|
Pythagorean Theorem?
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 |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
I would agree it is more form. FRom your calculations i wouldn't change a thing as to where i sighted my pin
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
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 |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
I know I don't need it where I hunt!;)
I wonder how high Micheal Waddell gets in that bucket truck to make that much difference??  |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Even if the differences where bigger it wouldn't amount to much because the verticle part of the arrows flight (going down) doesn't really matter. Gravity has a bigger effect on your arrows drop than wind resistance, that extra .2yard is going downhill anyways so it doesn't really matter.
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
I can tell you as someone that competes in field archery out to 80 yards, over rough terrain and bizarre angles.......the arc style rangefinders don't get close enough to hit the X ring every time assuming a perfect shot. The best thing you can do is use Ontarget1 or a similar ballistics program and print out a cut sheet showing the correct yardage cut for different distances/angles. I carry one of these with me that is specific for each 3D and Field archery specific setup I use.
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
I think your RIGHT On Dan, but I think a guy in the mountain in Colorado chasing elk may benefit from an ARC rangefinder on an extreme uphill or downhill shot, but in most instances, they don't make a huge difference.
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
I have done that math and got the same answers. So, now, after I get into my stand, I range differenttrees around me. I range them at my height and that is the range of my shot.
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Now take and add in a hill. That will drasticlly change the distance now you have two right triangles forming then the distance will be different,
Ryan |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Only instance I see them being of use is for rifle hunters shooting longer distances, and mountain hunts.
If you are on a mountain goat hunt, and you see a billy 50 yards (ranged) on a 40* decline....you would hold for a 38.302 yard shot..... this IS quite the difference....and eliminates calculations on the hunters part in crunch time, not that the calculations are that difficult. This is a step further than the pythagorean theorum, but is still extremely basic trigonometry. |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
ORIGINAL: OHbowhntr I think your RIGHT On Dan, but I think a guy in the mountain in Colorado chasing elk may benefit from an ARC rangefinder on an extreme uphill or downhill shot, but in most instances, they don't make a huge difference. The distance is never more than 2 yards and the farther the target the less it gets. In an elk environment and bow distance, I still think they are irrelevant. Maybe in ballistics and mountain ranges only. Now, when high in a tree and looking at a target on an extreme down hill scenario, yes they may have merit. On my whitetail hunt in IL I wish I would have had one. The distance difference in some of the things I ranged from the ground and then at the trees on the same level was 5 yards. |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
In 1994 I thought about arc but I was hullicinating heavilyas I watched Bevis and Butthead and did not finish my calculations.........thanks for the flashback of that moment and the unibomber math teacher I had in high school;) Rob hit it right on the head above........
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
ORIGINAL: Rob/PA Bowyer In an elk environment and bow distance, I still think they are irrelevant. Maybe in ballistics and mountain ranges only. My question is, if buying new....why NOT get one with the ARC built in? Doesn't hurt anything.. but that said, I agree 100% with you in that, if you already have one, don't waste your money buying a new one soley for that feature. |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
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 I find this really funny because last year in school i did a "geometery in the real world" project and this was the topic in discussion. PS dad didn't find it funny when i told him his 300 some dollar range finder doesn't do **** |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
I have done the calculations myself a few month back, and like you, found these rangefinders useless.
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Actually my point is that for the average Bowhunter they are definitely not needed.
They should put an ad out with a goat in the mountains. It might have some merit. I also agree if mine ever blows out and I had to buy a new one, well............................................. Why not!;) I hunted Elk twice and it never let me down. Maybe if I had hunted different/rougher terrain? Dan |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Not needed for typical deer stand hunting but could be quite useful in hills and mountains where really steep angles could be encounterd.
I had 1 stand setup that had me probaly 50' above my shooting lanes and had another set that I was probaly even higher than that.Could be usefull in these types of setups but I had trees to range straight out to so it wasn't a huge issue for me. |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Right or wrong, win loose or draw - this thread warms an old math teachers heart!
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Now, when high in a tree and looking at a target on an extreme down hill scenario, yes they may have merit. On my whitetail hunt in IL I wish I would have had one. The distance difference in some of the things I ranged from the ground and then at the trees on the same level was 5 yards. I would like to have one as well,besides,the price difference doesn't seem to be that great. |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
ORIGINAL: TFOX Now, when high in a tree and looking at a target on an extreme down hill scenario, yes they may have merit. On my whitetail hunt in IL I wish I would have had one. The distance difference in some of the things I ranged from the ground and then at the trees on the same level was 5 yards. I would like to have one as well,besides,the price difference doesn't seem to be that great. |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
My Nikon prostaff laser 440 does not have angle compensation and I've never had issues out of my stand.
I agree with ya! |
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
Luckily I get the time (and ambition) to shoot from my tree stands well before hunting season. Setup multiple targets at differentangles and distancesand take a dozen arrows with you. Makes for a fun Saturday with a couple hunting buddies...
|
RE: Pythagorean Theorem?
MeanV, I thought about that on several of my long sits in the stand.... You just answered several questions that I had. Thanks! Oh, I checked your math you did good! |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:02 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.