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
Reloading
Oehler 35P Questions
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: 382030" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>There's nothing to thank me for. I've pointed out the advantages, and you're honest enough to state that you don't understand them or value them. Your mind is yours alone and thank God in this country we can think as we please. I don't pretend, or care, to modify your level of contentment with your single Chrono setup. You get a velocity and you're content with that number without any means of verifying the operational integrity of your unit; and thus the credibility of that velocity. If the velocity's in the ball park and as you expected, you're good to go. You've confirmed a bullet left the bore and travelled over your skyscreens. What more could a guy want? Perhaps most importantly, you're <em>proud</em> to operate an Oehler 35P with that 20' spacing and there's no reason to fix a method that isn't broke. If it's been good for the past 15 years it's clearly good enough for the next 15 years. You don't need any smart alec advice - especially in a public Forum.</p><p></p><p>I'm willing to take the extra 5 minutes and end up with a means of verifying the operational integrity and reliability of my instruments, obtaining a means of data validation with the second, independent chronograph. Because when the credibility of the data has been brought into question by an anomalous delta of the velocity differences, I can qualify or dismiss potentially flawed data, thereby ensuring data sets of verifiably high quality. When I obtain a low ES/SD load, I can be confident that load won't string vertically at long range due to variable MV. This second chrono reduces the blind faith reliance on a number from a single operable unit. </p><p></p><p>But what the hey? It's an Oehler and you obtain velocities that are in the ballpark. Besides, what would a guy like me have to offer you? The world surely looks grand from your throne, gazing across that 20' skyscreen spacing. Hope I didn't hurt your feelings... too much. </p><p></p><p>This post, although in response to your reply, is now for the benefit of other Forum members less set in their ways, that might have the interest in improving the level of quality assurance and quality control of their chronographed velocity data, and employing a relatively straightforward method of obtaining verifiably valid ES/SD of their LRH loads.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 382030, member: 4191"] There's nothing to thank me for. I've pointed out the advantages, and you're honest enough to state that you don't understand them or value them. Your mind is yours alone and thank God in this country we can think as we please. I don't pretend, or care, to modify your level of contentment with your single Chrono setup. You get a velocity and you're content with that number without any means of verifying the operational integrity of your unit; and thus the credibility of that velocity. If the velocity's in the ball park and as you expected, you're good to go. You've confirmed a bullet left the bore and travelled over your skyscreens. What more could a guy want? Perhaps most importantly, you're [I]proud[/I] to operate an Oehler 35P with that 20' spacing and there's no reason to fix a method that isn't broke. If it's been good for the past 15 years it's clearly good enough for the next 15 years. You don't need any smart alec advice - especially in a public Forum. I'm willing to take the extra 5 minutes and end up with a means of verifying the operational integrity and reliability of my instruments, obtaining a means of data validation with the second, independent chronograph. Because when the credibility of the data has been brought into question by an anomalous delta of the velocity differences, I can qualify or dismiss potentially flawed data, thereby ensuring data sets of verifiably high quality. When I obtain a low ES/SD load, I can be confident that load won't string vertically at long range due to variable MV. This second chrono reduces the blind faith reliance on a number from a single operable unit. But what the hey? It's an Oehler and you obtain velocities that are in the ballpark. Besides, what would a guy like me have to offer you? The world surely looks grand from your throne, gazing across that 20' skyscreen spacing. Hope I didn't hurt your feelings... too much. This post, although in response to your reply, is now for the benefit of other Forum members less set in their ways, that might have the interest in improving the level of quality assurance and quality control of their chronographed velocity data, and employing a relatively straightforward method of obtaining verifiably valid ES/SD of their LRH loads. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Oehler 35P Questions
Top