Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fnbrowning</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone seriously considering, or defending, the Chrony might find this true, first-hand story interesting.

Today, I was at the range testing my first 338 Lapua hand loads. I have no chronograph, so was just shooting ladder test groups and looking at the group sizes and vertical dispersion.

A new friend offered to chronograph one of my loads for me. He had brought a brand new Chrony to the range today.

Pay attention to this next part: The load is:
Ptimer: Federal Large Rifle Mangnum
Case: Lapua
Bullet: Sierra 300g Matchking
Powder: 87g of Retumbo

Just prior to the chronograph test, I had fired a 4 shot group, at 250 YARDS, that was only 3/4 " vertically by around 2" horizontally (gusty wind, 45 degrees, I was wearing GLOVES it was so darn cold!). So, we are talking 0.3 MOA vertical by 0.8 MOA horizontal.

The Chrony delivered the following results:
1st shot: 3253 fps
2nd shot: 3328
3rd shot: 3360
4th shot: 3409
5th shot: 3404

Average: 3351
Extreme spread: 156.7
Std Deviation: 64

Now ask yourself:

1. Can 87 grains of Retumbo actually push a 300g .338 caliber Matchking at 3351 fps? Could ANY 300g 338 Lapua load deliver 3351 fps without blowing up the case and rifle both? The loading books all suggest this load should deliver somewhere in the 2400 to 2500 fps range.

2. Is a group with 0.3 vertical MOA compatible with SD = 64 and extreme spread of 156.7?

My new friend was as "skeptical" as I was, and tested a 308 hand load, in his rifle, that he KNOWS does about 2550 out of the barrel. The Chrony said it did 3410.

So, did I learn anything of value about my load by using the Chrony? Did I learn anything of value about the CHRONY?

Jim G
</div></div>

Oh for cripes sake, back off the Chrony so the muzzle blast isn't being measured. The alert reader can't be seriously considering, or defending this tale, unsupported by other evidence, purporting that the Chrony product or design is a complete failure.

No where on any gun board, will you find evidence of <span style="font-style: italic">systemic</span> failures in the Chrony line of chronographs. I concede that the manufacturer might have shipped a defective unit, IF you admit that no manufacturer is perfect. I don't know what customer service the other companies give, when I needed service on my Shooting Chrony, they were helpful. I would buy their products again.

Other brands may look better, have more features and have more prestige.
But the Chrony will work if you give it a chance. It is, after all, the Chevy of the chronograph world.
</div></div>

There were 4 witnesses. The Chrony was 15 feet from the firing line. The problem was encoutnered firing first 338 Lapua from my TRG and then .308 from the Chrony owner's semiauto. I just reported what actually happened.

I did like the remote he had atatched to the Chrony. MUCH nicer to use than trying to read a display on a unit 15 feet downrange.

Jim G

 

[steve123]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/smile.gif[/img]

I need to figure out how small a package I could get that Oehler kit into if I worked at it a bit.

Jim G

Just keep it in the shower nook wrapped in a plastic bag. You're wife won't mind, right ?

Sacrifices must be made

 

[Goin'Hot]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Overall length is 32" and the diameter at the base is 3".

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Goin'Hot</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Overall length is 32" and the diameter at the base is 3".

</div></div>

Thanks!! I'll doing some measuring.

Jim G

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

I can relate to the space deal since my parents, both registered able bodied sea men were "live aboards" on a 41 footer. Yeah, stashed stuff in the most unlikely places, like on a sub, and it seemed like everything they owned smelled of Diesel fuel. Had to bag clothes in ziplocks, or else. There were actually three levels, from the bridge to the engine room so not quite so bad as a vehicle. But, maintenance? That's a whole nother deal, painting, polishing, you name it. Cured me. Slip fees are outrageous. Better to to cultivate a friendship with a boat owner. My son-in-law has a nice 36' Hunter, sloop rigged. BB

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I can relate to the space deal since my parents, both registered able bodied sea men were "live aboards" on a 41 footer. Yeah, stashed stuff in the most unlikely places, like on a sub, and it seemed like everything they owned smelled of Diesel fuel. Had to bag clothes in ziplocks, or else. There were actually three levels, from the bridge to the engine room so not quite so bad as a vehicle. But, maintenance? That's a whole nother deal, painting, polishing, you name it. Cured me. Slip fees are outrageous. Better to to cultivate a friendship with a boat owner. My son-in-law has a nice 36' Hunter, sloop rigged. BB </div></div>

Yes, a boat is "a bottomless hole in the water into which you pour endless amounts of money". been there and done that. Motor coaches and conversion buses are the exact same problem (been there and done THAT too!). Both big boats and big motor coaches look great but consume all your money (set of tires for a conversion bus: $5000). Our trailer is a much better solution for us. Very simple and easy maintenance, and remarkably low cost living.

