FX Wireless Radar Chronograph Review/Opinion Video

Forums Other Parts, Accessories, & Equipment FX Wireless Radar Chronograph Review/Opinion Video

  • Views : 1978
  • Link

    AirgunGearShow
    Participant
    Member

     

     

    Link

    Cranky1
    Participant
    Member

    Well I think I will wait a little longer to order one for a few more kinks to be worked out. I was ready to order too. 

    Link

    cdefenbau
    Participant
    Member

    Stoti- what phone or tablet are you using? I’m using an iPhone 7plus. The FX reads 2% lower than the Caldwell from 370fps to 790fps. Is there a difference in accuracy between apple and android apps?

    Link

    edosan
    Participant
    Member

    just saw the video, thanks for sharing. 

     

    Link

    Spray1Mark
    Participant
    Member

    AirgunGearShow

     

     

    Giles, did you forget to comment?

    Link

    Centercut
    Participant
    Member

    I saw it this morning before he deleted it.  It was a long post defending the FX Radar Chronograph.  Apparently he was in on the design and testing of the unit, and took offense to the @mmahoney video. Later decided to delete his post…  It was worded in a logical and inoffensive manner.

    Link

    dan_house
    Participant
    Member

    Centercut

    Has anyone else noted that it seems to work much better with larger pellets like .25 Heavy and .30 cal?  

    doesnt surprise me. Bigger pellets/slugs will have more surface area to reflect energy back to the device 

    Link

    dan_house
    Participant
    Member

    at 4:15 he mentions it seems to have a sweet spot…… Well, so does my Caldwell, and especially the green and red folding units Ive owned thru the years definitely had a sweet spot for consisit, correct readings. Dont think thats weird. Nor have I EVER gotten two chonies to measure the same gun at the same FPS. 

    Kinda makes me wonder if there isnt a mindset of buyers that its a magic device that doenst need the attention that setting up a light driven chrony does.  Some of that would be rightfully blamed on FX's marketing. Do have to admit, that was part of my attraction to the unit. Plop it down on the bench, at the approximate good location, lob lead downrange and easily collect data for later analysis.  Dont have one, and after watching this vid, I think I'll wait a model rev or two…….

    Kudos to mmahony for the detailed analysis. at the very least we see what it takes to get the unit to work well.  Would love to see FX respond to this

    Link

    JoeWayneRhea
    Participant
    Member

    my friend Giles is a lot more tactful and politically correct than I am. But I can't say this I played with that FX unit at the Rocky mountain air gun challenge and it worked flawlessly I knew to the foot per second what my gun was shooting and I shot it over three of them all of them work perfectly.

    Link

    JoeWayneRhea
    Participant
    Member

    and by the way absolutely zero disrespect for m Mahoney for his review. It was very well done and I very much appreciated

    Link

    bandg
    Participant
    Member

    JoeWayneRhea

    my friend Giles is a lot more tactful and politically correct than I am. But I can't say this I played with that FX unit at the Rocky mountain air gun challenge and it worked flawlessly I knew to the foot per second what my gun was shooting and I shot it over three of them all of them work perfectly.

    Even Giles mentioned the need for relatively precise positioning for accuracy.  Many seem to be getting dramatically different readings with relatively small changes in position of the FX unit with different positions needed for different guns.  It might be fine for 1 gun but if that is the case it would seem to be a problem for use across multiple guns.

    I noted to mmahoney that for a truly valid comparison the Caldwell chronograph should have been repositioned each time along with the FX unit (he stated that he did not do this) as movement of either can cause a change in reading.  However, the optical chronographs seem to all have a basically similar positioning range for setup which most users can do relatively easily and one could expect that any variation in readings might be relatively lower in such an instance.  This does not necessarily seem to be the case with the smaller FX unit according to others.  Maybe the smaller size makes it harder to align easily.

    It will be interesting to watch as I like the convenience of use/ease of transport of the FX unit and I would like to get one.  I will not buy one until I see that they are EASILY positioned for repeatable use across multiple platforms.  At this point I have doubts about that function.

    Link

    Centercut
    Participant
    Member

    I think the issue is what has already been mentioned. The hype and videos of FX Fanboys using this device show guys just plopping it down under the muzzle of their guns, and shooting away, happy as a clam.  Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.  Really, it doesn't…

    I've set it six inches back from the muzzle due to table size – doesn't work.  I've set it beside the end of the muzzle, less than 2 inches away, and aimed at the same spot as the muzzle – partially works, one shot every now and then.  I've set it lower than recommended, because the bipod wasn't high enough to place the device at a height above the table – partially works, one shot every now and then, or a few shots at the correct velocity, then one or two unreasonably low (from a gun I know has an ES of under 10 FPS).  

