Trickymissfit
Well-Known Member
Gary,
I didn't test the SuperChrono. Bryan Litz tested it against a minimum of two additional chronographs, one being the Oehler 35P. You'll be able to find his report in a Thread posted on this Forum. The SuperChrono was obviously performing very poorly.
FYI, the SuperChrono is a different unit and manufacturer than the LabRadar unit. Bryan Litz also tested the LabRadar against his other equipment. He had some problems receiving velocities for the smaller caliber bullets. But he was generally impressed with the data he obtained with the .308 caliber bullets. That Thread can also be found using the Search tool.
As for my own use, I agree it's best to have more than a single velocity recorded for each bullet fired, in order to be able to identify bad velocity data. So I shoot over a triplicate chronograph setup that provides 4 recorded velocities for each bullet fired. I'm the one with the Oehler 33, Oehler 35P, and PACT PC2 setup, all recording the velocity of each bullet fired over my 6' plus long skyscreen rail. I have no problem identifying the chronograph that pukes out an incorrect bullet velocity.
yes I well remember the tests that you did several years back. Your results were pretty close to what I found. Still in the back of my head I get this nagging complaint about it. Was the Ohler (s) reading correct? Hell I don't know, but think they were pretty close. Good enough for 99% of us. The Pact ran parallel with the Ohler if memory is right, but was five to eight feet per second different. No complaint with any of the readings here.
I must applaud your work, as most of us would just whine and cry. I think I told you about building a new mount for the Ohler, and the operating window seriously tightened up (say +/- 8fps to about three or four fps). Definitely made the Ohler better! This is the one thing for sure that I like about the LabRadar. An excellent mount. The only thing close to these that I've seen is the Kurzzel (spelled something like that anyway) at about $800.
Now to figure out a constant to measure accuracy from, plus still being fast enough to get a reading. 200 fps is about as low of a reading as I've ever seen, but will it go lower?
gary