I see that with the Oehler, and probably any OTHER chronograph, the big items are the tripods and the cabling. The rail is not that bad, because it is thin, but those tripods and cables are big and awkward too. I have to find someone who has an Oehler and see how small a packed space all the components can actually be stored into.

Jim G

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone seriously considering, or defending, the Chrony might find this true, first-hand story interesting.

Today, I was at the range testing my first 338 Lapua hand loads. I have no chronograph, so was just shooting ladder test groups and looking at the group sizes and vertical dispersion.

A new friend offered to chronograph one of my loads for me. He had brought a brand new Chrony to the range today.

Pay attention to this next part: The load is:
Ptimer: Federal Large Rifle Mangnum
Case: Lapua
Bullet: Sierra 300g Matchking
Powder: 87g of Retumbo

Just prior to the chronograph test, I had fired a 4 shot group, at 250 YARDS, that was only 3/4 " vertically by around 2" horizontally (gusty wind, 45 degrees, I was wearing GLOVES it was so darn cold!). So, we are talking 0.3 MOA vertical by 0.8 MOA horizontal.

The Chrony delivered the following results:
1st shot: 3253 fps
2nd shot: 3328
3rd shot: 3360
4th shot: 3409
5th shot: 3404

Average: 3351
Extreme spread: 156.7
Std Deviation: 64

Now ask yourself:

1. Can 87 grains of Retumbo actually push a 300g .338 caliber Matchking at 3351 fps? Could ANY 300g 338 Lapua load deliver 3351 fps without blowing up the case and rifle both? The loading books all suggest this load should deliver somewhere in the 2400 to 2500 fps range.

2. Is a group with 0.3 vertical MOA compatible with SD = 64 and extreme spread of 156.7?

My new friend was as "skeptical" as I was, and tested a 308 hand load, in his rifle, that he KNOWS does about 2550 out of the barrel. The Chrony said it did 3410.

So, did I learn anything of value about my load by using the Chrony? Did I learn anything of value about the CHRONY?

Jim G
</div></div>
Nope you didn't learn a thing.
It would seem you don't understand how they work.
A high reading like that is most likely a sky screen moving or bright sunlight on the second sensor.
Only a moron would think he was getting 3350 fps.

All chronographs do is read the bullet's shadow. Place uneven or angled lighting across the screens and be prepared for erroneous readings. This also includes light changes from moving sky screens....back off the chronograph and get it under even light and it will work. It matters not what chronograph you run.

I have a Chronographs in CED, Oehler 43(sold), and Chrony. They all read about the same. The primary advantage to the Oehler is the longer spacing decreases wild errors in poor lighting/setups. The other advantage is the second screen checks the reading and confirms things are right. Set up a Oehler incorrectly and it will not work either. The difference is that it tells you when its upset...<span style="font-weight: bold">With the other Chronographs you have to think for yourself.</span>

I sold the 43 because it was a pain in the ass to setup and carry. My old 20 year old Chrony works and its simple to set up...So it gets used.
One of these days I may feel motivated to use my CED.
Probably not.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

You insult people a little too quickly, sir. I know darn well how chronographs work. I have used them off an on for over 2 decades, including indoors. So have the very experienced shooters who were trying to get the Chrony to work on Saturday. And we are certainly not the first people to have problems with one.

And, no, I'm not a "moron" who thought that the 3xxx fps reading was "real". Me, and everyone else who watched the whole test knew it was incorrect. Please keep the dialog polite if you don't mind. We're all tryign to HELP each other here, not defend our individual choice of products.

I'm genuinely in the market, and having toruble finding a reliable and adequately featured alternative to the Oehler which is just a bit large to store and carry around much.

