Who doesn't have a chronograph?

[Archie]

Spread sheets and data base. Man, what happened to just pop off a few rounds at a jug of water

Depends on what one wants to achieve. "... pop off a few rounds at a jug of water ..." is fun, but not a great way to develop loads for taking moose or skills to defend one's life, family and home. If the skills and knowledge sought by others are not included in your life, have fun. That is rather forgotten at times.

 

[Pottimus]

I have not bought one, I am just an enthusiast. I am sure I could borrow one, if I thought I needed to.

 

[sequins]

I use mine to calculate ballistic coefficient for my reloads. It also helps me ensure my QC is good, if SD changes between batches I messed up.

Labradar is what I use. I feel it's the best option available.

 

[webrx]

Been shooting 50 years, reloading for 10 didn’t own one until last year. Have plans to chrono some 45 colt loads and some 6.5. CM. Have not used it yet though.

 

[JFrank]

I use mine to calculate ballistic coefficient for my reloads. It also helps me ensure my QC is good, if SD changes between batches I messed up.

Labradar is what I use. I feel it's the best option available.

How exactly does a person calculate or varify ballistic coefficientcy ?

 

[WestKentucky]

No chrono. Been on the short list for a long time but still no.

 

[nofendertom]

No chrono---At this stage of the game I check velocity this way---If it goes through the paper target or makes the steel ring it is fast enough.

 

[Mark_Mark]

No chrono---At this stage of the game I check velocity this way---If it goes through the paper target or makes the steel ring it is fast enough.

before I had a chono, we did the steel test. Had a 1” steel plate from a buddies shop. nothing would go through this steel until we brought out the .50 BMG HE Incendiary AP round. perfect hole, nice flash

 

[Walkalong]

How exactly does a person calculate or varify ballistic coefficientcy ?

Truing your BC at distance. Not important if one is shooting at a known range, just sight in and go, but if you need your ballistic app to give you good data.....

 

[flatsticks]

no chrono here

 

[jmorris]

How exactly does a person calculate or varify ballistic coefficientcy ?

Historically there are several methods to calculate for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_coefficient

This is how Sierra measures them.

https://www.sierrabullets.com/exter...stic-coefficient-is-measured-by-firing-tests/

However, one reason I didn’t have a chronograph for so many years, is because if you know the trajectory at the different distances through actual testing, you don’t really need to verify calculations. No need to get all caught up in G1,2,3,4,5,6,7,…, simply note it was zeroed at x distance and down Y inches at Z distance, repeat.

 

[rainmaker2]

No chrono... Been looking into getting one.

 

[Poper]

When a load works and works well unless you find a magic bullet to improve it just stick with it.

I used too think that way, too. Then I discovered my best load with my .308 had a SD of 44fps! ES was something like 110 or so! On a 300 meter Javalina silhouette, that was the difference between a hit and a miss.
My .270, on the other hand, had a SD of 8 and ES of 12 which explained the 2-3/4" 5 round groups at 500 meters for me.

Without chronographing the .308, I would still be cussing myself for missing so many silhouettes. I have since moved away from the .308 and now use either the .270 or 6.5x55 and soon to be the 6mm Creedmoor.

 

[HowieG]

If you follow published load data to the T. You don’t need a chrono, they already chono-ed for ya

Yep. All you have to do it buy a gun like they used in the test. I am still looking for that universal receiver Lyman likes to use.

 

[redcon1]

I think another use for one is for when you're developing a load for a bullet that isn't listed in any of your manuals. I ran into this quite a bit with 460 Rowland as the data was sparse to begin with and what was provided covered a lot of bullets that were unobtainable back then (in the days of the previous panic). So it was nice to be able to compare my velocities with 230 hardball against published data that used a 230 gr XTP. Was it super useful? I don't know. It was comforting to me though because it was some data in a general dearth of data. It's just a tool for measuring something. Furthermore, I like to measure things because it's something that I can control and the better we measure things, the more accuracy we're capable of obtaining. I have seen some reloaders achieve pretty amazing results by measuring things. I find that my happiness is inversely proportional to my group size so I measure things.

