Discussion in 'Gear Talk: What to Buy? and Gear Evaluations' started by jb1000br, Dec 8, 2005.
Ain't it surprising how times change?....Ole
ITs true they made the new run. I bought mine when they did. They may still have some avaialbe. They are still great at customer service as I called and talked with them yesterday about a supplemental light system for use in early morning or late afternoon when my 35P seems to be most cranky.
I gave my Oehler 33 away years ago. What a mistake. I replaced it with a less expensive model (made in Canada) that worked about 80% of the time the other readings were errors. I bought a new Chronograph (made in Japan) with all the bells and whistles in 2010. It worked without fail but the velocities always seemed low. A friend, John708 bought the same chronograph. I rebarreled a rifle for him and he said it shot great just did not acheive the desired velocity. He shot it in a 1000 yard match and used the come ups he calculated using the newer chronographs displayed velocities. He shot over the 1000 yard target. He went back to his normal come ups and was right on target. He came over and we set up my identical chronograph, his identical chronograph, and my old chronograph. We tested 10 shots with an average ES 0f 5 fps. The old inexpensive chronograph read velocities that matched his 1000 yard come ups (2900-2905 fps). My newer chronograph displayed readings 100-132 fps slower than the old inexpensive chronograph. John's identical chronograph displayed velocities 50-65 fps slower than the old inexpensive chronograph. I also ran the same test using my infrared screens and got the same differentials. I have contacted the newer chronograph manufacture. They have been very interested and willing to work with me identifing the problem even with the warranty expired. He had me measure the distance between the sensors and they were .250" short of what was desired. I have ordered a Oehler 35P and it should be here next week. I will repeat my test including the Oehler 35P. It was ironic I spoke with Dr. Oehler at the shot show before he came out with the Oehler 35P and he recomended the chronograph I purchased. The person I spoke at at my newer chronograph company indicated their product was tested by and independent laboratory and was within .3% (tenths of 1%) of the Oehler 35P. He also said the older inexpensive chronograph tested 5-7% faster than either his product and the Oehler. I wish there was a way to use a tuning fork or something to test my chronograph to insure its accuracy. It all seems like vodoo science with no absolutes.
I worked for 26 years in the Air Force. Our work on aircraft is based on precision, so tools get calibrated routinely. We would never use an accuracy-based tool, torque wrench, micrometer, scale, multimeter, etc... without verifying its accuracy using lab standards before use.
I, personnally, would like to see a service offered to check a chronograph against a known standard.
What are your thoughts on this?
Phil aka tazzman
That is exactly what I was meaning in the last sentence of my previous post.
I believe an acoustic chronograph, or acoustic sensor mod, could suit for calibrated measurements of the supersonic.
The sensors/timer could be locally adjusted to MACH, provided you had a cal verified Kestrel.
But any market in it would near instantly be divided among all those COPYING whatever is easy(already developed) & selling.
It would be divvied up in red, blue, green, and/or pretty milled anodizing, to every shooter who would sell their soul to save a nickel..
So the guy that expends resources to develop it, would not get a return on it.
You know, we ARE paying a bigger price for this..
What are the potential pitfalls of using a good brand of 22lr ammo, marketed to perform at a velocity printed on the packaging, in a 'reasonably' high-quality rimfire rifle (my Anschutz would be my first choice) to 'characterize' a chronograph like my Oehler 35P? Or any other brand?
I make a distinction between characterization (getting an idea of what kind of results a given system can report, based on some established and known value, in this case the 22lr ammo) and calibration (using a verified speed-generating test object to set some kind of baseline into the system to report back the known speed value).
Yes I accept there's a difference between 1,050 fps and the 2,700 - 3,100 fps I expect out of my high power rifles, but if I do this kind of thing and the chrono reports 1,060 fps & 2,975 fps I have more to go by than just the latter figure alone, by itself?
