Chrono's don't agree... At all
- Thread starter MACTEN
- Start date
The way I target shoot is I go to the range and shoot using the hammer spring to find where particular pellets like to hit. Then i go back and tune the reg and spring to get more shots at that velocity with the chrono. I was wondering why some of my rifles like to shoot hotter than is typical for lighter pellets.. I think I know why now. Others may like to tune differently than me and that's just great. I started the thread not to get advice about how others use their chronos but instead to just tell people how many fps off these two chrono's are. Looks like these two chronographs don't agree with ES either.
Upvote 0
Do you use the bluetooth function? I had to reset everything to get that to work on this one but at least it works. If only Caldwell would update their app I could still use it on an Iphone.
Upvote 0
I can compare the FX vs. ProChrono from today same gun, minutes apart. FX 17 shots, ES 25, SD 8.5. ProChrono 36 shots ES 13, SD 3.
I figure I’m gonna go with the more stable, because that’s logical to me …
I use the Bluetooth always on mine.
Upvote 0
That almost seems like the difference I'm getting between these two with the pro chrono giving closer spreads.. When the female voince stated announcing the FPS I jumped a little as I wasn't expecting it. lol
Upvote 0
I figure, if it’s going to perform poorly, it would be a looser rather than tighter spread, that’s my theory, delusional though it may be.
Upvote 0
Like you. I actually think that's more logical than the other way around. Seems it would be harder for a machine to make a mistake that's more precise every time than sloppy. Unless is spitting the exact same number out over and over. That's suspicious too.. ja
Upvote 0
I was thinking the same. While I'm sure there COULD be some scenario where a poorly performing device spits out close values , it seems more intuitive that an inaccurate device will spit out values with more spread.
So along those lines, I trust my ProChrono the most because it is highly consistent. It either puts out good values, or (rarely) completely drops the shot. The FX Radar is nowhere near as trustworthy. That one has a lot of variation. Understandable due to all the factors in getting a radar reading in a small pocket size device like that.
I'm personally waiting for the FX Outdoors Radar unit that looks like a game changer.
Upvote 0
Yes I always use the bluetooth I like to hear what the FPS instead of looking. Maybe try using another phone
Upvote 0
Lot of Caldwell guys with apple not happy. Mostly the app dont work or kinga works on there old device but not the other .. so cadwell has suffered using apple stuff..
Personally cadwells just was not a front runner ..lol like i said i chose a 30$ china over a on sale 64$ amazon cadwell from the software issues i read about.. the base cut and dry stuff the china gives is all i need overall anyway..
The procrno line looked better but never found a good sale at the time and prefered over cadwells. Did not see as much crying on there's..
Personally cadwells just was not a front runner ..lol like i said i chose a 30$ china over a on sale 64$ amazon cadwell from the software issues i read about.. the base cut and dry stuff the china gives is all i need overall anyway..
The procrno line looked better but never found a good sale at the time and prefered over cadwells. Did not see as much crying on there's..
Upvote 0
This thread made me curious and I took a look at the manual and box for my Caldwell.
It says accurate to.25% plus or minus. I reckon that means as much as .25% above, below, or anywhere in between. That would mean that at its worst the reading could be off 1.5-fps at 600-fps. At 1000-fps it would/should be within 2.5-fps above/below a true reading. Is that arithmatic correct? .25% translates to a quarter of a hundredth. That's good enough for me. but... Seems to me that there should be a constant to use to verify this with.
I did locate the sonic "two box chrono" that's supposed to be accurate to 1-fps, but it's a bit more than I want to deal with.
www.gunsamerica.com
J~
It says accurate to.25% plus or minus. I reckon that means as much as .25% above, below, or anywhere in between. That would mean that at its worst the reading could be off 1.5-fps at 600-fps. At 1000-fps it would/should be within 2.5-fps above/below a true reading. Is that arithmatic correct? .25% translates to a quarter of a hundredth. That's good enough for me. but... Seems to me that there should be a constant to use to verify this with.
I did locate the sonic "two box chrono" that's supposed to be accurate to 1-fps, but it's a bit more than I want to deal with.
The Most Accurate Chronograph in the World? The Two-Box Chrono from Autotrickler (Full Review)
Unlike any other product on the market, this chronograph uses acoustic rather than optical sensors, which drastically cuts repeatability error.
www.gunsamerica.com J~
Upvote 0
I remember reading about that a few years back. It works off of a supersonic sound wave only and not sub sonic. Cool idea though.This thread made me curious and I took a look at the manual and box for my Caldwell.
It says accurate to.25% plus or minus. I reckon that means as much as .25% above, below, or anywhere in between. That would mean that at its worst the reading could be off 1.5-fps at 600-fps. At 1000-fps it would/should be within 2.5-fps above/below a true reading. Is that arithmatic correct? .25% translates to a quarter of a hundredth. That's good enough for me. but... Seems to me that there should be a constant to use to verify this with.
I did locate the sonic "two box chrono" that's supposed to be accurate to 1-fps, but it's a bit more than I want to deal with.
The Most Accurate Chronograph in the World? The Two-Box Chrono from Autotrickler (Full Review)
Unlike any other product on the market, this chronograph uses acoustic rather than optical sensors, which drastically cuts repeatability error.
J~
View attachment 342984
Upvote 0
For me, the most beneficial aspect of the ProChrono DLX bluetooth feature is that it enables the user to transfer shot-string data to a tablet, computer, or phone. From there it can be stored on whatever sort of storage device you deem necessary. That way the data can be stored on for later use or comparison.Yes I always use the bluetooth I like to hear what the FPS instead of looking. Maybe try using another phone
Upvote 0
I haven't had a chance to go through the features yet really. Other than the attractive voice letting me know that my shots are all winners.
Upvote 0
@MACTEN When you get a chance, look at the menu on the bottom of the screen (a row of five icons). Don’t click the arrow that looks like an email reply icon. That will cause a prompt to pop up asking if you want to delete your last shot. From three of the other icons your shot-string data can compiled into a bar-graph or chart, a brief summary, or a more detailed summary. The more detailed summary choices can be seen from the “export shot list” menu. This is what I was referring to as being the most useful Bluetooth function for me.
Upvote 0
I looked through it and it confused me LOL.. I'll read the manual and see if I can get some basics.. Sure a lot more to it than the Caldwell..
Upvote 0
I have compared my Pro Chrono DLX readings with an Air Chrony MK and they have been very close, within a couple fps.
Upvote 0
One thing I just noticed when doing strings this morning, duplicates only record on the machine itself not on the iphone app. I wonder if there is a way to get that working?
Upvote 0
If you had a android phone and its app to do a comparison on if ones better or more featured. Maybe it show on it but not that .(??)
Apple not as open as android so developers develop it more freely. I figured thats why apples apps like cadwells stuff not so great to start .. beg and pay apple for use to program its code.. ..lol
Upvote 0