Gentlemen:

I would appreciate your recommendation regarding which chronograph to purchase. My intended use is mainly for rifles.

Thanks in advance.

Buliwyf

You'll likely be advised by many to splurge and get the Oehler (pronounced A-ler, rhymes with Taylor).

They're pretty steep, but for the chrono-junkies they are reportedly worth the money.

My advice would be to first see if the simple Chrony unit will do. You can get a rebuilt one from their website for $49.95. If it serves your purposes (and it likely will), you're about 250 dollars to the good.

If you find it lacking, put it on ebay and they'll bid it to 70 dollars or so, then you can get the Oehler.

Dan

The shooting chronies are serviceable inexspensive chronographs, especially when you buy a re-furb. I've had mine for 5 years, and it works most of the time.

They are sensitive to lighting conditions, and there are situations where they just won't read.

I keep thinking about upgrading to an Oehler 35, but keep finding better uses for $250, and the chrony works most of the time, and is very quick to set up for lunch time shooting sessions.

The time and hassle to set up a chronograph is a big reason why I don't bother. I have used the same 5' screen holders for decades and even though they fold in half on a shoulder screw it's way too much trouble considering that when I am done I get the same results that I expected.

A unit like the Chrony that's all in one piece would be easier. I have a Pact now and it works fine.

The easiest method of being happy over your loads was suggested here but I can't recall the author. Just look up the velocity in two sources, average them and add 100 fps!

The advice Green 788 & Paul H. gave you is sound: For your first chronograph, buy a Chrony. Models (including refurbished ones), prices & features can be found on their website. Search for Shooting Chrony.

I would go in the middle with a PACT PC2. It seems to detect bullets better and has a few more features.

I have two Chrony F-1's and a Gamma Master...never had any complaints about any of them...

I had a Beta model Chrony and in three years, used it so much I had to update. The diffusers broke, the printer I purchased malfunctioned, etc. I upgraded to a Gamma model, same thing, after two years of constant use usually three days a week, it also showed wear and needed updating. I found an Oehler 35 at a bargain and started using it. I found my readings more consistent, not that the chronys were bad, but sometimes they seemed fast and more varied according to light conditions. The diffusers are larger, thus profiding more room to shoot through, and sometimes with friends and relatives using it, this is important. Bottom line, if you are real serious, get the Oehler, if you want to pick your perfect light conditions, and only use occasionaly, get the chrony. Good shooting.

Chrony Beta Master, for all the reasons given by the other guys.

Chrony Master. When you shoot it, it is about as expensive to replace as the Oehler skyscreens.

The Oehler is probably better, more reliable, but it is cumbersome. I can whip out the camera tripod, set up the chrony, and go in three minutes. FWIW, Dutch.

My advise is to get the cheaper Crony......you won't feel so bad when you shoot it!

More than likely, most of the posters here who reccomend the Chrony, have never had any other kind. I highly advise to spend just a few more bucks and get a Pro Chrono Digital. They are much more consistent on the readings, and less sensitive to lighting condiitions. I think given the current price of Chronys, you're only talking about $20. They set up easily, and the sky screens are durable. I also like the large shot strings the Pro Chrono offers. I have owned 2 Chronies in the past, and they just don't cut it for serious load development, at least IMHO.

bowhuntr

A simple fact of life is that anything that goes down range sooner or later gets shot. With the Oehler, only the screens are out front and it is a much smaller target than a whole Chrony. I have nicked the screens on my Oehler numerous times and, as long as you find most of the pieces, you just glue it all back together. No downtime. As long as you havn't hit the sensor (the size of a thumbnail) it will work. Three chronys plus shipping and travelling to and from cancelled range sessions = one Oehler. Not to mention time wasted when it may not be available before a hunt or competition.

I leave my skyscreens assembled on a tripod and it is perhaps a minute slower to set up than a Chrony. Just pull the tripod legs out, square it up to the barrel of the rifle, plug it in and go.

I have set up two Oehlers in tandem for checking of loads in competitions where a chronograph of record as well as a backup chronograph is required. The maximum difference I have ever seen between the two is 4 fps.

Once we tried the same with two Chronys and got differences of more than 150 fps. The system was protested by the competitors and two other Chronys were set up. Same problem. Eventually we drove 80km to fetch an Oehler to set up with mine so that we could run a valid match.

I have no use for an instrument that does not work as it should.

Check out this thread

[ 02-01-2003, 18:41: Message edited by: Gerard Schultz ]

I like me PACT, but I got it because I wanted the PC2/Mark IV combo. It is no less or more accurate than a Chrony, but I can replace sky screens for $5 if I shoot too low. Shoot a Chrony too low, and it will cost you 10X as much.

H. C.

I think it may depend on how much you plan to use it. If you do as much load development as Steve for instance, than you may look past the chrony, but for my purposes the Chrony does a great job.

Oehler. I've had both too...

