ORIGINAL: MeanV2

With all the rage about the new arc rangefinders I did a little math. On a right triangle the square of the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares of the other 2 sides. A squared plus B squared= C squared.

A being (in most cases) the height of your treestand from the ground, one side of a right triangle.
B being the distance your shot is from the base of the tree, one side of the right triangle
C being what the normal rangefinder reads orbeing the hypotenuse of a right triangle.

1st scenario
Treestand height 10 yards (30 ft., yep thats higher than most but just to take the extreme case)
Deer is 15 yards from base of Tree
My rangefinder would read 18 yards (actual distance18.02)

Would this shot be any different if you did or did Not have a new Arc rangefinder?

2nd scenario
Treestand height again 10 yards
Deer is 40 yards from base of Tree
My rangefinder would read 41 yards (actual distance 41.23)

Would this shot be any different if did or did Not have a new Arc rangefinder?

Just interested in everyone's thoughts, views, and opinions (I know we all have them) I was watching an Ad on the Outdoor Channel and they were showing a pretty significant difference to make it appear you would miss the Deer if you did not have one of their angle compensating rangefinders.

I decided to do the math. I think shooting typical angles that areencountered in normalTreestand hunting are more affected by your form than the angle.

Dan