I think sometime here soon in the new year I will be picking up a new chronograph. My Chrony (full meal deal. w/ everything except the printer) has been acting more and more flakey and erratic, to where I don't think I trust anything I see out of it (.30 cal 155 J4's @ 3800fps out of a .308?!?) when it even registers the shot (infrequently anymore). At one point I called the manufacturer, and they said to send it back and expect a bill for repair/calibration, w/ no hint as to how much or if there was even a ceiling. Considering what it cost to begin w/, I think I'm about ready to just right it off and pitch it. Unless anybody out there has more positive experiences w/ Chrony customer support? Even if I do get it 'fixed up', I think I'm still gonna be in the market for a new one, and relegate the Chrony to standby/loaner use.

I had previously pretty much 'made up my mind' to get an Oehler 35P, w/ the printer, proof channel, and set it up w/ about as long of a rail as I could fit in my truck. Lately though, from what I've been reading, I'm kind of leaning towards a CED Millenium for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that I could dump the data to my Mac at home after a shooting session for record keeping and analysis.

Supposedly the 'newer' electronics in the Millenium are supposed to be somewhat more accurate for a given sensor spacing (2') than the 35P, to the tune of 0.2% vs 0.5%, though the Millenium doesn't appear to benefit as much from increased spacing as the Oehler does, judging from the docs on the RSI site. The IR screens sound *really* nice, as I frequently end up at the range on overcast days and even when the Chrony was working right, it had a lot of trouble 'seeing' the shot. I guess for me, the Millenium has every thing going for it, w/ the exception of the Oehler's reputation and proof channel. I haven't heard anything really negative about any CED Millenium anywhere I've searched on the Internet, so I guess I'm mainly wondering how much I'm really going to miss that proof channel on the 35P if I go w/ the CED unit.

Anybody out there worked w/ these units enough to make a fair comparison?

Thanks,

Monte

Buy a 35P and call it a day. I am done messing around with crappy chronies!

And based on... what?

Monte

Milanuk,
I second what Pop says. I just received my new 35 Oehler this past Wednesday, prior to that I had a model 33 for 20 some years without any problems what so ever.
WARRANTY
If any handloader chronograph or skyscreen doesn't work, we'll fix it or replace it. If you aren't satisfied, we'll refund your money.


We have honored this simple warranty for 25 years. Our written warranty has been limited to 3 years, but we've repaired most units at no charge even though some were 15 to 20 years old.
Our customers are reasonable; if they shoot a screen, they expect to pay for repairs and we fix it at COST.
If a part breaks or wears out, we fix it FREE.

This is from the back page of the owners manual.
Jim White,a board member here has a 35P and in the course of his duties his Oehler see a lot of use and it has gone back to the factory twice and one time they installed an updated printer, No Charge. The last time they installed an updated case and wide diffusers again NC
You be the judge!
Stepchild

Hmmm... I guess what I'm trying to say is... I don't see the printer as being much of a benny compared to something I can download the data directly to my computer (and ballistics software). I'm more concerned with:

Has anyone used them side by side, or had one, and then the other (CED Millenium and a 35P, not successive models of only one brand), and can relate their experiences regarding accuracy and reliability?

Given that the CED Millenium has (supposedly) better/newer electronics, w/ greater accuracy (if one believes the 0.2% vs 0.5% claim), and w/ the IR screens is no longer dependent on ambient light (Oehler's own web site talks about inconsistent lighting being a reason for the proof channel), is there any benefit to the proof channel anymore?

If I get all the bells and whistles, the CED isn't going to be any cheaper than the 35P, but that's including the chrono, IR screens, NiMH battery pack for portability w/ the IR screens, and software. Total comes out actually close to $400, but that's w/ a $100 software suite.

Monte

Pop,

Well, I appreciate the input, and I'm glad you've had excellent results w/ your Oehler. Seems most people do. But perhaps you can appreciate that I'm kind of comparison shopping here, and 'Product X is great!' w/o a comparison to Product Y isn't quite what I'm looking for.