Jim G

 

[fx77]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

U might like to look at the PVM 21 Chronograph which is less bulky than the Oehler, and has fewer pieces for the range. I do not personally like the software with which it comes, and I do not believe it has been updated in a while, but it is a good device.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fx77</div><div class="ubbcode-body">U might like to look at the PVM 21 Chronograph which is less bulky than the Oehler, and has fewer pieces for the range. I do not personally like the software with which it comes, and I do not believe it has been updated in a while, but it is a good device. </div></div>

I'll do some research on it!

Jim G

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Well, that was quick.

The PVM unit has a fatal flaw for MY purposes: it requires using a PC computer to access many of its features. It is not compatible with a Mac, so would not work with my MacBook Pro.

It does also have a couple of other issues that might affect other people as well.

One is that it runs on 120v AC, and requires an optional rechargeable 12 volt battery kit to work where there is no power (like at all the rnages I have access to). That's a bit of an irritation.

The other problem is that the skyscreens appear to be a fairly large cubic shaped assembly. That's a deal kilelr for anyone who needs compactness for storage or in transit (like the modest sized trunk of my Ford Mustang

).

Thanks for the suggestion though.

Jim G

 

[Leaddog]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Replaced my PACT with the Oehler. Never looked back.

 

[Rthur]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

+1 on the oehler 35p. I have used it in conditions that chronys wouldn't do shit in. It has hiccuped twice while testing. Once was lightning and the other I believe was a cell phone. Without reasonably accurate readings your data is useless.

 

[Deisel]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

I have tried 3 chronos and currently have an Oehler 35P. I have found to the be the most accurate and consistent. Prior to that I had a CED. I have just found the Oehler to be much more reliable and consistent. I do realize it is bigger but to me it was worth it. Also you can get the 2' or 4' frame made by johndoe here on the Hide for the screens which works great. I got the 4' version. Using that you know every time your screens are exactly the right distance apart.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

2' or 4" frame made here by Johndoe on The Hide???

Please tell me more.

Jim G

 

[Deisel]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Jim, here is the link to a thread where there is a photo http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...260#Post2345260 I highly recommend it, very well made product. If you are interested send him a PM

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Looks like the sentiment is slowly drifting towards Oehler? I'm not surprised. BB

 

[DarkD]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

+1 on the Oehler 35P. I have used several Chronys and this one is by far the best one I have ever seen. It be bulky, but it has its out case. Most of all I have tried two others 35Ps and they are all consistent. It is by far one of the best hands down.

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
You insult people a little too quickly, sir. I know darn well how chronographs work. I have used them off an on for over 2 decades, including indoors. So have the very experienced shooters who were trying to get the Chrony to work on Saturday. And we are certainly not the first people to have problems with one.


Jim G </div></div>

I'll take that on the chin, retract, and even apologize for the harsher comments. I usually put a little more political correctness into my replys...Must be that time of the month.
So my apologies for being a dik.

Bottom line from my experience.
Put a Chrony in a box with a translucent top and it will perform perfectly...Same thing on a cloudy day. This is probably the cheapest solution that works very well.

Tripods:
Depending on the quality of the tripod the Chrony is mounted on you may need more than 14 feet from something such as a 338lapua or other cannon. Little vibrations piss off Chronys and Oehlers alike.
My Oehler tripod weighed 16-20 pounds and I could see the difference in performance between the big tripod and lessor versions.

So...I sold my Oehler 43....You might ask why I bough a RSI-CED?

Well sometimes you want the best...Without the painful setup.....Such as when I am testing for extreme velocity spread in my 6mmbr.

RSI CED M2

<span style="font-weight: bold">Here is an excerpt from the CED site,</span> <span style="color: #000099">"<span style="font-style: italic">Results: All calibers measured by the CED were within 0.2% (99.8%) of lab recordings, from 0.327% for 223 Rem to 0.081 for 45ACP. Results were better than all other chronographs. (The venerated Oehler tested 0.3% behind the CED.) The new IR emitters will virtually eliminate any variation caused by differences in natural lighting. If you need a chronograph that will approach the accuracy of commercial radar lab equipment, but do not want to spend $ BIG BUCKS $, try a CED chronograph." </span></span>

To get that accuracy you must purchase the optional ($89.00) infrared sky screens, but if you want the best there it is.
Cheaper, easier to set up, and more accurate than the Oehler.

