Re: allow rangefinders?May 28 2012 at 4:41 PM
|Eric Chin (Login echin)|
Response to allow rangefinders?
Thanks for the responses. But I used a Bushnell Elite 8-32 and it broke. When I sent it back, Bushnell said they couldn't fix it and offered me a new 8-32 which had a minimum focus distance of 25 yards. I just tried a Hawke 8-32, and didn't like the optics. I've heard their glass varies. As I said, good glass, focus to 10 yards, repeatability, and ruggedness are hard enough to find, rangefinding is the straw that breaks the camel's back.
I own a rangefinder, bought it when I played golf. Its easy to use, and with a +/- 1 yard accuracy rating, is probably as accurate as the big scopes at the longer distances. I actually think a scope could be just as accurate within 20 yards. I'd have to optically range find inside 15 yards as my particular rangefinder only goes to 15 yards. But other will go down to 10.
Buy a big Sightron? Nice glass, but will it last on a springer? And again, do we really want to spend that much on a scope just to range find? Who needs 50x to shoot within 60 yards?
I hope members of the governing body for field target read this forum. I'd suggest a trial program for a year and allow the use of rangefinders in a special class. See how people react, see if scores rise dramatically. Then make a decision. I don't think it will hurt. I wouldn't exclude rangefinding with optics, just allow laser rangefinders as well.
I think doing so would allow us to focus on shooting skills, and remove rangefinding as a barrier to development, both of individuals, and to the sport.