I made a little device to check the CED M2. It's not traceable to any national standard, but I'm satisfied. It plugs into the rear where the screens would go and each push of the white button scrolls through what is supposed to be 1,000 fps, 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, 6,000 and a little less than 7,000 (the CED max), then repeats. Because of the 4 MHz crystal and the 1 microsecond resolution (because of the software architecture), I can't nail every number exactly. But that doesn't really matter as long as the M2 gives me what I expect.
Pictures are a bit blurry, but you get the idea. The last pic is my "development" board.
itchy, I can't imagine that counting device accuracy would be a common source of errors.
Projectile sensing through screens represents the bulk of problems.
I agree the screens, lighting and bullet sensing are the major contributors of error but I thought to eliminate the main unit as a source would be beneficial. Besides, I like to design and build stuff.
My magneto speed is great ! Have you guys looked into it?
shoot a 22lr thru the screens....not a fast one, a slow one...
buy one brick...shoot a long string to est an average.
now when you go to the range...shoot just one 22 over the screens...should be at ave plus or minus your string.
now go shoot the real gun...
the current 35p's were available because they found a source of printers..it has been a production hiccup as it is very old school.
they will maintain a reserve for repairs to customer units..they will not sell them all
There are some aftermarket office equipment part manufacturers that may have the same part(s) under another name because so many manufacturers use the same or similar sub-assemblies to reduce their production costs, especially rubber parts. One of the larger ones that I remember is "Katun". I'm sure that you can find some more on the net. If not if you know any old office equipment tech's they can probably remember more by looking in the industry magazines. If nothing else I might be able to call some of the old techs. that I worked with years ago, maybe they will remember more than I do. just let me know. Paul
I have emailed Oehler four times about replacement parts without reply. Is this typical of them? it sure is frustrating and I think a first for me regarding a US company.
Based upon my experience with them a few years ago, no it's not characteristic of what I'd expect. Still, things may be different since then (staff leaves, inventory and business focus change) so my experience may not reflect what others get.
You might try calling them next, see if you can speak with someone rather than just leaving a recorded message.
I have a 35P which was in storage for ten years (no temperature control). It worked when I first plugged it in and tested with an air-gun in the backyard. Failed a week later...the printer paper wouldn't advance. Called Oehler, and got a person right away. The issue was explained and I was given the option to either send the unit and have it replaced or just get the printer mechanism and replace it myself. Chose the later and ordered it then and there. Remember, emails sometimes get routed to the spam folder. As others have mentioned, give them a call; you'll get immediate attention.
I was not happy about the $50 charge for a simple mechanism, but understand now after reading that Oehler could not get them easily.
Purchased one this week, received it on Tuesday. Saturday will be it's first official run. Any issues in particular that I should be aware of? I need to do some ladder tests on my 270wsm and my 7x57 Mauser. I've changed over to heavier bullets in both of them. Will be interesting to see what the results are.
Jerry what a coincidence, while at my private range I was using my Calldwell chrono and a guy there had a 35 p he asked if he could do a comparison by placing mine in front of his the resulting differences in data were negligible.
Granted it was only 10 shots fired, but the Calldwell held it's own. Now if I could afford it I would own a Labradar but it's WAY over budget for my casual shooting needs.
When it comes to purchasing reloading equipment I all to often find myself in the middle of a difficult financial quandary of the purchase of an much more expensive want vs a much less expensive want and trying to somehow justify spending the often considerably larger amount of money on a item when I can not be 100% certain the extra cost will equate to an increase in performance equal to the significantly added cost.
Annealing machines cost differences are an example that readily leap to mind.
I still have my 43...the software was sent to me on a 3.5" floppy disk
elaborate to set up...but when it has to be balls on accurate...the setup is worth it.
I believe this thread is about Ohler's, not other items. start a new thread it you need to tell the world.
I have a 35p 30+ years old that printer died yesterday, talked to the boys at Ohler and they said they would tune and replace printer, just send it in. They also replied to my e in two days. Looks like great service to me.
Separate names with a comma.