 

[HowieG]

Like other old guys, having a chrono in the early 1970's just wasn't possible. I got my first one in the very early 90's. It's very handy gear if you hand load. I find it interesting that shooters who have big screens in their living rooms and perhaps thousands of dollars of stereo equipment and computers haven't plunked down $130 bucks for a chrono. I guess you really don't have to have one, but you don't have to have that TV either. Or that iphone.

 

[JFrank]

Historically there are several methods to calculate for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_coefficient

This is how Sierra measures them.

https://www.sierrabullets.com/exter...stic-coefficient-is-measured-by-firing-tests/

However, one reason I didn’t have a chronograph for so many years, is because if you know the trajectory at the different distances through actual testing, you don’t really need to verify calculations. No need to get all caught up in G1,2,3,4,5,6,7,…, simply note it was zeroed at x distance and down Y inches at Z distance, repeat.

Well that’s a little much for my pea sized brain to work all that out. I’ve heard people say they had to confirm the BC of a load, I thought HTH do ya do that at a range!!

 

[jmorris]

Like other old guys, having a chrono in the early 1970's just wasn't possible.

The first portable chronograph was the Aberdeen in 1918. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberdeen_chronograph
People were playing with the “trigger” concept of foil sheets being contacts as an impact took place for years after that. Like the hammer impact on this bulb triggering a flash for an open shutter camera.



Popular Science even had an article on building your own back in ‘69.



I think that bullet was moving faster than my Fathers hammer in the first two photos.



The electronics in this example are a bit different than others I have read about, that used 4 sheets of foil, two at either end. Also a further distance apart for greater accuracy.

There was not the market for them back then to interest manufacturers though.

 

[hdwhit]

I didn't for a long time.
I started reloading as a teenager in the 1970's. I didn't get a chronograph until the early 1990's after I had a stable career, was married and had the "first-born" well on his way.
A chronograph is a useful tool, but it is NOT an essential tool. After all if your reloads hit their intended target(s) at the desired range, what do you really care whether the bullet traveled at 2,100 or 2,800 fps?
Does the venison taste different if the kill-shot was made at a particular velocity?

 

[HowieG]

The first portable chronograph was the Aberdeen in 1918. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberdeen_chronograph
People were playing with the “trigger” concept of foil sheets being contacts as an impact took place for years after that. Like the hammer impact on this bulb triggering a flash for an open shutter camera.

View attachment 1053014

Popular Science even had an article on building your own back in ‘69.

View attachment 1053016

I think that bullet was moving faster than my Fathers hammer in the first two photos.

View attachment 1053017 View attachment 1053018

The electronics in this example are a bit different than others I have read about, that used 4 sheets of foil, two at either end. Also a further distance apart for greater accuracy.View attachment 1053019

There was not the market for them back then to interest manufacturers though.

Ahh, the good ole days. I wonder just how accurate the foil method was.

 

[jmorris]

I don’t know, I do know that if you arrange 3 chronographs in such a way that all three are shot through at the same time, you get 3 different readings. So I wonder that about new ones, sometimes. Then again a few feet per second here or there are still in the very low fractions of a percent.

 

[HowieG]

I don’t know, I do know that if you arrange 3 chronographs in such a way that all three are shot through at the same time, you get 3 different readings. So I wonder that about new ones, sometimes. Then again a few feet per second here or there are still in the very low fractions of a percent.

Prochrono is rated at +/- 0.5% or better. I think that is pretty typical. Even the vaunted Labradar has an accuracy tolerance. It's a pity Heath Kit didn't get involved back when.

 

[Richard Jay King]

If one handloads..the first priority is not exceeding SAFE pressures in the cartridge being loaded. Since very few of us have pressure testing apperatus we have just a few things to give us some "indication" of what the pressure is. Primer condition, extraction effort, ejector plunger hole marks on base of case, case head expansion....and velocity. A chronograph gives one the last clue as to pressure. If a load shows a 50 fps gain per grain of powder and then all of a sudden gains 100 fps with the next grain increase...something is amiss...If you are able to achieve similar velocities to those in loading manuals and you have no other high pressure indications you can be fairly certain your load is safe. In every case I have found that loads that show the lowest standard deviation in velocity are also typically the most accurate. A chronograph is not necessary..but it supplies another piece of data that is useful.

 

[Show Me]

Ok who has shot there crony

 

[kcofohio]

Ok who has shot there crony