cover that falls off at the slightest bump due to a lever that protrudes from the surface and catches easily on anything it brushes up against. The Leupold is solid in every aspect of it's design. Target acquisition turned out to be a 2 phase competition. In normal light, 1st place went to the Opti-Logic unit. It's non-magnified design and red dot aiming point was a bit quicker than the magnified optics and LCD screens of the Nikon and the Leupold. In low light, the enhanced light transmission of the Leupold made up for this and both units ranged and read objects with the same speed. The Nikon couldn't be used in low light due to a failure to provide any reasonable picture. The final part of this review is purely subjective on my part and deals with the ability of the Leupold and the Opti-Logic to read horizontal distance as well as line of sight.The Nikon doesn't have this capability. When hunting from an elevated platform (archery from a treestand) or aiming at game traveling at a different elevation this feature, in my opinion, makes other units obsolete. Archery is a game of inches. I want everything in my arsenal to be as exact and as fine tuned as I can get it. These 2 angle compensated units give me that advantage over that standard offerings. If you're in the market to purchase a rangefinder, why not go with the unit that reads both ways instead of just one. For long gun hunting there is only one choice to consider. The Leupold wins hands down. The Opti has a maximum range of 120 yards compared to the Leupold's range of 750. Furthermore, the Leupold has incorporated a program called True Ballistic Range, and it will make a huge impact on your accuracy, giving you a much more accurate measurement than the straight line distance to your target, and even other tilt compensated units as well. The RX uses an inclinometer to measure up and down hill shots, coupled with the ballistics of your projectile to give you the equivalent horizontal range, and for rifle hunters, a holdover/holdunder point or an MOA adjustment. Other rangefinders that currently compute the angle of the shot use a simple calculation based on the third leg of a triangle. The Leupold actually makes that third leg (the flight of the bullet or arrow) into an arc, as it should be, and thus, almost completely eliminates the aiming error. The third leg of the triangle method is not totally accurate because the bullet or arrow actually travels a different distance than a true straight line would predict. It uses a very complex algorithm that took Leupold over a year to develop. Without this feature, the 3rd leg distance error gets more severe with longer ranges and steeper angles. This feature is unique to Leupold. I also like the Leupold Match-13 Reticle system. You can choose from a variety of brackets, duplexes and reticles to match the game you pursue and the terrain you're hunting. There you have it. All 3 rangefinders will adequately fill the bill for ranging an object, but when looking closer into what makes one more effective than another in the field some major advantages and disadvantages begin to surface. Choose wisely and good luck in the pursuit of your quarry.

Re: Can you tell me what you like about the Switchback Scotty will always give an honest opinion. In fact, he sold his Outback to buy a Switchback. In the middle of the year, when everyone was writing about how great the SB was he sold his and went back to the outback because he though it was a better bow for him, personally. If he likes the XT better than anythng introduced in 2007 I'm sure he'll say so. The man has far too much integrity to anything otherwise. By the way.......I've owned all three bows myself. Not only is it my opinion that the XT is a far better bow then the others but I can say with proof that it's the quietest as I have a decible meter and ran tests. The SB is the fastest of the 3 but I feel the XT is the most refined and their best offering ever.

After using the Leupold Golden Ring 8 x 42 binoculars for a few months in every condition imaginable, I honestly cannot find a single fault with them. They are far beyond any optics that I've ever taken into the field. While not inexpensive at $950.00, they represent an extraordinary value over European optics retailing in the neighborhood of $2000.00. Leupold states that they created the Golden Ring line to surpass standards set by the ultra-premium optics makers at a price that was far more appealing. To test this I put their glass up against a pair of Swarovski EL 8.5x42 binoculars. The results were so positive I felt I had to share them with as many people as possible. My testing was simple but, in my opinion, very conclusive in determining what makes optics stand out from one another. It involved my hunting treestand, an old broken down cottage, sunlight and two $20.00 bills I affixed to a tree. I was in my favorite stand well before sunrise. About 80 yards behind me in some very thick cover stands the remains of what once was a cottage, now reduced through the ages to two walls, a floor and half of a fallen roof. I couldn't see the structure with my naked eye but I could make them out vaguely with both sets of binoculars. Using them in this manner really proves the importance of quality glass when hunting. It enables you to get a visual confirmation on game in areas you wouldn't normally see yet and you can alter your strategy accordingly regarding setup and the routes traveled. As some time progressed I was switching glass periodically. I was surprised to find that with the Leupold I could now make out the individual planks of wood. I picked up the Swarovski and could not. In fact, I needed about 3-4 more minutes of time to elapse and sunlight to arrive before they would let me view them. I will say one thing about any pair of high end optics. Looking through them when you're used to a low or medium priced set is so different it's almost impossible to describe. Anyone who says that their low to mid priced set of optics is on par with the higher end stuff is either trying to fool themselves, fool you or has never used them to compare. Becoming accustomed to optics such as these and then going back to standard glass will leave you thinking the world has been reduced to two dimensions and your lenses need cleaning. My next test was with the $20.00 bills. I used two of the newer ones with the multicolored printing so I could get an idea of color transmission and separation as well as the fine detail of the gravure printing used for US currency. The front of the bill has blue ink for an eagle and some printing, green on it's outer portions and red and blue threads throughout the center. The rear has the same green for the outer portions but also in that area are many tiny "20" symbols in a mustard like color. I figured this test would go a long way in determining how the binoculars performed due to all of the subtle differences. What I didn't figure on was the steadiness that would be needed to complete this part of the test. My day of whitetail hunting was over almost as soon as it got it's start and I climbed down from my stand and continued the test. The front of the currency showed no favorite to either glass. All of the fine lines and subtle color shifts I was able to discern at the same distances with one pair was equaled by the other. The rear was a different story. While the fine detail of the print gave no answer to the winner of this test, the small "20" markings in yellow on the green background produced a clear cut winner. I was able to see them approx. 5 yards further out with the Leupold than I was able to with the Swarovski. The Leupold Golden Ring binoculars were superior in my testing in low light detail and in color separation over the Swarovski optics. Not only did they outperform them, but they did so at a savings of $750.00. Here is a link to the website for more information and technical specs: http://www.leupold.com/products/new_products4.htm