I have not used my CED, but I allow several of my benchrest and F-Class shooting friends use it all the time. The result?
None of us owns a Oehler anymore.

Hope that helps.

No disrespect to all the Oehler fans

Peace

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
You insult people a little too quickly, sir. I know darn well how chronographs work. I have used them off an on for over 2 decades, including indoors. So have the very experienced shooters who were trying to get the Chrony to work on Saturday. And we are certainly not the first people to have problems with one.


Jim G </div></div>

I'll take that on the chin, retract, and even apologize for the harsher comments. I usually put a little more political correctness into my replys...Must be that time of the month.
So my apologies for being a dik.

Bottom line from my experience.
Put a Chrony in a box with a translucent top and it will perform perfectly...Same thing on a cloudy day. This is probably the cheapest solution that works very well.

Tripods:
Depending on the quality of the tripod the Chrony is mounted on you may need more than 14 feet from something such as a 338lapua or other cannon. Little vibrations piss off Chronys and Oehlers alike.
My Oehler tripod weighed 16-20 pounds and I could see the difference in performance between the big tripod and lessor versions.

So...I sold my Oehler 43....You might ask why I bough a RSI-CED?

Well sometimes you want the best...Without the painful setup.....Such as when I am testing for extreme velocity spread in my 6mmbr.

RSI CED M2

<span style="font-weight: bold">Here is an excerpt from the CED site,</span> <span style="color: #000099">"<span style="font-style: italic">Results: All calibers measured by the CED were within 0.2% (99.8%) of lab recordings, from 0.327% for 223 Rem to 0.081 for 45ACP. Results were better than all other chronographs. (The venerated Oehler tested 0.3% behind the CED.) The new IR emitters will virtually eliminate any variation caused by differences in natural lighting. If you need a chronograph that will approach the accuracy of commercial radar lab equipment, but do not want to spend $ BIG BUCKS $, try a CED chronograph." </span></span>

To get that accuracy you must purchase the optional ($89.00) infrared sky screens, but if you want the best there it is.
Cheaper, easier to set up, and more accurate than the Oehler.

I have not used my CED, but I allow several of my benchrest and F-Class shooting friends use it all the time. The result?
None of us owns a Oehler anymore.

Hope that helps.

No disrespect to all the Oehler fans

Peace
</div></div>

X-fan: That is VERY interesting information! The translucent top box is a clever way to minimize transient light conditions. Excellent idea!

Your testimonial on the RSI CED M2 gets me interested enough to take a closer look.

1. I noticed yesterday that its software requires a PC platform, and will not work with a Mac. How much functionality do you lose if you use it standalone without a computer?

2. It LOOKS from the photos like the whole "kit" of parts required to function at the rnage would be smaller than that of the Oehler. Is that true?

Jim G

 

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gun-Tech</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've found the Oehlers to be more accurate in personal experience.... </div></div>
More accurate than what? And how did you make that determination?

If you can teach me a method for determining my bullets' true velocity without the use of a chrono, I don't need a chrono any more.

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

X-fan: That is VERY interesting information! The translucent top box is a clever way to minimize transient light conditions. Excellent idea! <span style="color: #000099">Used this idea for years under brightsun where no shade available. Works perfectly</span>

Your testimonial on the RSI CED M2 gets me interested enough to take a closer look. <span style="color: #000099">The CED is the official Chronograph for UPSA and IPSC if I am not mistaken. Keep in mind that the infra red light makes the difference here. I honestly believe they should ship it no other way...Otherwise it is just another decent chronograph. If there is no power at your range you also need the battery pack option</span>

1. I noticed yesterday that its software requires a PC platform, and will not work with a Mac. How much functionality do you lose if you use it standalone without a computer? <span style="color: #000099">No computer required. Review the site thoroughly...The site is not very clear and is obviously written by engineers...Information is all there though. The nice thing is if you do have a laptop you can tie in to the CED. They also have an excellent data base system</span>

2. It LOOKS from the photos like the whole "kit" of parts required to function at the rnage would be smaller than that of the Oehler. Is that true? <span style="color: #000099">The overall parts kit is indeed smaller and quicker to set up</span>

Jim G </div></div>

I also highly recommend the pressure test kit...Works like a charm. In fact you can buy the pressure trace and the full chronograph kit bag and the works for less than an Oehler complete. Its a good system.
IMHO so far the best out there.

