Forum Boss
Administrator
Jerry writes:
Is the 'Chrony' chronograph,$97.00) adequate to determine E.S. in load development? How bout the Chronopal?
I know the Ohler is supposed to be the best but what is really required? I don't really about accuracy. It's the repeatibility I need for e.s.'s. I hear of folks bragging about single digit e.s.'s but wonder if the repeatibility is really that good on even the Ohler? What say ye?
- - -
Al Nyhus replies:
Jerry, I use a Competition Electronics Pro Chrono and am very happy with it. It's taken a lot of hard knocks over the years w/o a glitch. You can usually find them for around $100-110.
- - -
Jeff replies:
I recently bought a CED and have been very happy with it!
- - -
jb1000br
1000yd Editor replies:
Jerry, for real, most available chronographs arent precise enough to mean much. They will give you an idea, but you must realize that the error with 1' spacing is higher than most of the claimed ES values
so it is justa tool.
You need to put rounds on paper at long range to see what it does to vertical spread to get real world ES.
i have the chrony, CED is nice. but unless you get an ohler and spread out the screens,like HBC on benchrest.com) it is more about preferance/price than anything.
I PREFERRED the chrony cause is was cheap and compact
- - -
Al Nyhus replies:
JB has touched on a very important point....most chonographs have a +/- 1% error factor. Chronographs are a tool, but the target tells the final tale. Good shootin'.
- - -
RCole replies:
Jerry,
I have had a Pact in the past and it was very good. I now use a Ohler with proof screens and it seems to work well.Along with the advice that has already been given, I would like to add two other points. For comparisons, the same machine and setup would have to be used. Think about it, placement of the screens and their spacing has a great deal to do with the results. There could also be minute differances in the units or the screens themselves.
Lastly, and the most inportant, be honest with the tool. It is so easy to shoot 3 and see that the results are going to be "something to brag about" and simply stop right there. Sure this makes your confidence soar and a big smile will cross your face. But will this help you win matches. I do not know. I would advise a regime of 15 shot strings and let the chips fall where they may. This gives you a real world results to test your ammo and gun.All of my testing is done with 15 or 20 shot strings with a second backup string to confirm the results, do not want any "flukes" either.
I will add before closing, I have never shot single digit ES for a 15 shot string, but I have recorded SD of 3 and 5 on a fairly regular basis. My goal for a ES for a 15 -20 shot string is less than 20, and it must be able to duplicate the results.
- - -
bcott replies:
I purchased an Oehler 35P when they first came out several years ago. Prior to that I had an Oehler 33. I use the 4 foot bar and am confident that I get the "repeatability", or accuracy that is necessary to get correct results. If I need more accurate results, then I would go to the 8 foot bar. The longer screen spacing DOES lead to more accurate chronograph readings. I have had zero problems with my Oehler 35P. Remember, quality and price are usually parallel items.
bcott
Is the 'Chrony' chronograph,$97.00) adequate to determine E.S. in load development? How bout the Chronopal?
I know the Ohler is supposed to be the best but what is really required? I don't really about accuracy. It's the repeatibility I need for e.s.'s. I hear of folks bragging about single digit e.s.'s but wonder if the repeatibility is really that good on even the Ohler? What say ye?
- - -
Al Nyhus replies:
Jerry, I use a Competition Electronics Pro Chrono and am very happy with it. It's taken a lot of hard knocks over the years w/o a glitch. You can usually find them for around $100-110.
- - -
Jeff replies:
I recently bought a CED and have been very happy with it!
- - -
jb1000br
1000yd Editor replies:
Jerry, for real, most available chronographs arent precise enough to mean much. They will give you an idea, but you must realize that the error with 1' spacing is higher than most of the claimed ES values
so it is justa tool.You need to put rounds on paper at long range to see what it does to vertical spread to get real world ES.
i have the chrony, CED is nice. but unless you get an ohler and spread out the screens,like HBC on benchrest.com) it is more about preferance/price than anything.
I PREFERRED the chrony cause is was cheap and compact
- - -
Al Nyhus replies:
JB has touched on a very important point....most chonographs have a +/- 1% error factor. Chronographs are a tool, but the target tells the final tale. Good shootin'.
- - -
RCole replies:
Jerry,
I have had a Pact in the past and it was very good. I now use a Ohler with proof screens and it seems to work well.Along with the advice that has already been given, I would like to add two other points. For comparisons, the same machine and setup would have to be used. Think about it, placement of the screens and their spacing has a great deal to do with the results. There could also be minute differances in the units or the screens themselves.
Lastly, and the most inportant, be honest with the tool. It is so easy to shoot 3 and see that the results are going to be "something to brag about" and simply stop right there. Sure this makes your confidence soar and a big smile will cross your face. But will this help you win matches. I do not know. I would advise a regime of 15 shot strings and let the chips fall where they may. This gives you a real world results to test your ammo and gun.All of my testing is done with 15 or 20 shot strings with a second backup string to confirm the results, do not want any "flukes" either.
I will add before closing, I have never shot single digit ES for a 15 shot string, but I have recorded SD of 3 and 5 on a fairly regular basis. My goal for a ES for a 15 -20 shot string is less than 20, and it must be able to duplicate the results.
- - -
bcott replies:
I purchased an Oehler 35P when they first came out several years ago. Prior to that I had an Oehler 33. I use the 4 foot bar and am confident that I get the "repeatability", or accuracy that is necessary to get correct results. If I need more accurate results, then I would go to the 8 foot bar. The longer screen spacing DOES lead to more accurate chronograph readings. I have had zero problems with my Oehler 35P. Remember, quality and price are usually parallel items.
bcott
