Chronograph recommendations? Old Labradar?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
MushroomPsyche

MushroomPsyche

Member
Jul 18, 2020
152
31
GA, United States
I'm about to pull the trigger on the Labradar (the old version). I'm looking for a chronograph that measures at different distances so I can easily calculate BC. Right now, the way I do it is I measure at the muzzle with the simple Caldwell optical chronograph. I then place the chronograph 30 meters away and measure again hoping I won't hit it. I really like the form factor of a lot of the new ones but one thing that is a deal breaker for me is the built in rechargeable batteries. I can deal with proprietary batteries but I need it to be user replaceable. I only plan to use it occasionally when tuning for a particular projectile so battery life is not a big deal to me.

So far, I only know of the old Labradar that has both velocity measurement at distances AND a replaceable battery. Are there any others I should be considering?
 
I've been looking at it some more and it seems like the old Labradar might still be the best in terms of down range velocity measurements. Even compared to the new Labradar LX, the new and smaller unit, is more about close range measurements as the range maxes out at around 25 to 30 yards according to a video I saw. The old one can measure up to 100 yards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smitty911 and 1900colt
Upvote 0
francisfaustino said:
I've been looking at it some more and it seems like the old Labradar might still be the best in terms of down range velocity measurements. Even compared to the new Labradar LX, the new and smaller unit, is more about close range measurements as the range maxes out at around 25 to 30 yards according to a video I saw. The old one can measure up to 100 yards.
Click to expand...
The LabRadar is the best deal going for what it offers and can do.

The Garmin.. in my opinion, it's an over priced joke. The old and new LabRadar can do more and the FX can as well.

Look for a used LR, especially on the FB group...

I have used mine for years, if you can aim a gun, you can use a LR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MushroomPsyche
Upvote 0
bigHUN said:
I have the FX radar ver 1 rev 2 and is working fine for my BR airguns.
But building now one F class pb from parts and I would need the higher velocities that the 308 produces.
Researching the classifieds, how can I recognize what is the older or newer Labradar without asking the seller?
Also a side note, I am using Strelok Pro as well.
Click to expand...
You can't miss it. The new Labradar LX is a much smaller unit similar in size to the FX and Garmin units. The old Labradar is the big square unit.
 
Upvote 0
bigHUN said:
I just had a quick look at my local classifieds, six of those showing the asking price $500 CAD, with today's conversion rate $363 USD.
Looks like the new FX and Garmin units forcing a price drop?
Click to expand...
Yes maybe as those smaller units seem to be much more convenient. However, only the FX $900 USD one has the measurements down range.
 
Upvote 0
@francisfaustino , downrange readings on a labradar may or may not be worthwhile info, it depends on the location you are using it at and how far downrange you are interested in. At 100 yards like you mentioned, I don't believe even shooting off a cliff with nothing within 100's of yards to reflect radar except a projectile flying through the air would have a chance of giving you good data that far out. BTW, I've been using a labradar for years and love it, but you have to understand what inexpensive radar is capable of and not capable of. Anything south of 15k is inexpensive in ballistic doppler radar. I use mine mostly for pb load development shooting off my front deck and I have one of the worse radar environments to use it in I have ever seen. .22 pellets out of my uragan only give reliable data out to 10 ish yards on my developent range, and about 17 yards on my 110 yard range about 90 degrees to the left. Boat tail 223 bullets in a PB are less than that, large caliber flat base pb pistol bullets not much farther than that. My range has so much stuff backscattering the radar that is all it is good for where I use it. The cleaner your radar environment the longer the distance for good data, but 100 yards is a pipe dream for small pellets. Mine will more often than not "track" projectiles that far, but the data is pure garbage. How about a diablo pellet going 150fps faster at 100 yards than at the muzzle and going 350 fps slower 2 one thousandths of a second later...yes it gets that ridiculous at long range in a really bad radar environment like mine. People over on GTA that know math/statistics very well have worked out bc's by using large sample sizes, and to get longer range good data by moving the labradar unit downrange in increments and triggering it with the doppler trigger. You better trust your skill and the accuracy of your pellet/rifle combo becuase the pellet must fly past the labradar at the same offset you have set it for. Or have a way of having plate steel protect the backside, but if you need that then you aren't having your projectiles take the same path which affects the accuracy of the labradar.