Peace

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

I did some research on the CED M2 chronograph.

The company offers a carry case that holds everything except the tripod inside it (a tripod cna be attached to the otuside via provided loops). That entire case is just 19" x 7" x 6", and the whole rig with everything in it weighs under 5 pounds. That makes it much more comaptible with my car's trunk and my RV home!

Can anyone who has actual firsthand experience with the CED M2 tell me any specific problems they have ever encountered,and what the solutions have been?

I AM aware now of the rail "droop" issue that some have adderssed by adding a "brace" that keeps the folding rail straight, and therefore the spacing consistent between the sensors.

Also, can the unit function adequately withOUT a computer upload? I ask that ebcause I run a MacBook pro, and the CED software is not comaptible with Macs.

Jim G

p.s. X-fan: I just saw that you posted while I was doing so. So, you recommend using the infrared setup ALL the time, or just when conditions warrant it?

 

[Deisel]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

I used the CED M2 and experienced inconsistent velocity readings for the same load from the same rifle on different occasions. I also would use the velocity from the M2 in my dope and it did not match in the real world. I did buy the IR kit, I did not find it to help. I talked to CED and they said usually the issue was not putting the sensors in the same place each time. I used a marker on the support arm to try and line up the sensors in the same place each time, but it really didn't help. Once I went to the Oehler I got the same velocity for the same load and rifle on different days and it matched my dope shooting at targets at various ranges. Just my personal experience, I know a lot of people have had good success with the M2, I am not one of them. I can only say the Oehler has given me what I want from a chrono, consisent repeatable readings using the same load and rifle on different days without a huge temp swing.

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

I'm still chewing on the accuracy claims. Exactly how do you determine the Oehler is +-3% while the X brand is +-2%, or whatever? I guess you use the X brand as a baseline and if the Oehler doesn't agree, it's wrong?

And, another thing. What "rail droop"? The Oehler uses a length of rigid galvanized conduit, which is like ½" water pipe without the seam, inside. Try bending it without a hickey. I do not believe there could be a droop, or sag in the middle, when supported by a tripod on each end? If there is, it must be inconsequential? So we must be talking about something else? BB

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BuzzBoss915</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm still chewing on the accuracy claims. Exactly how do you determine the Oehler is +-3% while the X brand is +-2%, or whatever? I guess you use the X brand as a baseline and if the Oehler doesn't agree, it's wrong?

And, another thing. What "rail droop"? The Oehler uses a length of rigid galvanized conduit, which is like ½" water pipe without the seam, inside. Try bending it without a hickey. I do not believe there could be a droop, or sag in the middle, when supported by a tripod on each end? If there is, it must be inconsequential? So we must be talking about something else? BB </div></div>

I was discussing the CED unit, not the Oehler in that psot. The rail on the CED, unlike on the Oehler, does have a hinge in it, for more compact storage. That hinge enables potential "droop" (because of the play in the hinge). Also, the hinge allows half the rail to "lift" in reaction to muzzle blast, if the rail is too close to the muzzle AND the rail kit is accidentally installed "backwards" (wrong end facing the muzzle). The second rpblem only applies if you accidentally palce the rail "backwards", of course.

Jim G

 

[BuzzBoss915]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Okay, another example of the shortcomings of the printed word. Or, maybe my comprehension? BB

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JimGnitecki</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I did some research on the CED M2 chronograph.

The company offers a carry case that holds everything except the tripod inside it (a tripod cna be attached to the otuside via provided loops). That entire case is just 19" x 7" x 6", and the whole rig with everything in it weighs under 5 pounds. That makes it much more comaptible with my car's trunk and my RV home!

Can anyone who has actual firsthand experience with the CED M2 tell me any specific problems they have ever encountered,and what the solutions have been?

I AM aware now of the rail "droop" issue that some have adderssed by adding a "brace" that keeps the folding rail straight, and therefore the spacing consistent between the sensors.

Also, can the unit function adequately withOUT a computer upload? I ask that ebcause I run a MacBook pro, and the CED software is not comaptible with Macs.