Good point, though, about the ongoing reliability of the Oehler products, and as the other fellow pointed out, they do seem pretty good about customer service.

Thanks,

Monte

I have a 35P, and am very pleased with it. As an electronics engineer, I can see that they did an excellent job of controlling (adapting) the threshold for the sensors, as it works in nearly any lighting condition. I live in Seattle, and many times I have used it past sunset, under overcast skys. It gets flakey for about three or four shots, then it just suddenly stops making any measurements. The proof channel is a great addition, as there is a clear cross check as to the accuracy of the measurement not possible with only two sensors. I outfitted mine with a 4 foot rail (1/2 inch EMT conduit, about $0.50 worth), and have the whole setup in a standard rifle case. As for the download capability, I find that I normally record just the mean and standard deviation of the velocity in my notebook for each group, and then keep the paper tape for later processing. I can then do a more extensive analysis using Excel or RSI Shooting Lab if I want to aggregate more than a 5 shot group. I would not want to have to download every range session just to get a permanent record.

Go with the Oehler, it is the technically superior product. Just my $0.02.

I made my statement regarding the technical superiority of the Oehler mostly based on the presence of the proof channel. I have not used the CED, so I cannot comment regarding the sensor accuracy or adaptability. I have used a Crony F1, and it clearly has issues with less than optimum lighting conditions. It faulted frequently on me, and prompted me to start looking for a better unit. Neither the Chrony or the CED has the proof channel, so any missed or false detection on either sensor will result in a bad value being computed, or no value at all. The proof channel on the Oehler is the middle sensor, which is used to compute a "proof" velocity between the first and middle sensor, which is compared to the "main" velocity computed between the first and last sensor. If the two velocities differ by more than a few percent, the unit flags this reading as questionable. The Oehler also allows you to set the sensors farther apart for even more accuracy, up to about 15 feet if I remember correctly. I chose the Oehler based on the presence of the proof channel, the ability to wide space the sensors, and Oehler's reputation.

Now that I have had the Oehler a while (~1 year), if have formed some conclusions that also went into my statement of the Oehler technical superiority. All the chronographs commonly available to us folk are based on measuring the time difference between occlusion events, that being the passing of the bullet over a light intensity measuring device. If the sensor design is done properly, the sensor will be able to track and adjust for a wide range of incident (ambient) light conditions, and still have enough sensitivity to detect the very slight shadow or drop in in intensity as the bullet passes over. The CED apparently uses an infrared type detector, which may make the sensors easier to adapt to ambient conditions. I have no experience with this unit, so I cannot give an opinion. Perhaps some others here on the board can do so. I do know that the Oehler is far superior to the Chrony with respect to sensitivity and handling a wide range of lighting conditions.

Even if the CED has equal or superior sensor capabilities, I would still choose the Oehler, again, because of the proof channel and spacing options, as the Oehler sensitivity is more than good enough based on my year of experience with it.

Hope that this clarifies the rationale behind my previous post.

Dr. Oehler got the D R because they gave him a PhD. in electronic engineering. Whose equipment do you think the manufacturers use? Now you are getting it...

Milan,



I do not own a Millinium CED but my gunsmith has one and i've used it on a few occasions. He has had excellent results with his. Once a sensor went out on a screen and CED replaced it quickly and at no charge. I'm sure it has missed a shot but I have never seen this happen. I doubt you will need the infrared sensors unless you would like to shoot indoors or shoot outside in the dark.



I think you will be happy with the quality of the unit. And even if others have different opinions, it's easier/quicker to upload the data rather than punch it into the computer with the keyboard.......less mistakes too. My next purchase will be a Millenium CED.



Oh, one other thing. The 35P I have no doubt is a very good product. I'm curious if you get readings when the first screen sensor goes out? My point is that it can still fail even with a backup screen. Also, if the two readings are not close, which do you believe? If you don't know which to believe, are you better off than having one screen?



