The only ones that I know of are the SWR Radius, and the Wilcox RAPTAR.

I understand there are also the STORM products but as far as I can tell they don't have a civilian version.

Is there something I am missing? It seems to me that if somebody made one that was similar in size (height) to a PEQ-15 so it could be mounted on the top rail, in front of an optic (like a 1-6x or ACOG), and not block your view they would sell like crazy if they were priced reasonably.

I am planning an 18" SPR-esque concept build and that would make an awesome addition. I feel like the Radius is too large for that application, which is fine, its more intended for precision bolt guns, and although the RAPTAR really seems to fit the bill it is prohibitively expensive.

Are there others that I just haven't been able to find? It seems to me that if somebody could make a RAPTAR-shaped product at a Radius price that would be outstanding.

I guess I am just surprised that there are so many high quality range finders out there and so few people have thought, "Hey, what if we put it ON the rifle?"

You've literally named the reasons why not. Their either too big or too expensive to be financially viable as a civilian product. The Storm was cool for our FO's but I wouldn't want to lug one of those damn things around on my M4. If cost and size come down, you might start to see them.

the 4x32 ACOGS have a practical range finder in their BDC system... the horizontal stadia lines are designed to subtend 19" at the indicated distance (width of a man's shoulders)... if you know the size of the target, bracket the correct width and pull the trigger.. my TA01 is calibrated for 55grain, and my TA31F for 62... half of the stadia line is approximately 10" so it is the width of an MGM flash target..... and the 10" is a good distance for me for practical wind hold off....

I would perfer to keep unnecessary weight off the gun.

The RAPTAR manages to be smaller than the Radius and pack more into it. You are right that the current ones are too big or expensive but doesn't seem to be that it has to be that way. If you removed the extra targeting lasers from the RAPTAR it wouldn't have to cost as much. And the Radius could be made more low profile.

The ACOG may not have been the best example seeing as it has stadia lines for ranging, however there are things that are useful to range other than a man (vehicle, building, animal, etc.).

Aside from ACOGs, there are a number of mil or MOA dot style 1-4,6,8x, 3-9x, etc. scopes that could sit behind a lower profile rangefinder and benefit from the speed of ranging a laser rangefinder provides.

But from the responses it seems like there aren't a bunch that I am just unaware of and those really are the current options.

Unnecessary is subjective. For a rifle intended to be shot off a bipod for a majority of the time, adding 10oz. is something that could be warranted in certain situations.

However, this could be the sentiment that keeps manufacturers from developing them.

learn to use a reticle, they are more reliable anyway.

Doesnt using a reticle require a known height prior to properly determining distance?

Yes it does. Not particularly helpful when ranging objects of an unknown size. It is also not as fast as being able to look through your scope at an object and have its distance displayed on a screen.

You don't know the size of the target you are shooting?

Give me an example

I like them.

I think they are a fantastic concept. From the rail, how high does it sit? I considered picking up a Radius until I realized it would likely be too tall to sit in front of my TR-25.

The radius is on sale for $500 right now.

http://www.avantlink.com/click.php?tt=cl&pw=55963&ctc=j2c49u8zar00zk8a00y51&mi=10077&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.brownells.com%2Foptics-mounting%2Frangefinders%2Fradius-rail-mounted-rangefinder-prod104782.aspx

Use L9Q for free shipping and $30 off.  Great price for them.  I paid more for my used one.

A little over an inch, I'll have to check.

The radius can also be side mounted for a lower profile.  It does change the orientation of the ranging laser.  Top mounted the pulse is wider in the horizontal plane.

Man of unknown ethnicity standing at the edge of a tree line, not holding a weapon.
(not that I would be shooting an unarmed man, but you asked for an example)

For the few people I know who do this for a living, reticle is your primary range finder.  Laser is a nice back up carried by your partner.  Outside of very expensive range finders, there are simply too many errors with most civilian grades.  Even the so-called nice ones.

I'm sure that is true about people who do it for a living, but for my purposes, being able to put my crosshairs on something and have its distance displayed without having to come off the rifle is what I'm looking for.

Regarding errors in accuracy, you're suggesting that estimating an object's size, then approximating how many mils across or tall it is, is inherently more accurate than laser rangefinders? Of course some people can be extremely accurate with it but the entire process is based off of estimates, which are inherently inaccurate.


That would be very helpful. Have you found any detriment to having the rangefinder horizontal rather than vertical?

The people doing precision shooting for a living and with a budget large enough to allow it are using laser range finders. There is no debate: an LRF used by an experienced team will result in faster hits. Reticle-based ranging is a critical skill to master and retain, but, for speed, there is a clear edge.

If it isn't professional, your ability to determine range has a number of options.  If hunting, you know the general size of the animal and from various angles.

I guess the point of the question is simply there is very little value in a weapon mounted laser range finder because if you need to laz a distance, you have time to use a non mounted one and are still going to have to dope wind and prepare the shot.

You aren't sprinting forward, assuming the prone, and cranking off a 837M shot in 2 seconds.

So... Your answer to "why so few weapon mounted range finders" is... "All range finders are useless."