Jim G

p.s. X-fan: I just saw that you posted while I was doing so. So, you recommend using the infrared setup ALL the time, or just when conditions warrant it? </div></div>

Kind of embarrassing to own the unit for well over a year and not have much experience with it, but I guess it relates to how I use a chronograph. For the most part I find relative velocity is plenty good enough...Hence why I like the Chrony...Let the targets do the talking other than that.

Also to be honest, time is very precious at this point in my life so I would rather shoot jerk with a chronograph.

If I'm trying for single digit variation and testing things like bullet tension or what ever then I want the best chronograph accuracy I can get...So at that time I would go with the Infrared setup.

The reports I got from my buds indicated the main support rod was a bit too flexible....Shaking sky screens are bad and my OCD buddies could not abide that! We (they) fixed that with a longer supporting piece of aluminum bolted to the tripod mount then drilled and taped a second mount underneath...No biggy. It was at this point I notice they all started selling their Oehlers.

I mentioned this before, but the tripod used makes a huge difference on any chronograph. Heavy is good and if your tripod is lighter duty hanging some weight on it can really help. Lots of chronograph issues I have had could be traced back directly to the tripod.

The CED comes with a decent case, but I always seem to add more crap and equipment (like the pressure trace) that makes it a chore to getting everything to the range...if you know what I mean!

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fred_C_Dobbs</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gun-Tech</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've found the Oehlers to be more accurate in personal experience.... </div></div>
More accurate than what? And how did you make that determination?

If you can teach me a method for determining my bullets' true velocity without the use of a chrono, I don't need a chrono any more. </div></div>

I think he was referring to getting the most consistent results from his Oehler. Compared to most other Chronographs I'd say he is barking up the right tree.... Perhaps you deny this?

Whether or not you want to spend the money there is no denying Oehler has a top rate product...Maybe the best in terms of accuracy...I don't know, I don't care, and I don't really think that it really matters. If it does matter for you Oehler is a good choice.

Posts like yours (and one of mine above) help nobody.
Some guy pushes the right button and it just creeps up on you doesn't it lol

I hate when that happens.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

X-fan: Late this afternoon, I got to the range, and another shooter was actually using a CED M2! I like the size, and also the ease of use - there is a whole "calculator keyboard" of buttons, with each one clear labeled! ONE button to get average, ONE button to get SD, ONE button to get Extreme spread, etc. VERY user friendly.

But, I do see now why you suggest strongly using (a) a heavy tripod, and (b) a brace for the sensor mounting rail. There was a gusty little wind this afternoon, and you could SEE the sky screens shaking, and therefore changing spacing minutely continuously. After seeing that, on a hunch, I had the operator press the "Std Deviation" button, and sure enough, SD = 20. I suspect a good chunk of that was the screens shaking. Easy to address, but you have to figure it out yourself or by having someone (like you

) tell you - it's not mentioned in the instructions, or at least not strongly enough.

I think an astute operator who has researched chronographs a bit, and is willing to take some advice from other owners with experience, could get this unit running pretty accurately. I have downloaded the user manual and will study it tomorrow. If it still looks good to me, I think I may buy one.

If I do, I will try it first with the normal (not IR) screens first, BECAUSE the IR screens require use of a large rechargeable battery pack if there is no AC power available (which there is not at any range I shoot at). But, if you use the unit with just the regular screens, a simple 9 volt battery inside the unit itself handles the power needs. That's a major plus.

Jim G

 

[Kevlars]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

CED M2 ... don't look back ....

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Jim,

Glad you liked it.
You probably know more about than me now!

I actually figured out the tripod thing by accident.
One time the Chrony would work well and the next garbage. My buddy commented that every time we had a crap session it was windy...After eliminating the sky screens I studied the Chrony (thru a spotting scope no less) and called out when I saw any movement..Turned out to be the problem...You could barely see the unit move with your eyes!
We switched the heavy tripod onto the Chrony and just like that problem solved.

The IR screens work very well...My OCD buddies (bench resters and F-Classers) insist on setting it up every time. They aren't the types of guys that would do it for nothing, but I suspect they figured out it was more accurate that way than the Oehlers we had and stuck with it. Will make some calls and let you know.

Peace

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The IR screens work very well...My OCD buddies (bench resters and F-Classers) insist on setting it up every time. They aren't the types of guys that would do it for nothing, but I suspect they figured out it was more accurate that way than the Oehlers we had and stuck with it. Will make some calls and let you know.

Peace </div></div>

Thanks, X-fan. I am getting one of these, and I'll do my usual detailed experiments, like I do with any piece of equipment I buy. I'd really appreciate the feedback on how necessary the IR screens are if the other factors are all correct (solid tripod, rail stiffener, paying attention to no glint or direct shadows or odd sun angles, etc). I'd really like to avoid that external battery that needs charging maintenance.

Note that I cannot go for the pressure measuring kit, as the CED software (ALL of it) is incomaptible with a Mac computer, and there's no way I'm giving up my MacBook Pro! I remember all too well the crap I used to have to go through with my PC laptops, and the past 1 1/2 years on the Mac has been a pleasant eyeopener - zero maintenance! I know I could run Crossover to get Windoews functionality, and I did that briefly with Quickload, but the issues introduced by dragging the Windows environment onto the Mac are too much of a reminder of how bad it was when I was on the Windows platform.

Jim G

 

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gun-Tech</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What do you think I meant by that statement. I fail to see where a normal functioning brain couldn't realize that I was implying that in my personal experience, the Oehlers seemed to be more accurate than other brands of chronographs.
Does that spell it out a little better for you or would you like to step out of line and snap at a new member for no reason again. Maybe next time when I think I might have some personal experience which could be of value to someone who asks for it, I'll just keep my mouth shut. I'll realize that as a new member I couldn't possibly have anything of value to say and I'll leave the advise to someone with more posts than me.
Do me a favor and stick your snide comments where the sun doesn't shine. </div></div>
Thank you for confirming what I suspected: You made it up, then tried to sell it as fact.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: X-fan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think he was referring to getting the most consistent results from his Oehler. Compared to most other Chronographs I'd say he is barking up the right tree.... Perhaps you deny this?...</div></div>
No, because I have no factual basis for denying it. But I do have material reasons to question it because the 35P still has 1990s era timing circuitry, and the electronics in some other chronos has better precision.

Consistency is not accuracy. It doesn't confer accuracy. Precision isn't accuracy either but precision does put a finite limit on accuracy. A chrono cannot have a level of accuracy its timing circuitry will not support. The greater the timing circuit's precision, the greater the chrono's <span style="text-decoration: underline">potential</span> accuracy.

There is no doubt the 35P is a fantastic piece of hardware, otherwise how do you explain it achieving cult status? As most any thread on this forum regarding chronos attests to, it also has become a sacred cow. People proselytize for Oehlers who've barely ever used, much less owned one. Mythology aside, I see what appear to me to be people in the throes of post-purchase rationalization, making inferences with no grounding in fact and baselessly denigrating competing chronos, as if trying to convince themselves the 35P was worth the brand name premium. That their cow is still holy.

The sad truth is, very few of us have the facility for determining how accurate our chronograph is. Which is ironic because we take so much stock in what they tell us. We mostly have no real measure of how accurate that information is.

If imaging your Oehler is more accurate than brand X, Y or Z helps you sleep better at night, I'm proud for you. But when you try to recruit someone else into your little delusion, I don't think it's too much to ask:

How do you know?

 

[misfire]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Off of RSI's site, mine should be here today. This was good enough for me. Here are CED's German defense lab test results for the original Millennium model:

Conditions: Indoors with consistent incandescent lighting for all chronographs
Test Measurement Equipment: Commercial radar velocity instrumentation
Calibers tested: .22, 9mm, 38 super, 40 S &W, 45 ACP, 223 Rem., 308 Win., & 4.5mm

Results: All calibers measured by the CED were within 0.2% (99.8%) of lab recordings, from 0.327% for 223 Rem to 0.081 for 45ACP. Results were better than all other chronographs. (The venerated Oehler tested 0.3% behind the CED.) The new IR emitters will virtually eliminate any variation caused by differences in natural lighting. If you need a chronograph that will approach the accuracy of commercial radar lab equipment, but do not want to spend $ BIG BUCKS $, try a CED chronograph.

