Wasabi Posted March 31, 2019 Report Share Posted March 31, 2019 I've recently bought a chronograph and have put some shotgun cartridges over it. They were all fibre wad and apart from being a bit slower than expected they seemed to set the chronno off ok. I remember someone on here saying fibre cartridges were hard to chronograph. Why's that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted March 31, 2019 Report Share Posted March 31, 2019 Could I ask which model you bought? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perazzishot Posted March 31, 2019 Report Share Posted March 31, 2019 (edited) It was Jonnytheboy who did a good few, I know when I was out with him on a couple of occasions the fibre wads did not register a speed. Can't remember the make of his Chrono though, he won't be long in seeing this and updating I'm sure! Edited March 31, 2019 by Perazzishot spelling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wasabi Posted March 31, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2019 It's an alpha chronny. Nothing fancy but seems accurate when compared to a friends expensive Oeler (spelling?). It registers fibre wads fine if you back up 5 or so feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perazzishot Posted March 31, 2019 Report Share Posted March 31, 2019 47 minutes ago, Wasabi said: It's an alpha chronny. Nothing fancy but seems accurate when compared to a friends expensive Oeler (spelling?). It registers fibre wads fine if you back up 5 or so feet. he tried different distances, chokes etc to no avail. light/cloud conditions were the only thing that made a difference I seem to remember! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wasabi Posted March 31, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, Perazzishot said: he tried different distances, chokes etc to no avail. light/cloud conditions were the only thing that made a difference I seem to remember! Do you know what male of chronny he was using? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Continental Shooter Posted April 4, 2019 Report Share Posted April 4, 2019 The chrony alpha is good enough if set up correctly and the correct adjustments are made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wasabi Posted April 8, 2019 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 On 04/04/2019 at 13:37, Continental Shooter said: The chrony alpha is good enough if set up correctly and the correct adjustments are made. What adjustments do you make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Continental Shooter Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 3 hours ago, Wasabi said: What adjustments do you make? so, here it goes: this is the result of 3 different chrony and 100s of comparative tests between the chrony and the manometric barrel (even in combination). With due adjustments the results have shown accuracy (95%) and consistency (98%); with less adjustments, the performances lowers a bit, yet to an acceptable level (90% & 85% respectively). In this conditions we can make safe assumptions on the standard variation which will then give us the final results: to any readings you must add 15-20 m/s (49.2 - 65.6 ft/s) We know the chrony works with 2 photocel so, amongst the many factor that can inifluence the reading, ligth is the most influent. We also know that photocels reading is inversely proportional to the light it's exposed to (less light more speed, more light less speed). Therefore, consistent light is paramount for consistent readings the best natural condition is a light but flat cloudy day (so, white thin clouds): light condistions will remain consistent throughout giving you a good base. Distance is also a key factor in the readings: too close and the gases will distort or invalidate the readings ... or (sadly) break an unprotected screen...; too far and you will be reading a non-standard speed as well as invalidating the assumption we will make. Therfore the first photocel must be 2 - 2.5 mt from the muzzle to be able to read the V1 (speed at 1 mt) - and save the screen (first time i tried at 30" and it didn't last much) if we then add the standard variation to the resulting readins we will get the V0 (speed at muzzle) A fixed shotgun mount with minimal play is also important when aligned with the photocels so, essentially: 1 photocell at 2-2.5 mt and test done on a cloudy day + standard variation will give you the most accurate readings. If you want to exagerate (i did) you can built a box/shed around the chrony and provide artificial light ( 2x 12V di 30 Watt will do nicely) and plug the chrony to the main for the most consistent results; it will also add an extra layer of safety for the chrony's screen (whatever you do, protect the screen! it is a ****** breaking it at the beginning of a day testing with 10s of shells to try LOL) hope it helps. if you want 90% accuracy you should build a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wasabi Posted April 9, 2019 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 Thanks Continental Shooter! Think I'll be getting back out with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokersmith Posted April 9, 2019 Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 12 hours ago, Continental Shooter said: so, here it goes: this is the result of 3 different chrony and 100s of comparative tests between the chrony and the manometric barrel (even in combination). With due adjustments the results have shown accuracy (95%) and consistency (98%); with less adjustments, the performances lowers a bit, yet to an acceptable level (90% & 85% respectively). In this conditions we can make safe assumptions on the standard variation which will then give us the final results: to any readings you must add 15-20 m/s (49.2 - 65.6 ft/s) We know the chrony works with 2 photocel so, amongst the many factor that can inifluence the reading, ligth is the most influent. We also know that photocels reading is inversely proportional to the light it's exposed to (less light more speed, more light less speed). Therefore, consistent light is paramount for consistent readings the best natural condition is a light but flat cloudy day (so, white thin clouds): light condistions will remain consistent throughout giving you a good base. Distance is also a key factor in the readings: too close and the gases will distort or invalidate the readings ... or (sadly) break an unprotected screen...; too far and you will be reading a non-standard speed as well as invalidating the assumption we will make. Therfore the first photocel must be 2 - 2.5 mt from the muzzle to be able to read the V1 (speed at 1 mt) - and save the screen (first time i tried at 30" and it didn't last much) if we then add the standard variation to the resulting readins we will get the V0 (speed at muzzle) A fixed shotgun mount with minimal play is also important when aligned with the photocels so, essentially: 1 photocell at 2-2.5 mt and test done on a cloudy day + standard variation will give you the most accurate readings. If you want to exagerate (i did) you can built a box/shed around the chrony and provide artificial light ( 2x 12V di 30 Watt will do nicely) and plug the chrony to the main for the most consistent results; it will also add an extra layer of safety for the chrony's screen (whatever you do, protect the screen! it is a ****** breaking it at the beginning of a day testing with 10s of shells to try LOL) hope it helps. if you want 90% accuracy you should build a Does this also apply to fibre wads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve s×s Posted April 9, 2019 Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 How ever did we manage to shoot anything in the past without all this carp (cell phones, cronos, nightvison, Beam me up Scotty)rant over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Continental Shooter Posted April 9, 2019 Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 3 hours ago, Smokersmith said: Does this also apply to fibre wads? For that I didn't do enough testing to proof the standard variable, sorry. That said the data I have shows the theory is valid although the accuracy of the readings is slightly below what I'd be comfortable with when giving advise. I'd personally still take the good readings as valid 56 minutes ago, steve s×s said: How ever did we manage to shoot anything in the past without all this carp (cell phones, cronos, nightvison, Beam me up Scotty)rant over. It's not a matter of shooting i.e. pulling the trigger and hearing a bang, if that's what matters then I shot coarse salt and pepper in grains... What other people are interested in is how what they're shooting performs...it might not be everyone's cup of tea but I don't see nothing wrong with it. Beaides, if it's not of interest what's the value in reading it and comment on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve s×s Posted April 9, 2019 Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 4 hours ago, Continental Shooter said: For that I didn't do enough testing to proof the standard variable, sorry. That said the data I have shows the theory is valid although the accuracy of the readings is slightly below what I'd be comfortable with when giving advise. I'd personally still take the good readings as valid It's not a matter of shooting i.e. pulling the trigger and hearing a bang, if that's what matters then I shot coarse salt and pepper in grains... What other people are interested in is how what they're shooting performs...it might not be everyone's cup of tea but I don't see nothing wrong with it. Beaides, if it's not of interest what's the value in reading it and comment on it? HaHa the wright fly in the wright place and u will get a take Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.