# GOOD or BAD purchase



## rockymountainelk (Jan 18, 2009)

I just bought a Bushnell yardage pro sport 450 Rangefinder. Just wondering if anyone else has one of them or has used one and if you feel it was a good or bad purchase.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

I have the 800 and it works great, just a little big, so I have a Nikon for archery but is does not work as well as the bushnell in fog or rain.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

I can't complain about my Bushnell 800, it's always dead nutz on and has never let me down.
My philosophy is- "Buy a flat shooting rifle and decrease your margin for error" :wink:


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Good... bad... its all opinions. Let me say this though, max range is usually calculated off of a hard, reflective object. When ranging off of "soft body" animals like a deer, you usually only can get a signal on average of .5 to .75 the max range of the finder. My 650 yard Busnell CompactPro rangefinder will actually detect a stop sign out to almost 850 yards... yet a deer I can usually only range directly out to around 350 yards. People with finders will normally try to locate something harder / more reflective at roughly the same distance like a rock or tree and range off of that.

Do you hunt with a rifle or something shorter range like a frontstuffer or a bow? The 450 would be great for ML's and bows... for a rifle, well you can just use a scope's subtend to estimate a 400 yard distance on a deer.


-DallanC


----------



## svmoose (Feb 28, 2008)

I've got the Bushnell Scout. (I think). It works pretty well. I don't know what it's max range is but it's tough to get a deer beyone 400 yards. It works pretty well though. I think bushnell makes a pretty good rangefinder. You should be happy with it, the only time mine has let me down is when the battery died. So now I always carry an extra.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

I have the Leica 1200 so I wont answer that question. :mrgreen:


----------



## Size Matters (Dec 22, 2007)

I think you made a good purchase Bushnell makes pretty good equipment all though there are better ones out there it will get the job done.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I have the Cabela's 800 yard rangefinder (Cabela's site made by Bushnell and let's say that I did not quite get my money's worth; it was free with the Euro binocs. It is an absolute piece of trash versus the Nikon Monarch 800's I had previously. I see that the ones that you have is rated 3.7 out of 5 on the Cabela's site Good luck!


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

DallanC said:


> . Let me say this though, max range is usually calculated off of a hard, reflective object. -DallanC


When ranging off of "soft body" animals like a deer, then you start to see the differnce between the Bushnells and the Nikons, ditto for the Leica's or Swaroski's.

For the record I sold off my bushnell and bought a nikon 880, for the reason stated above, I love the 880, I can get mine to lock onto critters out to 800 or so if I can hold it steady enough.


----------



## alpinebowman (Sep 24, 2007)

I really like my nikon range finders. I think the lasers are much tighter and they work better in the elements. I know a few people with the lower end range finders and I know I wouldn't be confident with one in the hills.


----------



## miagenboy (Sep 12, 2007)

That was my first rangefinder. I have a nikon now, but I still have the Bushnell that I just carry in my bow case. I can tell you that it is really tuff to get an acurate reading out past 250 when in the hills. With that said it is a tuff rangefinder. I lost it going up the mountain off the back of my wheeler. Found it on the way back and it was all sorts of beat up, but like I said, I still use it when shooting around the yard. Still works just fine for those shorter distances. GOOD purchase, better than nothing.


----------



## Guest (May 7, 2009)

The bushnell 1500 has a hard time going to 1000 yards so my husband bought the swarovski rangefinders. They go out to 1900 yards early in the morning before radiation levels get too high, and out to 1100 yards on bushes all day long. He loves his swaros and just tossed his bushnell's aside.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

i've got that exact rangefinder, and I absolutly love it. But I will give the point that after about 350 yards it's hard to get a reading on a deer. That being said, at 350 + yards, it's pretty rare that the deer knows I'm there and have time to find somehting else in the area I can use as a reference point. If it's under 350 yards, and I'm hunting with a rifle, I really don't need to get a reading because I shoot a pretty flat rifle, and I really don't like to shoot much farther than about 300 anyway, because too much can go wrong between the moment of no return on the trigger and the second the bullet impacts.

But I do use it a lot for archery, and in that situation it has been a fantastic tool. Although I have to admit, I am starting to get really interested in the new rangefinders that adjust for the angle.