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: misfire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Off of RSI's site, mine should be here today. This was good enough for me. Here are CED's German defense lab test results for the original Millennium model:

Conditions: Indoors with consistent incandescent lighting for all chronographs
Test Measurement Equipment: Commercial radar velocity instrumentation
Calibers tested: .22, 9mm, 38 super, 40 S &W, 45 ACP, 223 Rem., 308 Win., & 4.5mm

Results: All calibers measured by the CED were within 0.2% (99.8%) of lab recordings, from 0.327% for 223 Rem to 0.081 for 45ACP. Results were better than all other chronographs. (The venerated Oehler tested 0.3% behind the CED.) The new IR emitters will virtually eliminate any variation caused by differences in natural lighting. If you need a chronograph that will approach the accuracy of commercial radar lab equipment, but do not want to spend $ BIG BUCKS $, try a CED chronograph. </div></div>

This sounds like a carefully set up lab scenario probably done specifically to generate the advertising blurb you quoted. That unfortunately does not address how reliably the equipment works OUTSIDE a lab.

ONE difference was apparent to me a few days ago when I watched that other shooter use his at the range (see my posting above). Regardless of the fact that the CED M2 has a very fast clock speed and other good specification features, the SCREENS were visibly vibrating in the wind, and that showed up in the standard deviation results reported for a load that was actually SHOOTING betetr than the SD implied. The remedy of course is to stiffen the hinged rail and use as heavy and stable a tripod as possible.

I believe that the reason the Oehler is so consistently reliable and thus highly regarded is that Oehler did a better job of engineering the PHYSICAL (versus electronic) package as a whole, and did not try to reach a lower price point. The price is what it is. The unit works. And, it, not the CED, is what many commercial labs use.

Now, before anyone flames me for being too critical of the CED M2, please know this: I have just ordered a CED M2, for some good reasons:

1. I believe I know what I need to do to make it reloably consistent and accurate

2. It is very much more compact than the Oehler, and for MY speciifc needs (see above postings), that is important

3. The price I am paying is low enough that if it does not work WELL enough for me, I can sell it to someone with less critical standards, taking only a loss that I can afford to take while giving someone else "a deal". If it works well enough, I have gotten performance, small size, and great price, and will be satisfied.

4. I have upaide potential too, if it works well enough: I can buy the infrared kit, and get even better reliability under less than good lighting conditions (even in the dark, technically!

). I am NOT getting that at this time, because I regard the need for an external battery pack for the IR system (in the absence of 120v power at the range)as a negative.

These are sufficient reasons for me to have ordered one and to see what I can get it to do.

I try not to jump to conclusions where the informaiton available is not complete enough and verifiable enough to warrant making a firm judgment. I'll be sure to report my findings on this forum, so that others can have betetr data on which to base THEIR judgments.

Jim G

 

[X-fan]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

Some results for those that care.
I am not a bench rest guy nor am I inclined to this level of detail and testing..I in fact, find it annoying as hell, but in the interest of sharing what I know...

My buddies (one is an electronic engineer) built a wire fire system (shoot one wire to start and the other to stop the clock then some Distance=Speed X time math) and compared all the chronographs including my 43. This was how they figured the actual velocities an compared them to the Chronographs. The 43 and the CED were within 15 fps and read closest to the wire break test unit while others were within an extreme spread of 35fps. As they only had one test CED it is possible other units would read differently as there is more room for error in a shorter rod system of the CED.

Statistically speaking the best an Oehler can do is get you within 15fps at 3000fps while the best a CSI can do (with the infrared kit) is 5-6fps at 3000fps. This was (statistically) supported by my buddies testing after using a hundred or so rounds each from a 6mmbr and a 6PPC that had low (near single digit) variations.
Don't ask me about the statistical math...I don't pretend to understand that stuff.

Testing started in the morning and went until dusk on a more or less windless day. As the light changed the CED was a statistical winner by a small margin or proximately the 0.5% (0.3%) mentioned in CED's literature. As the sun came up, went behind clouds, then went back down, the CED became significantly more consistent. Other than the clouds these results were ignored as they though they could get similar result from the Oehler(s) with an artificial light source.

There was also talk of building a new solid rail for the CED and bonding the screens to it as they are still not completely happy with the unit in windy conditions. Everybody prefers the setup and interface of the CED over the Oehler.

Frankly I could car less. Make it more difficult to use and I may never use it. As expressed before I am perfectly happy with my 20 year old Chrony for 99% of what I do.

Hope that helps!

 

[JimGnitecki]

Re: Thoughts/Opinions on Chronographs

X-fan: helpful! Thanks.

Jim G