HogWild

Looks like I'm the only person that has seen BOTH units in action. If I were buying one, I would go with the CED, less the IR, because I haven't seen the IR needed yet. It misses less shots than the Oehler, and has more features.

I was looking at getting the package deal w/ the chrono and the software (playing w/ the demo on my 'puter off-n-on lately), and adding the IR screens later (and the NiMH battery) as needed. $20 off the package, IIRC.

Thanks,

Monte

I have a CED Millenium that I bought back in Feb of this year and have really enjoyed it. I check the calibration with published velocities for several brands of .22 rifle
ammo and they read right on the mean for 10 rounds fired.
(CCI Stinger and Ely Tennex). I have never needed the IR
setup as some have stated here most all shots are recorded
even on overcast days. One thing that did give me a little trouble was movement of the screens due to muzzle blast. I
solved that problem by stabilizing the tripod with a sandbag
and moving the screens at least 10 feet from the muzzle.
The RSI Shooting lab is very good and downloading only
takes a few seconds. It really helps in load developement
and I go back to the data often.
I also found the "voice data" feature to be helpful if you are writting down velocities of strings of shots or if someone else is recording for you. I don't have a printer
nor do I need one since all the data gets printed out at
home on my pc after downloading. I also like the large LED
display which can be read in the scope at 100 yards if you
chose to check downrange velocities. One word of caution at
the range you will have people wanting to check their loads
on your chrono and that is a good way to get your equipment
shot to pieces. The only extra battery I carry is a 9 volt.
I didn't buy an Ohler because the CED has everything I need
and the sensitivity is great. I have chronographed everything from arrows, .22, .243, .270, 7.62x39 , 7mm RM,
.357 mag and 12 guage shotgun loads (both factory and reloads) without any real problems other than operator error. I highly recommend the CED! BLR7

As others have stated it seems that you have come to or just about got your mind made up about which one you really want. It sounds like the computer interface is one of the features that holds a lot of weight for you. I would just like you to consider some other things.



When I bought my first chronograph CED was new to the market. Like you I did my research. Because the CED unit was so new it was hard to get any data on it and reviews were very few and far between. Oehler was king of the hill in features, reviews and cost. I finally bought the Pact Professional and it has served me very well over the years. Yesterday I fell into a deal that I couldn�t resist so now I have a second chronographs, an Oehler 35P. This one has all the options including the storage case. The only thing wrong with it was a little dirt from being stored for 5 years and the cover for the battery compartment had a broken latch. The latest date on any of the paperwork that came with it was 1990 and the prior owner said he had owned it for six years. I called Oehler to find out how I could get a replacement part, instead of attempting to make a replacement myself. After giving the gentleman at Oehler my name and request without any hesitation he told me all he needed was my address and it would be shipped, free - no charge. Needless to say I thanked him.



Here are some of the reasons I bought the second chronograph. With two I can now get muzzle and downrange velocity figures for the same round. I will put the Pact down range if I do. Because the 35P has the three sensors it can calculate possible velocity errors, because it is actually recording two velocities for each shot instead of just one. Two sensor units are not able to do this so you have no idea when or if a possible problem exists. Although CED says they have a warning system it can only guess at a possible error based on previous shot velocities not the actual measured velocity of the shot in question. Otherwise, you may only think you have a higher or lower velocity shot compared to the rest of your shots. Also, in the edit mode if you choose to omit a shot that is flagged it does not use it when performing any of the calculations for Hi, Lo, ES, SD, etc. The ability to easily increase the screen spacing to increase the accuracy of the readings. It can be done with Pact and CED�s sensor mounting but not as easy or inexpensive as resetting a dip switch and the purchase of an eight foot length of �" EMT conduit (about $2). CED wants $42 for their 8 foot bracket which is designed for use with three tripods or three table mount bases (at $23 each). The 35P uses standard 2 1/4" wide adding machine paper and the print roller uses the standard Epson Model 41 used in dozens of portable calculators. I like to attach the chrono results to my targets. What does an HP inferred printer cost?



