Chronograph’s - cheap vs expensive

[Justin_Tree]

I used my buddies garmin zero the other weekend while doing some load development and got lower ES’s than I have ever seen with my Caldwell. This makes me think that my chrono isn’t as accurate as I may have given it credit for in the past. It makes sense that a $600 chrono would be more accurate/consistent than a $150 one.

Here’s my question, what advantage's does an expensive chrono such as a garmin xero, lab radar, etc. provide over a cheaper one like the Caldwell that I currently have or has any one shot through a cheap and expensive one to verify the difference?

 

[Dmoua]

You answered your own question. More accurate.

 

[Jason Snyder]

How much lower were your ES values? I have a cheap Caldwell and have always taken the readings with a grain of salt.

 

[mighteywhitehunter]

Well the Garmin can't be shot by your friend who
"Just wants to check his speed"...

 

[Kyle C]

Garmin and labradar are definitely better quality. I don't have experience with Caldwell, but like most things you get what you pay for. I run a labradar personally.

 

[ljalberta]

I went from the MS Sporter to the Garmin.

Noticeable differences are ease of use, no dropped shots, no fiddling around with the bayonet loosening or slipping, easy app integration and hardware interface, and I don’t have to worry about poi shifts.

It’s expensive but the easy button. A cheaper option works if you just need to check velocity now and then. If you want to dweeb out and use it lots, go Garmin.

 

[Justin_Tree]

How much lower were your ES values? I have a cheap Caldwell and have always taken the readings with a grain of salt.

Well I only shot 3- 3 shot groups with 1 grain differences past the xero checking for velocity and pressure. The ES’s were 1, 4, and 30. With the Caldwell I have never shot a 3 shot group and got a single digit ES, I think the lowest I have seen was 15. That is for dozens of 3 shot groups and a lot of different loads. For the loads that I have a lot of data for, the ES really stretches out. I alway took it with a grain of salt as well but when I read that people are getting single digit ES’s, It made me scratch my head and think I am crappy at reloading lol.

 

[Axlrod]

The difference between the optical chronos and the radar, that I have observed, is the radar is very consistent at picking up shots.
As far as ES goes, even though I record what it is, all I care about is what the target looks like. If your load groups to your satisfaction, at the longest range you are comfortable with shooting, then the ES will not matter.
So if you can handle a few missed shots, the cheaper ones will be fine.

 

[N2TRKYS]

You’re just assuming the more expensive one is correct. I use a Caldwell and love it. I’ve compared mine to some LRs at the range side by side and haven’t noticed any difference. Except for the extra money I didn’t spend on my chronograph.

My Caldwell has given me single digit ES.

 

[jfk69]

My ProChrono has also clocked equally well against a Labradar as well as a Garmin. No detectable difference. Being an optical, I will say that setup is more finicky with respect to light, but that’s been it.

 

[35WhelenAI]

My ProChrono has also clocked equally well against a Labradar as well as a Garmin. No detectable difference. Being an optical, I will say that setup is more finicky with respect to light, but that’s been it.

Comparing my ProChrono to Magneto speed, the magneto speed gives about 10 fps higher. That's the difference between 15-20' downrange and at the muzzle.

Garmin and labradar are definitely better quality. I don't have experience with Caldwell, but like most things you get what you pay for. I run a labradar personally.

Better quality by what standard? Get what you pay for? You haven't had experience with the Caldwell. You have paid more, for a chrono that quite possibly isn't any better with respect to the readings being discussed. That is all that could be said at this point until you compare them.

You’re just assuming the more expensive one is correct. I use a Caldwell and love it. I’ve compared mine to some LRs at the range side by side and haven’t noticed any difference. Except for the extra money I didn’t spend on my chronograph.

My Caldwell has given me single digit ES.

Appears you have compared.

I too have seen single digit ES with a Pro Chrono that has been around for 25 years. Think it was $89 when I bought it. A buddy hit one of the screen rods and the force cracked the case. They sent me a new one when I asked them to repair it.

 

[Tahoe1305]

Always doubted my old Caldwell. Seemed the numbers never duplicated in different sessions.

Magnetospeed solved that. Garmin is even better. Spend the $$ otherwise you’ll always wonder.

 

[Kyle C]

Whelen when I say I don't have experience with Caldwell I mean personally I've never used one. I however did not say that I haven't been next to one. I've had guys at the range ask to try mine and they have had better results, and throughly seem to enjoy it more. These rifles are not personally mine so I cannot speak to the performance. My set up time seems much quicker, interface seems better, and the constant bitching I hear from guys next to me at the range will keep me away. Not shooting a bullet through something rather then past it seems better to me as well. I don't have to own Honda civic to know a Ferrari will beat it, but when I see them side by side on the freeway the winner is clear. Just my .

 

[35WhelenAI]

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. No doubt there are set up drawbacks for a Pro Chrono, light has to be right, dropping a shot now and then, etc. Almost to a "T", lighting or battery is the only issue I've had with an optical chrono not registering each shot.

FWIW, the original post was in reference to variation in readings obtained.

My point was with respect to the readings being discussed (ES). I haven't seen a difference that couldn't be chalked up to simple load variation between individual cartridges when using a pro chrono and magneto.

Good discussion.

 

[Justin_Tree]

The difference between the optical chronos and the radar, that I have observed, is the radar is very consistent at picking up shots.
As far as ES goes, even though I record what it is, all I care about is what the target looks like. If your load groups to your satisfaction, at the longest range you are comfortable with shooting, then the ES will not matter.
So if you can handle a few missed shots, the cheaper ones will be fine.

That has been my mind set when using my cheaper one.

 

[Justin_Tree]

My conclusion is that the cheaper ones are good for basic chrono information. Essentially giving you a ball park of what your velocity is for a given load.

If you really want to geek out on ES/SD, use for for ladder testing for load development (if your into that), then your better off forking out $600.

I think I have expected too much out of my Caldwell in the past but it has suited my fine. It is finicky to set up and get consistent readings but I have learned to be patient and set it up right the first time.

Thanks for the input guys.

 

[35WhelenAI]

Shooters, not just casual ones, have been using optical chrony's for decades.

However, point taken, agreed the new Garmin is pretty much the bees knees and certainly no less accurate and much more user friendly.

 

[Jfjfrye]

Garmin is the answer.

I have a magneto for sale if interested