Oehler, cause you get your money's worth. It's accurate and dependable. It's got the third skyscreen...the proof channel...so you can trust it. Part of the accurate readings is due to the wider screen spacing than with the all-in-one models. I've got mine on a 4' piece of electrical conduit, but you could go out to 8 or even 10 feet screen spacing if you intend to shoot really small, extremely fast bullets. .22 caliber 50 gr bullets at 3900 from my 22-250 get clocked just fine, usually. Noslers are so highly polished that sometimes they have to be blackened so they won't glint the detectors. But only in very bright conditions with sun nearly overhead.

In the ~10 years I've been using my Model 35\43PBL I've only ever nicked one of the diffuser supports when shooting a hot 44 mag load in windy conditions. It didn't hurt anything, just roughed up the plastic a bit.

Give Oehler a call. Their catalog is mailed free. Be an informed consumer. Good shooting.

Boy, one of these days I'm going to make a copy of this post so I don't have to re-type it!

CED Millenium. Talk to Jim Ristow at

http://www.shootingsoftware.com/chronographs.htm

Also check out his bench tips. Very cool and interesting. I love my CED. Also, Dillon Precision sells them and that's a good sign to me because they replace equipment pretty readily for customers who have problems.

Do a search for this and you'll find previous posts about it...

Roger

Roger,

Thanks for that link. And the "Bench Tips" recommendation.

In the link entitled "The Lastest on Moly," the author takes a swipe at Harold Vaughn's "Rifle Accuracy Facts," though he doesn't name the book directly. It appears that Vaughn refuted what the engineers at Norma had to say on the subject of moly coated bullets, and he is taking his blows for doing so.

This is the third instance in which I've found Vaughn's work harshly critiqued.

It had been recommended that I read "Rifle Accuracy Facts" by two members at another site I frequent, and as of late, a member at this forum.
However, if Vaughn's reasoning throughout the rest of the book is as flawed as many knowledgeable folks (Norma engineers among them) seem to think his moly reasoning is, perhaps I should save my money...

Thanks again,

Dan

Roger, does that model require that the readout be near the chrono screens? In other words, is it out on the range or on the bench? I think the source of my confusion is the remark about seeing the display downrange at 100 yards.

FWIW, I still like the Oehler with the proof screen although I'm not particularly happy with the cheap mounting hardware...conduit. Some sort of square tube would not add too much more expense and clean up the arrangement. Once set up it's pretty hard to beat though.

Reed

Oehler, the 'brain' and read-out are beside or behind the shooter with only the screeens and sensors in front of the muzzle. And the windows that one shoots through are larger. Always set up with one rest, one target, and a well centered set of screens. Make sure your projectile is centered in the window as opposed to centered with the optics line of sight which could be an inch and a half or more higher than the bore line. In over a decade I haven't shot mine....YET

With the ballistics lab you can get a whole host of information by gaining readings at 100 yards. Obviously one needs both an accurate rifle and confidence...and no coffee that morning. With the Oehler you use a shitpile of cable to put the skyscreens at outer distances and the remainder still lies on the bench. In this case I think a laptop computer is required in combination with their hardware, i.e., not just the printer like the 35P. I'm having a brain cramp on the name of the value obtained but it basically gives you some ability to compute the decay of velocity over a given distance. In addition, they have what's called an acoustical target that is apparently quite accurate. Specs say 0.1 inch but people that have them report that it seems to be even more accurate than that. These are not upgrades to the basic 35P. If you think you may want these capabilities (also a strain guage for pressure) you should start out with the ballistics lab. I bought the 35P...sometime I wish I had sprung for the ballistics lab...quite the toy.

Reed

I have a Oehler 43PBL with the acoustic target and a 35P also. The 43 will give you much more data if you desire and also the ability to store all the information you have on the laptop. It was way out of my price range but I got a deal on it all, it was used for 400 bucks so I couldn't pass it up. The laptop is what killed me! I'd not own one for a long time had I not got the deal I did. Testing pressure is where this unit really shines.

I almost never use my 35P just because I can save and recall my data from the 43 easier and faster. Target coordinants are displayed on the screen and real accurate. A real nice system if you shoot alot. Here's a pic I took of what's displayed on the moniter when testing and a printed sheet from the test of my brothers Rem. 700 338/378Wby and a 300gr SMK to give you an idea of what it does. Too fun not to use.

The CED approach to the downrage issue is that the display is large enough to be read with a scope/spotting scope pretty easily. Because it is attached to fairly long cables, you can put it in a place that is not *likely* to get shot. I'm so darn happy to get readings out in front of the muzzle..one day I'll the time to calculate my own 'real world' BC's by putting the chrono. downrange...

DAN,

Glad you enjoyed the site. I'm not sure that J. Ristow is correct about all the things on his site, but it was very fresh and different. I really like some of his homemade gadgets--some of which are beyond my feeble mechanical/building skills. If nothing else, his writings made me think about what contributes to accuracy. He's a hoot to talk to. If you have free long distance, give him a call sometime. He loves to talk the accuracy game.

Roger

http://www.serveroptions.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=007183#000010

Above is a link (I hope it works ) to a recent inquiry about chronographs.

jpb,

The fact that stuff downrange get shot is why I use Oehler. The chronograph does not go downrange like the Chrony, only the skyscreens - smaller target and easy and cheap to repair when they do get hit.

green 788,

The author of the "Latest on Moly" must have slept through the reading of "Rifle Accuracy Facts" or he did not read it at all. Vaughan only disagrees with the Norma opinion on the reason for a drop in chamber pressure and nothing else. He also explains how he arrived at his conclusion and his method is so logically simple, I cannot believe that anyone who has read it, could question the validity of his testing. If you read Harold Vaughan's credentials, I would trust his findings and reasoning rather than a raft of Norma engineers. The book is not only Harold Vaughan's work alone. He gives credit to a team of 14 degreed scientists, engineers and other experts in their fields who assisted in the research. He received his MS in aerodynamics in 1949, then joined NACA (now NASA) and 2 years later, Sandia National Laboratories till his retirement in 1986. In 1974 he received the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Mechanics and Control of Flight award for "his fundamental contributions to the understanding of the flight mechanics of re-entry vehicles, rockets, bombs and shells, together with his innovations in their aerodynamic design for minimum dispersion in transonic flight." He received the Outstanding Civilian Service Award from the US Dept. of the Army in 1976 for solving a serious ballistics problem with the M422 shell and in 1982 he received the Dept of Energy "Award of Excellence" for significant contributions to the nuclear weapons program for "Ballistic Similitude" of artillery shells. For the author of the article on moly to suggest that Harold Vaughan "slept through high school physics" is presumptuous in the extreme and taints with suspicion the rest of the information on that site. Spend the money.

Xwind,

When determining the BC of a bullet it is required to read bullet speed at two distances to determine the reduction in speed over a known distance. We use two Oehlers - one with screens at 5m from the muzzle and one with screens at 95m from the muzzle. Thats the one where the screens need glueing from time to time.

Dan, I'm with Gerard on this one too, my book is on order to review for myself, I seriously doubt it isn't worth the money...

Gerard,

when you check velocity with your downrange screens, how high above them can you shoot and still get good readings? How high do you normally shoot above them too? My model 43 will compute the distance the two screens are set apart from the MV and second screen velocity as well as the time of flight which is based on two trigger points, one from each rail. No measuring needed, and they say it's more accurate than you can measure anyway.

I have thought of hooking up the 35P to the second set of screens and using the acoustic target immediatly behind this to get the BC from the 43 and also figure it out as you do with the velocity loss measured with the 35P on the same shot. Comparing both would be interesting to see what I find.

I have never hit a screen on my Oehler "yet", but I don't shoot through it unless I know I won't either. At even 300 yards with a good rest I don't see much of a problem if you shoot high first to know where the gun is grouping so you don't make contact with a screen. No flinchers shoot through mine though.

Brent,

Have you had to 'reglue' any strain gages yet on your M43 because they've been on for too long? Also, what length did you make each leg of your accoustic target. Mine is 41" which makes it functional and portable enough.

I haven't had to mess with the gages at all since I glued them on. I haven't covered them with anything either. My dad put scotch tape over his and that's about it. I use the scotch tape to hold down the stripped ground wire and for strain relief on the leads as well, works great and sticks better than electrical tape. Doesn't leave glue on the barrel when removed either. I keep my leads about a foot long and made an extension cord about fifteen feet long to use with it, never a problem.

My leg length is 39", also kept short for portabilty. I haven't had time but I am going to make some at 16" for my 200 yard setup. That's kind of small but it will work if you are real carefull on getting your group center before moving to it.

I'm going to start a topic on the 43, come add to it. I have some pics of things I do that might help you out in the file department. You might have found something better than I have too.

I have a CED and really find it has great features. Lately on a long session at the range I found that it was being triggered by shots up to 6 lanes away. I didn't know what the reason was? On another long session the same problem occurred. I had a hunch that maybe the sensors(skyscreens) get too hot. This proved to be the case. I took it in for 5min or so then put it back out. It was working as normal again. When it gets hot it reads the muzzle blast from up to 6 lanes away but does not read a bullet flying straight above the skyscreens.

Anyone had this happen with their CED's?

I had the unit in the sun for about 3.5 hours. Was sunny but not overly hot. I did have the diffusers on. Checked with Jim Ristow & he has not had this happen to him & he lives in Arizona where it'll get at least as hot as in Oz.

John,

I did hear something about heat affecting them not too long ago, this was "thought" to be the problem at the time. No mention of other lanes triggering the sensors though. That sucks!

Brent,
As long as the shot goes through the triangle, it will read. We still use the old uprights made from spring plate and have long since replaced the white tape with solid white plastic panels. During summer, we put the Oehler up and work, regardless of temperature. When we have lunch, it happily sits there till we finish and keep going. Under wind and dusty conditions, we just keep the sensor lenses clean when sun starts getting overhead. We usually have an air rifle handy that we shoot over the Oehler to verify battery condition and function before starting with development shots. I have never had an adjacent shot give a reading on my chronogrph. Our benches are about two meters apart.

Thought you were using screens downrange, I got ya on the triangle. Sure does simplify thing.