Rangefinders

[iacas]

I don't have one, but I've looked at a few. I keep wanting the $500 ones, though. And that's too much to spend on a range finder.

I chose the third option above, but I'd like to find a good range finder for those times when you aren't in the middle of the fairway, are playing to a very deep green (which throws yardages off), play a new course, etc.

[MJonGolf]

I have become fairly adept at remembering to look for the yardage markers as I walk towards my ball. Although I have drooled over a few range finders leafing through catalogs or at the local pro shop. Could never decide which model to select.

[gas_can]

I think rangefinders can be a really dangerous thing, especially for beginners. Once people get a yardage in their head, they just reach for that club, they never take into account elevation change, wind direction or slope, they just pick the club that'll get them the yardage and hack away.

My home course has GPS from uplink and it's pretty amazing to see just how innacurate the yardages can be even from the middle fo the fairway. I've seen as much as forty yards difference between course markers and the GPS system.

[iacas]

In the hands of an experienced player, though, a rangefinder can really just be good. "168 to the middle, 175 to the pin, but downwind so playing 168 or so, but a tick or two uphill, so I need my 170 club."

[iacas]

Nikon has a new product, seemingly, the 500 . My friend works at Nikon and is getting a price for me. Might be worth it if I can pick it up cheap. Nikon's previous model, the 440, is still available and costs only $200.

The biggest problem I have with yardages is new courses. Often I'm not sure whether their yardages are accurate or not.

[gas_can]

I was watching golf channel academy live last night, and the pro they had on was saying that the new rangefinders coming out this year are also going to have clinometers built in as well to measure elevation changes.

Does the Nikon have one built in too?

[iacas]

  TaylorMadeFan said:

I was watching golf channel academy live last night, and the pro they had on was saying that the new rangefinders coming out this year are also going to have clinometers built in as well to measure elevation changes.

No. Looks like I'm back up to $500, then.

In other words, just what I voted for above: too expensive. Everyone would have one if they cost $20, y'know?

[flap]

I have A Bushnell cost me 225.00 good up to 300 yds on a tree or person 200 on a flag which is all I need.They are excellent on par 3's or layups on par 5's

[skrumple]

i dont need one because I play the same course every day and if i havent played it I buy a yardage book. Anyway they are way to expensive I could just buy as new driver instead.

[iacas]

Incidentally, this one has worked its way into my bag.

[Thrash13]

I just don't think a rangefinder is a necessary golf purchase for me. There are too many other things I would rather have and can't afford. :)

I'm kinda old-fashioned as well. I think golf is a lot more about feel than all the number stuff. But that's probably why I'm a 15 handicapper instead of 0-5 like some of you others here at The Sand Trap.

I guess I better catch up with the technology.

[rckymtnglfr]

  Thrash13 said:

I'm kinda old-fashioned as well. I think golf is a lot more about feel than all the number stuff.

I'm with you on this one Thrash. Besides, if you get used to using it, then play in an event that plays USGA rules, you legally can't use it. May be kind of tough reverting back to the old way.

[flap]

Well here is where we differ,I have a Bushnell and love it!!!It helps me play quicker and lets me think about nothing but the shot.Golf is hard enough I don't have a caddy that gives me front middle and back yardage and Bushnell gives me to the flag just fine.The USGA should come down off its high horse on this one cause one of the biggest course backups are people looking for yardage markers.It dont help the average golfer to have it to the exact yard but it will speed him up and anything that keeps pace of play under 4 hours i'm all for.

[aceadair]

I just rely on the old sprinkler head! It has worked until now and it will work just fine later! But I must admit they are a very nice luxery! I played at a course that had a GPS in the cart, Man I could get used to that!

[aceadair]

The USGA is just trying to preserve the game! There is no need to "rag" on them for not allowing rangefinders. The pace of play issue is not how people are looking for yards markers. It is people (that are 36 handicap) standing over the ball for more than 5 minuets and then banging the club after they hit a bad shot! Golf can be slow but not because people have to find there own yards. Its beacuse a 36 handicapper expects to hit every green and when he/she doesnt they spend an hour wining about the bad shot!

[Baynative]

  TaylorMadeFan said:

I think rangefinders can be a really dangerous thing, especially for beginners. Once people get a yardage in their head, they just reach for that club, they never take into account elevation change, wind direction or slope, they just pick the club that'll get them the yardage and hack away.

Our pro says, "If you can put a bath towel on the range at 165 yards and hit it consistently with three different clubs you're ready for a range finder. Other wise find a swing and go enjoy it."

[bayareamtnbiker]

It only takes 5 seconds to lase the pin - easier than finding a marker sometimes.

[flap]

When you play Muni's as much as I do there are allways morons who beat the tag on the sprinkler head cause the skull they just hit flew the green and now it reads 1-9 for yardage and people will walk 25 more yards to see the next one and now it is a 4.5 hour round.I whip out my Bushnell and away I swing and I can afford it and I am worth it.