Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
New Oehler 35P, New skyscreen rail, First Test Data
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 1173441" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>Regarding skyscreen alignment:</p><p>I rarely ever set up my chronograph at a shooting range. In fact I rarely shoot at a shooting range. I simply do not enjoy my time at ranges. I don't shoot for the social aspects of it. I have the ability to locate a shooting location where it's only me, myself, and I, which is just about mandatory for me to enjoy the experience.</p><p></p><p>This allows me to set the skyscreen rail further downrange from my muzzle. Where I currently shoot, the middle of my skyscreen rail is set 40 feet from my muzzle. All I do to align my skyscreen rail parallel to the bullet path is look thru my scopes at their lowest power setting and align the skyscreen rail by eyeballing it through the scope. It takes a few trips back and forth from the rifle to the skyscreen rail until I'm satisfied. The farther the skyscreens are set off the muzzle, the easier it is to get them aligned parallel with the bullet's flight path. </p><p></p><p>The other advantage of setting the skyscreens farther down range is that I can shoot into four separate targets taped to my cardboard backing at 300yds, and never have to re-adjust either the rifle position, or the position of the sky screen rail.</p><p></p><p>This makes the setup more accurate (alignment-wise), and more versatile by being able to shoot differing loads into multiple differing targets while never having to re-position anything.</p><p></p><p>One more thing about the Pact PC2. In my experience, it's more important to have the skyscreen covers installed over the Pact skyscreens than with either of my Oehlers. Last week while recording bullet velocities in the evening, I received no recorded velocity from the Pact for the first two shots fired. I then installed the skyscreen covers and obtain good recorded velocity data for the rest of that shooting event. </p><p></p><p>I should add that I've upgraded the Skycreens on my old Oehler 33 from the Skyscreen II version to the Skyscreen III version, the same skyscreens that Oehler currently provides with their Model 35P. I talked with Ken Oehler and his wife at the 2009 Shot Show and asked him if there were any options available to improve/update the original Model 33 performance. He asked me to describe which skyscreens I was using, and then told me that their new skyscreens were improved and recommended replacing the Skyscreen IIs with the current Skyscreen IIIs. Which I did. This is another reason I'm convinced that the Skyscreens are the primary reason that both of my Oehler chronographs operate in lower light conditions than the Pact. There was further discussion with Ken Oehler on skyscreens than I've provided in my posts. I came to understand that skyscreen performance was key to good/consistent/repeatable chronograph performance. A computer is a computer, and they're all fast enough to provide accurate timing calculations. The key to reliable chronograph performance is the sensitivity of the skyscreens and their ability to signal the computer accurately, precisely, consistently, time and time again in a variety of lighting conditions.</p><p></p><p>I've never tried operating my Pact PC2 using the Oehler skyscreens. If the male prongs on the Oehler Skyscreen IIIs are the same size as the prongs on the Pact, I think they would work just fine. This would probably improve the performance of my Pact PC2 in low level light. I'll have to try that the next time I shoot and see what kind of data is recorded. lightbulb</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 1173441, member: 4191"] Regarding skyscreen alignment: I rarely ever set up my chronograph at a shooting range. In fact I rarely shoot at a shooting range. I simply do not enjoy my time at ranges. I don't shoot for the social aspects of it. I have the ability to locate a shooting location where it's only me, myself, and I, which is just about mandatory for me to enjoy the experience. This allows me to set the skyscreen rail further downrange from my muzzle. Where I currently shoot, the middle of my skyscreen rail is set 40 feet from my muzzle. All I do to align my skyscreen rail parallel to the bullet path is look thru my scopes at their lowest power setting and align the skyscreen rail by eyeballing it through the scope. It takes a few trips back and forth from the rifle to the skyscreen rail until I'm satisfied. The farther the skyscreens are set off the muzzle, the easier it is to get them aligned parallel with the bullet's flight path. The other advantage of setting the skyscreens farther down range is that I can shoot into four separate targets taped to my cardboard backing at 300yds, and never have to re-adjust either the rifle position, or the position of the sky screen rail. This makes the setup more accurate (alignment-wise), and more versatile by being able to shoot differing loads into multiple differing targets while never having to re-position anything. One more thing about the Pact PC2. In my experience, it's more important to have the skyscreen covers installed over the Pact skyscreens than with either of my Oehlers. Last week while recording bullet velocities in the evening, I received no recorded velocity from the Pact for the first two shots fired. I then installed the skyscreen covers and obtain good recorded velocity data for the rest of that shooting event. I should add that I've upgraded the Skycreens on my old Oehler 33 from the Skyscreen II version to the Skyscreen III version, the same skyscreens that Oehler currently provides with their Model 35P. I talked with Ken Oehler and his wife at the 2009 Shot Show and asked him if there were any options available to improve/update the original Model 33 performance. He asked me to describe which skyscreens I was using, and then told me that their new skyscreens were improved and recommended replacing the Skyscreen IIs with the current Skyscreen IIIs. Which I did. This is another reason I'm convinced that the Skyscreens are the primary reason that both of my Oehler chronographs operate in lower light conditions than the Pact. There was further discussion with Ken Oehler on skyscreens than I've provided in my posts. I came to understand that skyscreen performance was key to good/consistent/repeatable chronograph performance. A computer is a computer, and they're all fast enough to provide accurate timing calculations. The key to reliable chronograph performance is the sensitivity of the skyscreens and their ability to signal the computer accurately, precisely, consistently, time and time again in a variety of lighting conditions. I've never tried operating my Pact PC2 using the Oehler skyscreens. If the male prongs on the Oehler Skyscreen IIIs are the same size as the prongs on the Pact, I think they would work just fine. This would probably improve the performance of my Pact PC2 in low level light. I'll have to try that the next time I shoot and see what kind of data is recorded. lightbulb [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
New Oehler 35P, New skyscreen rail, First Test Data
Top