----------



## muleymadness (Jan 23, 2008)

Good purchase IMO, I believe I have the same one also.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I am asking this purely out of stupidity/ignorance:

Are these rangefinders really all that useful for anyone but bow hunters? I mean, is it all that practical to stop what you are doing, range the target, and then shoot at it?
Most shots I have ever taken only present themselves for just a moment, and then they are gone. So I wonder how practical a rangefinder is.
The concept is really interesting to me, and I can see them being very useful. So I dont want to sound like a jack a$$ trying to debunk these. Just curious about your thoughts


----------



## rockymountainelk (Jan 18, 2009)

Bax* said:


> I am asking this purely out of stupidity/ignorance:
> 
> Are these rangefinders really all that useful for anyone but bow hunters? I mean, is it all that practical to stop what you are doing, range the target, and then shoot at it?
> Most shots I have ever taken only present themselves for just a moment, and then they are gone. So I wonder how practical a rangefinder is.
> The concept is really interesting to me, and I can see them being very useful. So I dont want to sound like a jack **** trying to debunk these. Just curious about your thoughts


The only time I have ever used a rangefinder is bow hunting. I have taken it with me a few times on the rifle hunts. But have never found a time I needed it. I personally don't agree with lobbing a bullet 800 yards to try and get close to an animal. I have never taken a shot over 300 yards at any big game animal. I just don't like to risk wounding an animal. Also I don't know that you can really be considered hunting a sport when you are shooting at everything that comes within 1000 yards of you. I am sure I will get some s*** for saying that but that's just how I feel. But to get back to the topic at hand. No I don't see a rangefinder being all that useful to a rifle hunter. But when it comes to bow or muzzy hunting there is no better tool then a good rangefinder.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

You would be very surprized by the number of people who will grossly misjudge the yardage even on a 250 yard shot, so yes they are very useful for rifle hunters.

If you are shooting long range shots and don't have time to range the distance, maybe you shouldn't be shooting that far away rangefinder or not :!: 

I know I usually have plenty of time to range and get prepared for the long shots I take.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I dont intend to hijack this thread, but I just wanted to get some legitimate input on this:
But I think Mojo1 and rockymountainelk make valid arguments.

One thought I had on the usefullness of a rangefinder is that I would worry about making too much motion changing from rangefinder to rifle (unless you had one of those dandy rangefinder/scope combos). Is that a valid point, or am I up in the night on that?

Sorry to sound stupid about this topic, but I just want to explore the angles on this topic.

Speaking of angles: can anyone explain the problem that some range finders experience when rangling down hill and uphill? Does that change the true distance or something?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Bax* said:


> I am asking this purely out of stupidity/ignorance:
> 
> Are these rangefinders really all that useful for anyone but bow hunters? I mean, is it all that practical to stop what you are doing, range the target, and then shoot at it?
> Most shots I have ever taken only present themselves for just a moment, and then they are gone. So I wonder how practical a rangefinder is.
> The concept is really interesting to me, and I can see them being very useful. So I dont want to sound like a jack **** trying to debunk these. Just curious about your thoughts


Extremely useful to smokepole shooters as well... BUT it depends on the situation.

Sitting at a fixed position, smart people will generally range off of various things BEFORE the target animal comes into view. When archery hunting out of a blind I range different objects in different directions so I know "the trail to the left is 40 yards, the big rock on the left is 30" etc etc. Very few times have I quickly had to range and shoot something... several times I've followed parallel to a feeding animal and ranged it occasionally while I got closer.

For the highpower rifle crowd, anybody with half a brain should be able to range a deer out to 400 yards using their scopes subtend, THATS WHAT IT WAS MADE FOR. Its amazing to me how many people dont understand this. Beyond 400 yards finders become very important to accurately determine the range.

The more you use your rangefinder while SCOUTING, the less you will need to use it while HUNTING. This of course because you will know when sitting on your favorite rock, the deadfall to the left is 333 yards, the big pine up the ridge is 275... etc etc.

-DallanC


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Dallanc is right on, if I'm setting a stand I range objects around me before hand; if I'm spot and stalking if I fell the need I will range before a shot, for the record I've never been busted by a critter while ranging when rifle hunting, but can't say the same for bow hunting.


----------



## WasatchOutdoors (Sep 26, 2007)

I'm going to agree with DallanC that the rangefinder is a great tool for scouting, but I'm going to also add that the rangefinder is a tool that you have to make a habit out of, because if you don't regularly use it, it won't even cross your mind when you need it. 

If I'm still-hunting with a rifle, when I get near the edge of a clearing or area I suspect might have game, or that I plan to hang out in for a little while to see what happens, I try to use the rangefinder to get a distance to the other edges, crossing points etc. 

One of my better bucks was taken using this exact technique. I came out on a rocky knoll overlooking a thick deep canyon, and noticed a couple guys on 4 wheelers headed down the bottom of the canyon. I pulled out the range finder and glassed the other side and a few reference points down the canyon, so that if they bumped something out I'd know if it was within range or not. About a minute later, a decent looking buck and a small 2 point came out on the far side heading up the hill. The guys on the 4 wheelers had already gone clear down below them and were still heading away, so I knew they never saw them. I had already ranged the other side and knew that it was about 320 yards to the big rock on the far side, so I took my rest and when they stopped about 20 yards from the rock to look back down the canyon, I took the shot. 

If you would have asked me how far it was without the rangefinder I would have guessed it closer to 400 yards and probably would have passed on the shot or held too high. 

Point of the story, you gotta learn to use the tools, and make a habit of using them for them to do you any good.


----------