For the best data, aiming is super critical, a 2 foot error in aiming the labradar at 100 yards ends up being order's of magnitude difference in signal to noise ratio(>10db) when a projectile is first picked up a couple yards in front of the labradar. On my development range, a 1 foot intentional error in aiming my labradar at the 55 yard target yields completely worthless data and many failure to tracks. Like I said, I have extremely bad radar environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MushroomPsyche
Upvote 0
I understand the OP wants a Doppler style chrony because of the fear of striking an optical model but if I may, make a suggestion based on my hundreds of BC testing shots across my Competition Electronics crony.
It is not necessary to skim the top of the optic sensors. Aim 4-6” above the unit. It will still provide a reading. Speed and size of the projectile has little to do with sensing.
Just last week I needed a BC for a .177 gun/pellet combo.
I checked the muzzle speed shooting three times approximately 4” above the sensors. All three shots read.
BTW, I didn’t and don’t use any light diffusers.
Checked my zero at 30 yards.
Moved the chrony to 30 yards with an aim point target 6” above and behind the chrony. The tricky part here is to square up both sensors to the trajectory of the pellet but if you will keep the chrony lower than the elevation of the gun, the vertical part of the reticle helps you with that task.
Fired three more shots (all three read) took the averages of both sets of velocities and entered the data into the BC calculator found on AoA’s website.
I wanted to get the most accurate BC over the entire range (55 yards max) so I did the same exact process at 55 I did at 30. Now I must confess my gun will shoot sub 1-1/2” groups at 55 so I was confident I was going to make quick work of it and I did.
I took all the data, entered into ChairGun Elite, was able to compile a holdover card with great accuracy.
From start to finish I spent maybe 10 minutes?

The other thing to consider is to just put a piece of 1/4” thick polycarbonate (not plexiglass) in front of the chrony and even if you miss your aim point terribly, there will be no damage to the chrony. Should save you a few Benjamins to spend on more pellets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MushroomPsyche
Upvote 0
Thank you for all the comments. I have taken all that was said into consideration... and I have decided to hold off purchasing anything for now. Although I think the Labradar is extremely cool, I just can't justify it with how little I plan to use it. I'm mostly a pest hunter and as such, I shoot my gun very little. I don't change projectiles often. I only use the .22 Hades right now but I was planning on using the Labradar to try to find a slug for my gun. However, with how expensive the Labradar is, I should be content with putting the Caldwell downrange for now. I've calculated quite accurately the BC of the Hades using the same method. Yes, the Labradar is more convenient but I know that once I find the appropriate slug, the chronograph will practically just go back in its box only to be taken out again maybe years into the future when I'll need it again. Not a wise spending of funds for my use case scenario.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beerthief
Upvote 0
Chris_K said:
Have you considered "hardening" up your Caldwell? It could be as simple as putting a piece of steel angle on the side of the housing that faces the firing line.
Click to expand...
Yes, I can do that when I start getting velocities at more than 50 meters or so. If anything, I can just use an old phone to record the shots so that I don't have to see the chronograph's display from my scope. I also like the polycarbonate idea. If it's clear enough, maybe I will still be able to see the display from where I'm sitting.
 
Upvote 0
francisfaustino said:
I'm about to pull the trigger on the Labradar (the old version). I'm looking for a chronograph that measures at different distances so I can easily calculate BC. Right now, the way I do it is I measure at the muzzle with the simple Caldwell optical chronograph. I then place the chronograph 30 meters away and measure again hoping I won't hit it. I really like the form factor of a lot of the new ones but one thing that is a deal breaker for me is the built in rechargeable batteries. I can deal with proprietary batteries but I need it to be user replaceable. I only plan to use it occasionally when tuning for a particular projectile so battery life is not a big deal to me.

So far, I only know of the old Labradar that has both velocity measurement at distances AND a replaceable battery. Are there any others I should be considering?
Click to expand...
I don't mean this in any critical way, but just wondering why you need the downrange velocity more precisely than the estimates available in charts? I understand that more accurate velocity numbers will yield a more accurate BC calculation, but the practical difference seems relatively insignificant, especially considering the cost to achieve it. Of course, academic curiosity is great, and sometimes we don't know what we don't know!
 
Upvote 0
elh0102 said:
I don't mean this in any critical way, but just wondering why you need the downrange velocity more precisely than the estimates available in charts? I understand that more accurate velocity numbers will yield a more accurate BC calculation, but the practical difference seems relatively insignificant, especially considering the cost to achieve it. Of course, academic curiosity is great, and sometimes we don't know what we don't know!
Click to expand...
For example, the .22 Hades has a published BC of 0.026 and I think even Hard Air Magazine did a test and that's what they got. This was a few years ago when I did this but when I plugged that number into my ballistics calculator, I noticed that my shots were always hitting low. Most of my shots are within 40 meters or so and I was noticing the low POI of a few centimeters at just 27 meters away. Trying to figure out what's going on, that's when I put the chronograph down range about 33 meters away. In my situation, the Hades' BC was actually only 0.017. Maybe it's because I'm shooting the Hades a little fast at 940 FPS but ever since I started using that number, the ballistics calculator in my rangefinder has been spot on.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu