Jump to content
IGNORED

Question on Rangefinders


Note: This thread is 4857 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Years ago I had an inxepensive $20 - $30 rangefinder/scope. I remember having to aim and focus on the pin/flag to get a reading. I now have my skycaddie, for distance to doglegs/eofs, parts of the green, hazards, etc. Although hitting range balls is not as accurate as real balls, a gps can not help determine distances at a range, Similarly, going to my local course end of day, when empty, I would like to hit balls, using various clubs, without chasing them using my gps. Do rangefinders still need to point to the pin, or any object such as trees? Can any be used to point to my ball and find the distance? And if so, can anyone recommend a decent one at a reasonable price?

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Originally Posted by Alohaed

Hi all,

Years ago I had an inxepensive $20 - $30 rangefinder/scope. I remember having to aim and focus on the pin/flag to get a reading. I now have my skycaddie, for distance to doglegs/eofs, parts of the green, hazards, etc. Although hitting range balls is not as accurate as real balls, a gps can not help determine distances at a range, Similarly, going to my local course end of day, when empty, I would like to hit balls, using various clubs, without chasing them using my gps. Do rangefinders still need to point to the pin, or any object such as trees? Can any be used to point to my ball and find the distance? And if so, can anyone recommend a decent one at a reasonable price?

The scope type you apparently had are purely optical and mostly worthless.  The modern laser rangefinder can be used to measure the distance to any object within its visual range.  I shoot trees, bunker lips, mounds - all sorts of things other than flags - to help me plan my shots.  However, a ball 200 yards downrange is an awfully small target.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

You would be better off going to your ball and shooting back to your starting point to measure distance.

Iacas will recommend the Leupold and I think they are the nicest looking rangefinders and have the nicest display, however I sold my GX4 for the 1600 Bushnell (with slope) and could not be happier.  I get one consistent dimension when using this rangefinder as opposed to 4-5 from the Leupold.  Both of these are the top of the line models from each company and run between $350-$500 on Ebay and Amazon new.

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Originally Posted by MikeLowry5

You would be better off going to your ball and shooting back to your starting point to measure distance.

Iacas will recommend the Leupold and I think they are the nicest looking rangefinders and have the nicest display, however I sold my GX4 for the 1600 Bushnell (with slope) and could not be happier.  I get one consistent dimension when using this rangefinder as opposed to 4-5 from the Leupold.  Both of these are the top of the line models from each company and run between $350-$500 on Ebay and Amazon new.

Good luck.


Only one hitch.  If it has slope it can't be used for any round played under the rules of golf.  If you ever plan on carrying a handicap or playing in a tournament, then you are wasting your money on the slope feature.  If you have a clue about playing the game you don't need that feature anyway.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 4857 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • I need… 1, 8, 10, 11, 14, and 17. Today… On 1, my alarm went off mid backswing, but I was playing a blue SuperSoft anyway and hit it okay, but just moved my ball up to where Sculley's was a bit as we were pressuring a threesome that jumped out ahead of us. On 8, I hit a good 3W, a really good 9I, and lipped out the 12-footer. On 10… good drive, god-awful second. Chipped to four feet. On 11… pulled left onto a slope, chipped just past the hole to four feet. On 14, left the 50-foot putt three feet short. On 17, good 3W, good 9I, pulled the putt a few inches, so missed it a few inches left from 16 feet.
    • I found this video... Old Method 1. Open the clubface a ton 2. Open the stance a ton 3. Swing along the foot line New Method 1. Set up with the handle lower, and the ball further away form the body. 2. The clubface still opens up, but lowering the handle helps in not having to open the stance as much or for some keep the stance closed. Keeping the stance closed allows them to keep their weight forward much easier.  Now, I question that the PGA Tour players are hitting steeply down into the sand. I think they may have gotten this wrong in the video. You can load up the weight on the front foot, and still hit the ball shallow. The amount of sand taken out in some of the swings is not that much, and the divot doesn't look that deep.  Thoughts?
    • I would say I am not a fan. Honestly, I never ran into a situation where a tree root was anywhere close to the fairway. I am not a fan of free relief from a natural occurring feature of the course. Guess what, you have an option, unplayable lie. I know people think fairways should be pristine and free of all things that could inhibit your shot. I've played courses were big a** trees overhang a fairway and you have no shot at the green. It happens. If you think you will injure yourself, or do not want to chip out sideways from a root, then take an unplayable lie.  If you apply this rule, what is stopping someone from not being able to take a right-handed swing to being able to take a swing? A tree could be in the fairway (think hole #18 at Pebble Beach). They are like, I need relief. Now they get to have a shot at the green when the tree is there as an obstruction, something to play around.  Sorry, I do not think this is a good rule at all. If the course has that many trees, that it comes up a ton. Then vote as a club to have them removed. 
    • I've thought about this quite a bit since I've started using Shot Scope. Not all shots from a certain yardage that end up a certain distance from the hole are created equal, but I guess the thought is that over time those should even out since there would be other times where you're hitting into a funnel pin or something where it plays "easier" than what the SG suggests.
    • Wordle 1,108 3/6* 🟩⬜⬜⬜🟩 🟩⬜⬜🟨🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...