I mean, it's an answer I guess... Although it doesn't really address the question directly.

And like I mentioned before, I can imagine when one could be interested in ranging a variety of objects. I don't know about you, but I don't plan on keeping a flip chart of different vehicle, door, tree, rock, and other dimensions on me so I can check my list of known sizes.

That seems many times less practical than having an unnecessary, inaccurate, laser rangefinder mounted to a weapon so you can range with your crosshairs on the target.

Aren't there range finders built into some scopes?

No.

What I said was if you need to laze a target you have time because you are going to need the time to dope the wind, calm yourself down and calculate the shot.  which means not on the weapon.

While not useless, I would say they are generally over rated for most shooters who would be better served to learn to memorize sizes of things and use their reticles.

GPS based distance calculator apps have really made things easier for the target shooter.

Manufacturers are just now getting the hang of developing hand held sporting rangefinders which don't cost a fortune, and are capable of reliable, accurate ranging out to the max supersonic ranges of new calibers such as 6.5CM, 260, 6.5G and 308's higher BC loads, hell even 77gr SMK can get out there too. And by manufacturer(s) I mean Sig, and this is as of just recently. IIRC the Kilo 2000 just came out last year. How long do suppose is a reasonable amount of time for them to make this new tech weapons mountable, and smaller so it can be aesthetically pleasing to you, 6 months?

Referring to non sporting LRF's keep in mind that the Raptar is a state of the art milspec unit and it's, specs, size, and cost reflect as much. What you're wanting is a mountable LRF which is the size of a milspec LRF but at the cost of a sporting LRF. You think that this a possibility because you mistakenly think that "If you removed the extra targeting lasers from the RAPTAR it wouldn't have to cost as much". There are two versions of the Raptar and the addition of a LRF is only difference between them however you failed to acknowledge/notice the $3, 600 cost increase of adding the LRF to a Raptar. Sorry OP but given the current state of technology in LRF's your wishes are not possible/unreasonable dispite what you think maybe "the sentiment that keeps manufacturers from developing them".

Even when manufacturers have the ability to develop smaller cost effective mountable LRF's I don't think they will be popular. I don't see how the benefits of a mountable LRF outweight the drawbacks

-I don't see the need to add weight/bulk to an already heavy percision rifle

-there is no reason to subject the LRF to recoil which could shorten the lifespan of the electronics

-deciating a somewhat expensive LRF to a rifle is not cost effective for those us that have more than one rifle

-as stated above if you need to range the target then you have time to use a handheld LRF.

I was thinking about the BORS but it's just a ballistics computer right?

Barrett BORS

This

If you put a range finder on your gun, you probably won't be carrying a hand held.

Do you really want to point your weapon at things that you don't want to shoot? Like an FO ranging friendly troops, a hunter making sure he's the legal distance from an inhabited structure or roadway, seeing how far away your hunting buddy is, measuring property lines... I can think of many uses of a LRF that would be unsafe if mounted to a gun.

Same reason you don't use the scope on a rifle in place of binoculars.

Also, range finding scopes work great for fighting weapons. An ACOG likely won't get you a precise enough estimation to make a head shot at 600 yards, but it will get you a good hit on a man size target.

the SilencerCo Radius was $499 on their website yesterday.. I'm sure if you call them they'll honor it (make up something like you get paid on the 15th but it doesn't hit your account until the 16th..)

It's $499 at Brownells and I believe the L9Q coupon is still good for free shipping and $30 off.  $470 delivered.

http://www.avantlink.com/click.php?tt=cl&pw=55963&ctc=j2rkswxtv500zk8a00y51&mi=10077&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.brownells.com%2Foptics-mounting%2Frangefinders%2Fradius-rail-mounted-rangefinder-prod104782.aspx

Yes but I can't remember what brand for the life of me.   Not a expensive brand if I remember correctly...actually low tier


ETA. ATN brand.  Must not be what is being talked about

Burris has the Eliminator line of range finding optics.

I see an elk standing broadside to me.
I estimate its torso is 25" tall.
It measures 4 MOA, so I think it is 600 yards away.
I dial 9.8 MOA/61.4" and aim for center.
It's actually 22" tall and therefore 525 yards away and I miss high.

Well there probably wasn't much meat on that little guy and I didn't want him anyway

I find GPS mapping on my iPotato to be good in hunting situations.  My app of choice lets me lay a ruler on the satellite map and I range various points in my view.  If a deer steps out I already know the distance to the deer based on the ranging I did using the app from my stand.  This works well for beanfield hunters here in the south but of course would be useless in areas with no coverage.

Just pointing out there are options beyond reticles and lasers.

Not really adding anything relevant...I just like this picture I took:

I shot an informal match next to a guy using a Zeis scope with built in rangefinder that would automatically adjust the elevation for distance.  He had it on an MWS 308.  He said it was under a grand.

I prefer to use a hand held range finder due to I don't have to un-shoulder and point a rifle each time I use it.  I guess it could be used with multiple rifles, granted there is a rail system in place to attach it to, however I don't have to worry about that with a handheld model.

I think most guys with a rifle mounted range finder have a hand held as well.

I know I do.