1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

shooting chrony vs. oehler?

Discussion in 'Handloading and Reloading' started by 30 cal slob, Mar 20, 2005.

  1. 30 cal slob

    30 cal slob Well-Known Member

    Sorry if this is a rehash, I'm in the market for a chrony.

    I use pen and paper at the range to log results, which I'll then input into my p.c. for later analysis.

    Don't need the printer or a gazillion shot memory...just the basics.

    Oehler is more expensive than Shooting Chrony...

    Any thoughts would be appreciated.

    Thanks in advance for your thoughts...
  2. LHB1

    LHB1 Well-Known Member

    I can only tell you that I have been extremely pleased with my Oehler 35P chronograph. It has given excellent service for several years. I would definitely buy the Oehler again if the current machine were lost or stolen. Check their website for detail specs of latest version.

    Good shooting and be safe.
  3. steveno

    steveno Well-Known Member

    I have had an Oehler for 20 years without any problems. yes it is more expensive but the best does cost more
  4. HankL

    HankL Well-Known Member

    I bought an Oehler 33 in August of 1985 and it's the only chronograph I own.
    It has never needed service.
  5. Zak Smith

    Zak Smith Moderator Staff Member

    I went through 2 or 3 cheap chronographs before I bought my 35P. It will never leave you wondering if you're getting good data or not, and that is priceless in terms of lost time and effort.

  6. 66gt350

    66gt350 Well-Known Member

    +1 for the Oehler 35P. I bought one last year and love it. I kick myself for not getting one sooner. If you do much shooting indoors, get the light kit. It works great. I had only 2 or 3 that didn't register out of about 400 rounds one afternoon!!!
  7. Peter M. Eick

    Peter M. Eick Well-Known Member

    Oehler 35P for me. Works great in nearly any weather. Reliable, accuarate and I have not shot it yet!

    Get one and don't regret it!
  8. oldfart

    oldfart Well-Known Member

    Gee, I'd hate for you to only get one side of the issue... I bought a Chrony primarily because I could afford it. Aside from the one time I shot a bit low, it has served me quite well, (I had to get another one.)
    This thread has all the markings of a Lee vs Dillon thread, and I use Lee stuff too. First, remember, you will NEVER get an absolutely true velocity from any chronograph. What you will get is something pretty close and, hopefully, something repeatable. Any method you use to measure something you can't hold in your hand has to be an approximation. Sure, you can compare one machine to another and they may check each other, but that only proves they were both calibrated by the same guy, using the same equipment and the same methods. If you compare one make of chronograph to another and get different numbers.... Well, the other guy's chrony must be off.
    As I said, I use a Chrony but I don't depend on it entirely. I use it to develop a load that has repeatable results, then I shoot it over different distances and record the vertical corrections. The actual drop of the bullet is a better measure of the velocity than any chronograph.
  9. Zak Smith

    Zak Smith Moderator Staff Member

    Yes, machines have a margin of error, and a good machine will operate within that published margin of error. But sometimes it doesn't, and you're left with chrono results which don't make sense. And that leaves you in a bad place for load development.

    The nice thing about the 35P is with the two separate channels, you don't need to wonder. If both the channels agree with the margin (it lets you know if they're not), you're basically assured of a good reading.

  10. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    oldfart, i'd be interested to hear what your margin of error is with that technique.

    i.e. since you're not measuring bullet drop in a vacuum, and lots of things can act on that drop, like wind resistance, and all the things that affect that (humidty, elevation, temperature, possible effects from shape of bullet)

    all those things are pretty small, but then, so is +/- 30 fps on a 3000 fps bullet for a chrono.

    i might just try your method next time i'm at the 200 yrd benchrest range.
  11. RugerOldArmy

    RugerOldArmy Well-Known Member

    My $.02...

    I've read reviews of chronies, and in seemingly each case the different brands had remarkably similar consistent results. In most cases the results were a few fps apart. In terms of the chronnies being precise, they all were. Some were a few fps faster consistently, so the actual accuracy is in question unless you have a reference and can calibrate a chronny.

    In short, it seemed all reviewed were giving very similar readings within a few percentage points. The best ones has three screens or were of longer length, yet the cheapest (chronny F1) gave 99% similar results.

    So for reloading, I wouldn't think one brand had much over another. The results are similar and close enough to expected values.

    So price and reliability (or warantee) seem the key considerations. The technology is all the same, or very similar.
  12. BluesBear

    BluesBear member

    If all you want are the basics then the Chrony should do you well.

    No need to buy steak when all you require is bologna.
  13. Lennyjoe

    Lennyjoe Well-Known Member

    Poor man's ham. ;)

    Back on topic. I purchased an F-1 Chrony at Sportsmans Warehouse for $69 and it has served me well. I would like to have a printer but for now pen and paper work fine.

    Buy what you can afford. Like Bluesbear says. ;)
  14. 30 cal slob

    30 cal slob Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the feedback folks! I'll flip a coin. ;)
  15. JNewell

    JNewell Well-Known Member

    If it comes up for Oehler, you'll need to find a few extras to go with it. ;)
  16. 30 cal slob

    30 cal slob Well-Known Member

  17. rbernie

    rbernie Well-Known Member

    Was at the range yesterday with my Chrony Beta. About a dozen lanes down is a guy with his 35P. 'Bout an hour into it the guy with the 35P comes by to see if my Beta is working. He tells me that his 35P is having issues with the very bright sunlight and isn't working reliably for him. Yup, I'm having issues too - my Beta's missed two shots so far out of the 15 five-shot strings I've put over it. I'm using the short arms on the skyscreens to compensate, and it's mostly working but not perfect. Oh, says he - that's not bad. Seems his 35P isn't picking up hardly ANYTHING. During cease-fires, I see him trying to tape carboard boxes on the top of the skyscreens to help with the contrast. Evidently it worked well enough that he finished his testing and went home, but he sure had to work at it for a bit to make things happen...

    Is the moral of this story that the Beta a better product than the 35P? No, not hardly - the 35P is a very nice product indeed. But my Beta worked acceptably well, and continued to work under conditions that had at least this one 35P struggling.

Share This Page