You have heard what Oehler�s warranty is and although I have never had to use it Pact also has a Life Time Warranty. CED on the other hand is a �3 Year Limited Warranty.� Return or warranty service has to be handled through your purchase location (where ever that might be) but you can write to CED in Hong Kong if you like, instead of simply sending your chronograph back to the manufacture in Texas like Pact or Oehler. After reading this last sentence I realized what some might think about why I wrote it so I wanted to clarify that it has nothing to do with �Made in the USA.� I don�t care if I had to send it back to Canada, Mexico or Europe somewhere, I like to have those who built it fix it not simply a parts changer with no vested interest in the product. Also, chances are they won�t check further to see if anything else might be wrong so that you don�t have to send it back again.



If cost is a factor for you then buy one of the Pact models, I suggest the Professional because I want the printout, if not then get the 35P. I think that what little time you may spend plugging numbers into your computer will be worth it in the long run.



As far a ballistic software goes that's for another topic



Later,



P.S. - I just checked the Pact site (http://www.pact.com/newchro.html) and noticed that their 2004 version of the Professional has "New PC interface lets you download your ballistic data to your computer and upload new bullets from your computer to your PACT chronograph." Based on this I would say that the CED unit is out of the running in my book.

opps, it sold already

jeffe

Hmmm... I will have to take a closer look at both the CED warranty, and the new Pact chrono. I wasn't really even considering it, as most of the times I've heard it mentioned by competitive rifle shooters, it has been something to the tune of 'I have one, and wish I didn't'. Maybe the new model will address those problems. Not sure I understand the point of uploading bullet data to the chrono, unless it's starting to do the ballistics calcs for you on the unit, which if it's made to plug into a computer is kind of redundant. Still, it'd be neat to see. Mac (not just PC) compatibility is a big plus w/ the CED unit for me. As others mentioned, hand entering the data from a printout from the 35P doesn't take *that* long, but I'm kind of wanting something light enough and mobile enough to set up regularly while I practice from position, recording the data for later use. That's the main scenario where computer hookup would be nice, because I'm not talking like only 20 shots, probably more like 50-100 for the day.

The one thing that seems a bit off is that yes, the 35P does have the third screen for the proof channel, but the CED has the IR screens (which do bite into the price differential, and the mobility, unless using the NiMH battery, which is more $$$) which are supposed to 'fix' the whole problem that the proof channel is trying to detect: flaky light conditions. And the CED is supposed to be more accurate (0.2%) at 2ft than the 35P (0.5%). Increasing the screen length on the 35P out to 8' should overcome that, but man, that just sounds unwieldy as all get out.

As someone else who has had/used both units said earlier, there may not be a 100% clear winner, depending on what a person wants. Sucks, but looks like I'm gonna have to live w/ it.

Thanks for the information and advice everybody,

Monte

My intent for posting was simply to point out things that you may not have been aware of. You wouldn't want to go into battle unarmed, and when shopping if you don't have as much information on the product as you can get it's about the same thing.

Decisions are a bitch sometimes. I deal with computers and when asked, "what is best deal I can get?" I tell them that no matter what it is this moment, the minute they make the purchase someone is going to come out with a better one.

Later,

I too have been researching and trying to decide between the CED Millennium and the Oehler 35. Deep down, I'm leaning towards the Oehler unit for it's reputation and the service (if required). But I keep asking myself if the CED unit is newer technology, thus just as dependable and slightly more accurate. Also the CED seems to be more portable, easier to setup, and the keypad seems to be more user freindly. So as of now....I'm still undecided. I just want to get the best product and one that will give me many years of trouble free-service. Anyone else out there have an opinion or have used BOTH units? Thanks, doogie.