Sig Sauer Kilo Rangefinder
 

Has any one used one of the new Sig Sauer Kilo Rangefinders? The Optic Zone has a good price on one and I was thinking about finally purchasing one.


http://theopticzone.com/product/sig-...hite-sok16701/

Got mine at Cabelas on a Black Card member event (or whatever they call those of us who are foolish enough to spend too d@mned much on their cabela's card) for $399. Has been as fast and accurate as my Leica 1200 and 1600, which both cost something around $650-700 when I got them if I remember right.

Optic is very clear, the red display seems like it would wash out your eyes, but it doesn't, and it's a HUGE improvement for low light visibility over my Bushnell 1000's (not to mention nice being 7x instead of 4x or 5x). Haven't found anything I don't like about it yet, but I don't ask my range finders to do anything except tell me range, angle, and synthetic range.

Nice and compact, kinda like the lens being recessed. I was going to buy another 1600 to replace my 1200 and sell it off, but I might sell both and buy another couple of Sig's. I've ranged 1800yrds on treelines, picked out coyotes and deer between 800-1200yrds. Best in its price range I've found, have Leica, Nikon, Leup, and bushnell's between my buddies and I - I like the Sig a lot.

Thanks Nomercy!

Rangefinders sure got expensive
 

since I learned range finding at a 3D archery range with my eyeballs.
Recheck the eyes on hikes. Would check a rifle by setting up he rifle to shoot a couple of inches high. Never did make one of those 800 yard shots some seem to talk about all the time.
Using a muzzleloader on groundhogs must have lead me astray. I had 50 yard shots down pat.

All the reviews on the sig kilo are very good. It's on my list to buy sometime before november....
-Jake

Nomercy, How is it up close? Can it be used for archery as well? All the reviews mainly adress it's long range capability.
-Jake

Jake,

I expect the reviews all focus on long range stuff because that's the unique part of the feature set for its price - it has a remarkably long range, and remarkably far non-reflective range for its price point.

But it does have to work at short ranges too. It has two modes, like most laser RF's these days, Line Of Sight "LOS" which is the true distance to the target, and Angle Modified Range "AMR" which does angular correction. AMR only really makes sense at shorter ranges for most guys, unless you're mountain hunting.

Compared to my Bushnell units, it's a lot faster, and will come into short ranges a lot better. I have trouble getting down to 5yrds on my Bushnells, usually only 7-8yrds will read. The Sig reads down to about 4.6yrds reliably - which is something I never noticed I didn't have in other units; Decimal places!! Playing with it tonight, it read 9.4yrds to the wall, and 8.3yrds to the front of my work bench - which is 40" deep (1.11yrds). My wife measured it out with a 100ft tape for me and she got 28' 4" from the wall to the front of the unit (should have been 28' 2.5", maybe Mrs. Mercy slacked the tape a bit), so best we can tell, it's accurate to within a few inches at short ranges.

One thing I wish it DID have, although I never use it, so I can't say it matters - on my Bushnell units even, the angle corrected display outputs the corrected range, the angle, and the line of sight range, all in one display. It's a boatload of info and can be confusing if you're not used to the Bushnell display, and I only ever use the angle corrected range anyway, but it'd sure be nice if SIG included at least the angle on the AMR display. It's fast enough to change back and forth between LOS and AMR, I don't think it'll be much of an issue in the field if I ever decide I need both, instead of just the corrected range.

The autobrightness AND manual brightness option is nice. The auto seems to work really well so far, but it's nice to be able to modify the brightness manually if I want.

Good info thanks. Sounds like it does anything I, and almost anyone else, would need it to do.
-Jake

Well I got my Sig Sauer rangefinder and have been playing around with it. I think this is the best rangefinder out there right now. It is fast and accurate. I would highly recommend it to any one that is looking for a rangefinder.


Just a good word for The Optic Zone. They were great to deal with. The lady that took my order was nice and the order was received in a couple of days. Highly recommend them also.

I save the money
 

I don't spend a dime on a rangefinder. Learned how to judge the distance by participating in 3D archery events, where rangefinders were prohibited. For rifle, set up the scope to set up within four inches, plus or minus, on hits, out to 300 or so yards, if longer shots were expected.
The old ways in hunting, sure saved money. New ways find ways to spend, spend, and spend.
The longer I hunt, the cheaper it seems to get.
I saved some money on winter gear last year for a hiking friend of myself and me. It would be embarrassing to tell. But not for me to do. I sure love to save money. The hiking buddy learned last year and this year. I saved so much, I bought both the gear.

Kilo2200LRH
 

I traded my Kilo 2000 in for the new Kilo2200 from Cabelas. I noticed that the new 2200LRH does not have the auto brightness feature. It does have a smaller reticle though. Does anyone know what other features the new2200LRH vs 2000 offer. or did I actually downgrade?

Yesterday got a Leupold 850. My first. I like how compact is, and don't like how small the writing is. Ha. Distance is fine. Not sure how much I will use other features.

I bought it mostly for bow. It is heavily wooded by me, and long shots are rare. Last gun season was 20 yards or less. Bought I am using 45-70 this year, which can shoot far, if you know how far, far is. With 30-06 I wasn't concerned about 150 vs 200 yards, with how mine was sighted in.

