Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics


Reply

Cronograph's ??

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #36  
Old 03-17-2013, 01:26 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Great Falls, MT
Posts: 4,365
Re: Cronograph's ??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trickymissfit View Post
I think the total cost would be well under ten dollars! And zero if you had access to some junk parts in an auto repair shop. I have to dig out one of my physics books to figure the actual velocity, but the rest is kinda easy.
gary
Cool, thanks!
__________________

I voted for my "FREEDOM", "GUNS", and "MONEY" - keep the change - UNK.



"I am always proud of my country!"

"Leadership Rule #2: Don't be an @zzhole." - Maj Gen Burton Field.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-17-2013, 02:17 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 3,344
Re: Cronograph's ??

Quote:
Originally Posted by D.ID View Post
If you where limited to the pistol range (200-) for load development, then you would have no choice but to use a chrono, but if that is the case: you have no business hunting at long range if you can't train at those ranges.
Never said anything about not being able to shoot and develop field measured dope at long range. I'm saying it's not a readily available option for me and others to shoot rocks at 1000 +yards at the variety of elevations and temperatures we plan to hunt.

Of course a person has to shoot at long range. It's part of the load development process for any serious long range hunter. It's nice if a person can shoot and measure long range drops at the same location, under the same environmental conditions, where the trophy game animal presents. As mentioned earlier, it's even nicer if I can set a target up and practice where the animal will be standing sometime after taking the practice shots and taking the target down. For many of us, that's not as convenient as it is for others. I don't often get the opportunity to target practice in the mountains where I hunt in Alaska.

Your methods may work well out to 7-800 yards under the conditions you practice and hunt. But the intrinsic errors of guesstimated MV and BC will become more troublesome at longer yardages and under variable elevations and environmental conditions.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-17-2013, 06:29 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boise IDAHO
Posts: 838
Re: Cronograph's ??

Quote:
Originally Posted by phorwath View Post
Never said anything about not being able to shoot and develop field measured dope at long range. I'm saying it's not a readily available option for me and others to shoot rocks at 1000 +yards at the variety of elevations and temperatures we plan to hunt.

Of course a person has to shoot at long range. It's part of the load development process for any serious long range hunter. It's nice if a person can shoot and measure long range drops at the same location, under the same environmental conditions, where the trophy game animal presents. As mentioned earlier, it's even nicer if I can set a target up and practice where the animal will be standing sometime after taking the practice shots and taking the target down. For many of us, that's not as convenient as it is for others. I don't often get the opportunity to target practice in the mountains where I hunt in Alaska.

Your methods may work well out to 7-800 yards under the conditions you practice and hunt. But the intrinsic errors of guesstimated MV and BC will become more troublesome at longer yardages and under variable elevations and environmental conditions.
I was not saying you had said anything about only shooting close range, I was just saying.
Now for the rest, You are assuming my bc is off......ok I have bean trusting Brian's data on that and have no reason to doubt it or method to research it beyond what he has done, since apparently you do, I would love hear how that is done .
.
And your assuming my velocity is off " intrinsic errors of guesstimated MV" Who said anything about guesstimating?
I am running my data threw the same software everyone else is using and trusting, there is no guess work involved.
I am using gravity tested in reality and filtered threw the same software, your using the read out on the chronograph and filtering it threw the same software. How could you possibly conclude that yours is any more accurate than mine?
In fact mine has already bean proven when I run my solutions threw that same software.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-17-2013, 06:45 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boise IDAHO
Posts: 838
Re: Cronograph's ??

It just occurred to me that perhaps my system was not elaborated on adequately.
I am using ballistic software, I am dependent on pre established bc numbers just like everyone else.
I am not running on just drops and expecting that to work in a variety of conditions. I am just using known conditions and gravity instead of known conditions and a chronograph for my initial base line.
Both limited by and dependent on ballistic software to develop firing salutations for what ever conditions we are in.
The only difference is an led screen or gravity to establish initial base line. NO GEUSS WORK.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-17-2013, 07:07 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 3,344
Re: Cronograph's ??

