Chronograph ??

[Glocktogo]

I've has the Shooting Chrony, CED Millenium (tons of features) and the Competition Electronics ProChrono Digital. By far my favorite is the ProChrono, simply because it's the easiest to use. It's self contained, so setup is a snap. Most times I'll just set it on top of a 55gal barrel at USSA and turn it on. If you search online, you can get them deliverd for just over a c-note.

 

[swampratt]

I have had the wind blowing or gusting so hard the tripod and crony were lifted off the ground.
Careful using it on a 55 gallon bucket.. wind could make a mess of it.

 

[Bevenue]

I vote for getting a Competition Electronics ProChrono Digital.

Im a firm believer that a chronograph goes hand in hand with reloading.

Are you needing to check a load for Badlands next month?
I can bring mine to Jack's or Pete's match early next month if you have not picked one up.
What is the load your shooting? From your M&P pro right?

 

[Old Fart]

I have a about 30-35 year old Chrony and it works fine. As mentioned they've made improvements over the years. If I ever buy another it will have the capability of multiple shots and printout. Electronic data transfer would be nice too.

 

[NikatKimber]

I just had a crazy idea. I'm going to make my own chronograph.

I'll write it up / document what I do.

 

[Woodcutter]

When I am really serious about accuracy and consistency, in my opinion there is only one chronograph to use. This the brand that the ammunition companies and the writers of the reloading manuals use. I am talking about the Oehler model 35P proof channel chronograph. With all others, I am just guessing. The 35P actually takes two velocity measurements and compares the two. It lets you know if you can trust the figure or if something happened to cause an erroneous reading. For those of you who own two or more chronographs, or if you own one and know someone else who owns one, could you please try this and report back the results? Place the two chronographs in line, front to back so that you can get a reading from both of them for the same shot. If you get the same reading from both of them on every shot, then you can trust every shot. But what if one of them reads 973 FPS and the other reads 861 FPS for the same shot? That has happened to me with two Chrony brand chronographs. With just a single reading for each shot, you do not know if it is accurate or if it was reading a pressure wave or the actual bullet on both screens, for example. In developing accurate long range rifle loads, the standard deviation (SD) is just as important, if not more important, than the average velocity. I have seen the SD vary between two chronographs by as much as a factor of three, measuring the same shot string using the back to back method. That is why you need the proof channel. With it you know if a velocity reading is in error, and you can remove it from the SD calculation. You get a much more accurate measure of the consistency of your load and rifle that way. Before I discovered this, I wasted hundreds of dollars in reloading components, not to mention many hours of my time, chasing that elusive accurate, consistent long range load. I could have used this wasted money to buy several Oehler Chronographs.

 

[Glocktogo]

When I am really serious about accuracy and consistency, in my opinion there is only one chronograph to use. This the brand that the ammunition companies and the writers of the reloading manuals use. I am talking about the Oehler model 35P proof channel chronograph. With all others, I am just guessing. The 35P actually takes two velocity measurements and compares the two. It lets you know if you can trust the figure or if something happened to cause an erroneous reading. For those of you who own two or more chronographs, or if you own one and know someone else who owns one, could you please try this and report back the results? Place the two chronographs in line, front to back so that you can get a reading from both of them for the same shot. If you get the same reading from both of them on every shot, then you can trust every shot. But what if one of them reads 973 FPS and the other reads 861 FPS for the same shot? That has happened to me with two Chrony brand chronographs. With just a single reading for each shot, you do not know if it is accurate or if it was reading a pressure wave or the actual bullet on both screens, for example. In developing accurate long range rifle loads, the standard deviation (SD) is just as important, if not more important, than the average velocity. I have seen the SD vary between two chronographs by as much as a factor of three, measuring the same shot string using the back to back method. That is why you need the proof channel. With it you know if a velocity reading is in error, and you can remove it from the SD calculation. You get a much more accurate measure of the consistency of your load and rifle that way. Before I discovered this, I wasted hundreds of dollars in reloading components, not to mention many hours of my time, chasing that elusive accurate, consistent long range load. I could have used this wasted money to buy several Oehler Chronographs.

Every year at the IDPA Nationals, they lace three ProChronos together so that the bullet goes over all three at the same time. The velocities rarely if ever vary more than 2-3fps between the three. I figure that's good enough for me!

 

[Woodcutter]

I would say the IDPA folks are taking Oehler's 35P concept to the next level. It sounds like the ProCrono is much more consistent than the Shooting Chronys that I have used. I may just have to try one (or three) of those. I am glad to find an alternative to the Oehler. Thanks for that information Glocktogo.

 

[Glocktogo]

I would say the IDPA folks are taking Oehler's 35P concept to the next level. It sounds like the ProCrono is much more consistent than the Shooting Chronys that I have used. I may just have to try one (or three) of those. I am glad to find an alternative to the Oehler. Thanks for that information Glocktogo.

No problem. When you're talking about disqualifying someone for not making power on their ammo, I reckon IDPA wants to be sure! As for the Chrony's, I was always concerned about the fold up design and accuracy of the readings. The ProChrono is a one piece, solid unit. It's pretty foolproof (and I'm a seriously talented fool)!

 

[dennishoddy]

Here is a little video comparing the Oehler and the Chrony.

http://youtu.be/EzNKUAgpKNY