From what I understand about them, the 2200 LRH (Long Range Hunter" was a Cabela's Exclusive, base model of the 2200.

I own both a 2000 and a 2200, one of my 2000's spit the bit, Sig replaced it with a 2200MR. The 2200 has a smaller reticle, AND of course, the "MR" feature is nice for those of us who like graduated reticles to read impact corrections.

What I can say - I don't think you gained much of anything by trading the 2000 for the 2200. It's the exact same chassis, just with a different reticle. If yours doesn't have automatic brightness as an option, then you need to send it back to Sig, as that IS a listed feature for the 2200 LRH. The 2200 is reported to be faster, but honestly, I cannot tell the difference between the two, Against my Bushnell 1-Mile and my Leica 1600b, the Sig's are both the fastest, and frankly, if I said I could perceive a difference in their speed, I'd be lying. Both the Kilo 2000 and 2200 have "deer" ranges of 1200-1300, non-reflective of 1500-1600, and max readable range on reflective targets at 3,400yrds. The 2200 has a beam divergence published at 1.3mrad, whereas the 2000 was 1.4 or 1.5mrad (have seen both published). Either way, we're not talking about a huge difference, say, compared to the Leica with a .5x2.5mrad divergence, or the Terrapin with the 0.3x1.5mrad - 1.4 vs. 1.5 really doesn't make a difference, it's 3" on a 47" beam at 1,000yrds...

Effectively, you got the exact same thing back, but with a smaller reticle.

For the purpose of the thread - I'll admit, after having this time to play with my 2000, and now my 2200 too, the Leica does give me longer range reads on non-reflective targets more reliably and more easily. Not a big issue, and I have to get past about 1,400yrds before it becomes an issue, but I can notice it. I wouldn't pay more for the Leica just for that unless I were doing a lot more ELR shooting than I am, which is already a lot more than most guys ever do in their life, so I'm still very happy with the Sig's. Both seem to read equally well in low light, but I get a better image in the Leica than the Sig as well - like most optics, the Sig gets a bit of a weird blue hue in the evenings which the Leica doesn't pick up. It's still a great image, very good resolution, it's just a coatings issue - the Leica obviously uses better IR/UV coatings.

I'll also note, I got the Bushnell 1mile Conx for a song, so I picked it up this summer. I have not used the ConX feature as of yet. It's a big ol' chunky thing compared to the Leica or Sig, but it has done very well for me on ranging so far. The downside for it is the large beam divergence, which is 1.5x3mrad!!! It's huge, so you get a lot of bad readings on small targets. It's fast, way faster than my other Bushnell LRF's, but it's big, and for the money, a guy is really buying the ConX option, not any great feature of the rangefinder itself. With the option to link it to a smart Kestrel and use the AB ballistic solver, it's probably the cheapest opportunity to get into a combo LRF/ballistic computer, but I think a guy would be better served, personally, by owning a Sig or Leica, connecting the smart Kestrel directly to their smart phone, and using the AB mobile app, instead of using the Bushnell Elite 1 mile. I got it so cheap, I don't really have anything bad to say about it, but if I were talking street prices, the Sig is the better LRF for the money by a long stretch.

I agree with you nomercy, it seems like I lost the auto brightness feature but gained the smaller reticle. I am not sure which would be the greater benefit. Any of the other features that the 2200 may have I do not notice. I am not sure if it even shoots at longer distances and by how much

Something is wrong if you don't have Auto Brightness. The LRH is spec'd to have it - all of the 2000+ models have auto and user adjustable "Lumatic" displays (the 850 and 1250 have "transmissive" displays). Either you're just jumping over it in the display brightness menu, or something is buggy in your programming - a call to Sig would get you straightened out though. They sent me an RMA for my 2000 when it wouldn't power on, and I had a replacement 2200MR in my hands within 10days - it was only in their hands for a day before the replacement was mailed out.

Well, I called Sig Sauer today and they made me feel like I was nuts. They told me that the specs indicated that neither the 2000 or2200 had the Lumatic display and that that would just eat up the battery life having it constantly monitor and change to light conditions. I swore it states it on the box and I could of swore that my old 2000 had the Auto feature during the set up for brightness. There is no recognizable difference between the two except for the smaller reticle and internal programming that the user would never notice???

The 2000 does have the adjustable and auto brightness. I'm holding mine right now. My 2nd 2000 was exactly the same. And my 2200MR also has it. The LRH is listed as having it.

I'd say you got the new dipschitt on the phone.

My cabelas has a good deal going on the 2200lrh right now.. I'm gonna head out tomorrow and pick one up I think.

-JaKe

Love mine, great product and definitely recommend it. Got it on sale from Cabela’s!

I just received my Kilo3000BDX binos and I'm in a fog as it only shows the AMR best red LED and ranges ok I guess but the sig app is limited to only a few Cal. so do I need to download a different app in order to sync with my Droid. I'm old, fat and lazy, well that's what I tell people anyway
Just need a little hekp I thing as the Tech stuff is not meHhardrock