You're presuming your measured drops based at various yardages run backwards through a ballistics program provides you with a MV as accurate as my measured velocity over triplicate chronographs. This involves at least three immediate sources of potential error.
1) Shooter error at long ranges. You may be dead nutz on or you may not be. Could be a 12:00 or 6:00 wind. At long ranges like 1000 yds, if you're not including coriolis drift for an eastward or westward shot, you could automatically have several inches of error built into your measurement. An error in your drops for these or any other reasons will lead to an errant MV from a ballistics program, even if the BC of your bullet is exactly correct.
2) Your bullet BC out of your rifle may not be the same as it was out of Bryan Litz's rifle. There's a scholarly fellow that occasionally posts on this Forum that does a lot of research for a living, and he's documented significant differences in BC from the same bullet out of different rifles. First name is Michael. Seems he does some work under contract for the military.
3) Error in the ballistic program. No all ballistic programs are built equally. Dunno which one you use. Some don't even incorporate coriolis.

So you can fudge BC and MV with any ballistics program and come up with a match for your measured drops at any single yardage. Doesn't mean the BC and MV are accurate. Just means you tweaked two input variables in a mathematical equation to got the drops you measured. Take faulty (yours may be perfect every time and good for you) MV and BC values and re-apply them with a ballistics program under different environmental conditions, and bad data input will result in bad data output.

I contend measured MV from a decent chronograph, properly operated, with a proof channel to detect bad velocity data, is a more accurate method of determining MV than back calculating MV through a ballistics program based on measured drops. If you want to disagree, that's fine and your option.

On a second topic, there's a good reason Ken Oehler designed the proof channel into his 35P chronograph. He learned early on that every chronograph, even those of his own manufacture, will occasionally record and provide a faulty velocity. The proof channel or a second chronograph run in tandem, allows these faulty data to be identified and discarded. I experienced this problem and learned this lesson myself, as soon as I started running two chronographs in duplicate. Since I use chronographs to identify loads with acceptable low ES and SD during my load development, it's important to me to be able to identify ES and SD accurately. Otherwise I throw out a potentially good load, based on a faulty chronograph velocity, wasting time and money in the process. This is the primary reason I say anyone that makes claims about the quality, accuracy, and precision of their chronograph based solely on the singular velocity data their chronograph records, is operating semi-blind, and possibly, without knowing it. And FEENIX, if you don't accept this premise, or care about it, good for you. It is important to me, the way I use my chronographs. You dismissing the significance doesn't negate the facts. Just means it's not important to you, or for whatever other reason, you could care less.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 03-17-2013, 07:27 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Boise IDAHO
Posts: 838
Re: Cronograph's ??

Once I have my base line established, I shoot all over with positive results. ES is obvious at distance. Groups fired repetitively can eliminate shooter error and needs done anyway to develop a load, test it's consistency and stay in practice.
Agree that not all software is equal and the bc discrepancy exists no matter how you measure your speed.
I am limited to a few long range rifles and about 1300yrds (the limit of my range finder) but my numbers match my scope with my rifle and my set up, using the software I use. My numbers are solid and you can't beat them because they are solid.
You can spend more, put more rounds down range, have more stuff in your range bag but you can't beat the math because it adds up.
A 1/4moa remington is not better than my 1/4moa savage. They are two different means of doing the same thing, but in all likelihood one costs more than the other. Same results and same limitations.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-17-2013, 09:30 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 171
Re: Cronograph's ??

The best inexpensive chronograph for me has been the Pro Chrono Digital which I am still using. Had one of the Chrony masters beta series and I could only get it to work about a third of the time. I was very sore displeased with it. The Pro Chrono Digital worked the first time out of the box. Could get simialr results between the two within 10fps but for every good reading on the Chrony I probablly had 15 good on the Pro Chrono Digital. I used it to set up my 6.5x284 turret and it has been on out to 600yrds. For as my shooting i'm about .75 to .7 moa at 600 so I'm shooting around a 4inch group with the turret out to 600yrds. I also for a test ran the turret to 850 yards and pinged the metal target but not exactually sure how close to center...I was just testing to see if I could hit it with the come ups. So for ar the Pro Chrono Digital I like it alot. Also read the review at Midway USA's web sight. Several reviews with almost all of them being positive. I set mine up about 10 to 15 feet away from the rifle and it seem to work great. Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Where in the US do you live?
West of the Mississippi River - 60.81%
897 Votes
East of the Mississippi River - 36.88%
544 Votes
On the Mississippi River on a houseboat - 2.31%
34 Votes
Total Votes: 1,475
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC