Now that the Garmin has been out for a while I'm looking for feedback from people that have used them.
For me…..the Garmin is dependable and the fx just is not. My fx has been hit/miss from day one and is way too particular on how it is aimed. The Garmin also has a screen built in and battery (rechargeable) lasts a long time on a charge.Doesn’t it not do any more than the FX chrono ? I thought I saw that in a video. If so how can you justify 600 ?? To me that is kind of insane.
There’s a lot of things I do in life I get called ‘nuts’ for doing……might as well add this to the list…. Like you say, to each their ownMy fx has been pretty good and I could buy three for that money. Thats nuts but to each their own
As previously mentioned the Garmin is more reliable, it does not miss shots. If all you use are air guns, it may be harder to justify the cost difference compared to the original FX chronograph. Since I also reload for powder burners the FX alone will not work for me. I got the Garmin for my powder burners but now use it exclusively. I like that it lets me tune airguns for velocity and accuracy simultaneously. Hangin a FX chronograph off an air rifle barrel does effect the accuracy.
Now that the Garmin has been out for a while I'm looking for feedback from people that have used them.
A friend has one and clocked his pellet rifle at ~620fps without issues. Not quite as low as you're asking, but it's an indicator.I wonder how well it works for low speeds ? 450 FPS or 590 FPS .