Chronographs...

[Doc Hoy]

This is going read like sacrilege

But I had two Shooting Chronys and I found them too finicky to work with black powder revolvers. I tried every combination of distance from the muzzle, screens/no screens and I simply could not get them to give me good performance reliably. I even sent one of them back for the 38.00 rehab. No change whatever. I don't use wads most of the time but there was still enough stuff coming from the muzzle (apparently even out to fifteen feet) that I could not get a reliable velocity reading ever.

I moved over the the Millenium 2 from CED and I don't regret it. Good credible readings reliably for BP cap and ball and BP cartridge from pistol and rifle.

I have made this statement about a half dozen times and it always generates some negative responses from those who love their Shooting Chrony. Sorry guys....I'm just saying.

One of the nice things about the M2 is that if you happen to shoot the trap, they are cheap to replace. I shot one of mine (grazing impact) and it still works.

I shot the Shooting Chrony and the jar was enough to seal the deal. The wind took it and I hit the support rod for the screen right where it went into the chassis of the chrony. Took quite a good lick.

Had a battery lead break off and had to resolder the thing.

 

[Kimber84]

But I had two Shooting Chronys and I found them too finicky to work with black powder revolvers. I tried every combination of distance from the muzzle, screens/no screens and I simply could not get them to give me good performance reliably. I even sent one of them back for the 38.00 rehab. No change whatever. I don't use wads most of the time but there was still enough stuff coming from the muzzle (apparently even out to fifteen feet) that I could not get a reliable velocity reading ever.

I moved over the the Millenium 2 from CED and I don't regret it. Good credible readings reliably for BP cap and ball and BP cartridge from pistol and rifle.

I have made this statement about a half dozen times and it always generates some negative responses from those who love their Shooting Chrony. Sorry guys....I'm just saying.

One of the nice things about the M2 is that if you happen to shoot the trap, they are cheap to replace. I shot one of mine (grazing impact) and it still works.

I shot the Shooting Chrony and the jar was enough to seal the deal. The wind took it and I hit the support rod for the screen right where it went into the chassis of the chrony. Took quite a good lick.

Had a battery lead break off and had to resolder the thing.

I can believe that BP might give it some trouble. Only thing I've ever had issues getting a reading on was a .22 LR... Go figure, but I was just messing around testing it.

I did blow the screens clean off one day from the muzzle blast of my 06'... I think I was slowly jarring them loose. When they finally went I thought I blew it to pieces, but that's all it was.

I've found that even if I don't use the screens I will place one rod in on each side, I then run the zoom down on my scope to bare min. This allows me to line the horizontal of the reticle up with the brass ends on the rod. Doing this allows me to visually see that I've fully cleared the flight path of the bullet. I've never had a misread doing this.

 

[Doc Hoy]

Kimber

As crazy as it seems, the best performance I had from either of the F1s was with a .177 air rifle. RWS Dianna. Got 500 to 600 fps readings consistently.

It tells me that the F1 has a sensitivity which exceeds that of the CED M2.

My thought is that it would be easy for the designer to make the sensitivity adjustable. This might be a good user feature.

In addition, perhaps a light screen over the optics would reduce the effect of the BP stuff.

Something like a section of nylon stocking or something stretched over the optics.

I realize that this idea is purely academic since nearly everyone else (besides me) who has used the Shooting Chrony, likes it.

 

[Jim Watson]

I now have the CE Pro Digital with remote control.
I have shot over three different model Oehlers, a couple of PACTs, a Chrony, and a CED.
The CE has the largest "window" of any and better detection than any but the latest Oehler. It does have the risks of a "brain" downrange, but you just have to be careful. I grazed a diffuser but did not break it.

I still have the CED and think it can be cleaned up to work after the fire.
It has a lot of bells and whistles but I had to get the IR illuminators for it to get decent detection. A more expensive package than any but Oehler.

The Magnetospeed is interesting. It straps to the barrel of the gun and looks kind of like a bayonet. Not affected by lighting and not requiring you to walk in front of the firing line, which busy ranges object to. Can't use it on an autopistol, though.

 

[hdbiker]

I've had my Beta Shooting Chrony for about 12 years and used it a lot. It has always given me trouble on bright days when the sun is high. Either a error message or no reading at all. I'm almost glad I nicked the sun screen support with a shot from my .243 and now its dead. I'm shoping for a differant modle now and it won't be a Shooting Chrony. hdbiker

 

[jimbob86]

Shooting Chrony ..... works well for me.

 

[Unclenick]

I'll echo favoring the CED, though I would buy it from RSI because I've had good luck with them and they keep the download interface software current on their site. I have both the original CED Millennium and the Oehler 35P. They always agree with each other nearly perfectly. Bryan Litz reported finding the same agreement between these two brands in his book, Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting, only I believe he has the newer CED M2. My dad's Chrony: not so much agreement. Almost 200 fps difference with .308 rounds one afternoon when we were set up side by side, and it's reading could be "tuned" by how you tilted it to change the incident light angle. It's an old model, but that experience did not inspire my confidence in the brand. Also, their web site suggests the accuracy equals the resolution of the instrument based on clock speed. That's almost never what limits accuracy in an optical chronograph; sensor matching is much more critical. Reading their statement didn't inspire my confidence in their technical acumen.

I've looked at the Magnetospeed. I think the newer version has a large enough "bayonet" that you can get the sensors far enough forward that you don't miss out on velocity gained from muzzle blast. It still has the disadvantages that you can't mount it on a pistol slide and that it will detune a rifle barrel, so you won't be shooting velocity and accuracy test loads simultaneously with it. But if you need velocity and shoot where it's impossible to set up out in front of the firing point, or you want a system that can't be hit by a bullet by mistake and don't need to measure pistol velocities, it's something to consider.

 

[precision_shooter]

From everthing I've read on here and reviews around the web, looks like the CED M2 is what I will be getting. Midway has them in stock for $199.99. It looks like it will do everything I need it to do, has a decent user-friendly interface and a large remote display.

Thanks for all of your thoughts and input, it is much appreciated!

 

[Unclenick]

P&H will probably be cheaper elsewhere, but if you have one of their fairly regularly issued coupons and add some trivial item to break $200, then you'll do better that way.

 

[totaldla]

Chrony Info - good for a laugh at least.

All of the chronographs are more than accurate enough. The major difference is the "missed shot" sensitivity and the cost of replacing something you put a bullet through.

 

[Crashbox]

One word: Oehler.

 

[hodaka]

I bought my Oehler about 20 years ago for $200. I see that now they go for something closer to $600. It is a good unit but I would look elsewhere these days. They are nice, but I end up only using it after working something up for accuracy, just to see how fast they go to work up the ballistics.

 

[Nick_C_S]

I got the Beta Master (not to be confused with the MasterBeta lol) this past summer.

I don't have anything to compare it against, but it seems to do a great job.

 

[Unclenick]

All of the chronographs are more than accurate enough.

Tell that to my dad. Getting about 2700 fps readings on his Chrony when the Oehler and its check screen both said about 2500 fps (much closer to the load data's numbers). I actually don't mind the absolute value being off if it is consistent, because I'm mainly concerned with identifying ignition issues by the percent standard deviation I get. But dad's unit could be "tuned" almost 150 fps by angling it on the tripod to change the incident light angle, so it's consistency seemed suspect to me.

It really is a fundamental problem with all chronographs that a simple means of checking calibration isn't readily available. All I can advise at this time is finding someone else with one and lining them up and seeing if they agree within a few feet per second. If the do, then the chances are both have good absolute accuracy. If they don't, at least you have a sense of the size of the errors you are dealing with. At that point I would see if I could find a third one to check it against.