    So does it work when its set up EXACTLY as directed?  Mostly.  I've had to increase the sensitivity from 20% to 10% in order to get consistent readings with high speed .22 caliber 15.9 grain JSB Exact, like 950 FPS.  Don't get me wrong, I like the unit.  But is it like an Apple computer where you just turn it on and use it mindlessly?  Nope…  Improvements with the app will make it even better I'm sure, and I'm also sure that FX won't leave us hanging with the unit as it currently is.  They have always worked with customers to improve their products. 

    Yes, I have one of these units. And yes, I have two FX rifles – and have owned two others in the past.  But I'm not an FX Fanboy, and like my Eastern European girls better…  ;)

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by Centercut.
    Link

    stoti
    Participant
    Member

    cdefenbau

    Stoti- what phone or tablet are you using? I’m using an iPhone 7plus. The FX reads 2% lower than the Caldwell from 370fps to 790fps. Is there a difference in accuracy between apple and android apps?

    iPhone X. 

    I used my Radar again this morning with a different .25 caliber gun. Set it up in the same place as with my Impact, a couple inches below the moderator and a couple inches back from the muzzle and it worked flawlessly again. I didn't measure it against my Caldwell, no need, I'm past that. Whether it works well because I know where to place it or because I'm shooting a .25 cal, I don't know. But for me, it works and I'm very happy with it.

    Stoti 

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by stoti.
    Link

    bandg
    Participant
    Member

    stoti

    cdefenbau

    Stoti- what phone or tablet are you using? I’m using an iPhone 7plus. The FX reads 2% lower than the Caldwell from 370fps to 790fps. Is there a difference in accuracy between apple and android apps?

    iPhone X. 

    I used my Radar again this morning with a different .25 caliber gun. Set it up in the same place as with my Impact, a couple inches below the moderator and a couple inches back from the muzzle and it worked flawlessly again. I didn't measure it against my Caldwell, no need, I'm past that. Whether it works well because I know where to place it or because I'm shooting a .25 cal, I don't know. But for me, it works and I'm very happy with it.

    Stoti 

    Bottom line-if any individual is happy with theirs then that is all that matters but it certainly seems that many are not happy and more information would be helpful to prospective buyers.  

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    @bandg

    I didn't change the position of the Caldwell because it is my control in the experiment. The only variable I want to change is the FX position to compare differences to the control.

    Link

    Spray1Mark
    Participant
    Member

    A $200 unit is simply an indication, you wouldn't see a set of $200 scales in a pharmaceutical lab, aren't some people expecting a bit much from the unit as far as it's ability to cope with all external conditions equally?

    If there is an an error, as long as that error is consistent then it can be factored in, if you trust a Caldwell and the difference is 10fps between that and the FX unit so what? as long as it's always 10fps.

    If you want the best buy a SKAN for $5k, then you will never have to query the results will you? well yes you will if the muzzle distance is wrong or the barrel isn't perfectly square or in line with the bore etc.

    The FX unit brings portability and IME ease of use to the table, that is it's big advantage.

    Link

    bandg
    Participant
    Member

    mmahoney

    @bandg

    I didn't change the position of the Caldwell because it is my control in the experiment. The only variable I want to change is the FX position to compare differences to the control.

    Understood and logical.  But knowing how such changes effect the range of readings from the Caldwell would seem to be relevant to the overall conversation.  Still, your work was very helpful to many and is appreciated.

    Link

    mmahoney
    Participant
    Member

    @spray1mark

    I may be expecting too much from a piece of $200 equipment. The problem is that the FX unit costs twice as much as my Caldwell. I'd like to see some performance benefit to reflect the cost. As is, it seems half as good at twice the cost. I'd argue that the only big advantage is the portability. How easy can it be to use if one day it reads 10 fps high and the next 15 fps low?

    • This reply was modified 5 months ago by mmahoney.
    Link

    bandg
    Participant
    Member

    Spray1Mark

    A $200 unit is simply an indication, you wouldn't see a set of $200 scales in a pharmaceutical lab, aren't some people expecting a bit much from the unit as far as it's ability to cope with all external conditions equally?

    If there is an an error, as long as that error is consistent then it can be factored in, if you trust a Caldwell and the difference is 10fps between that and the FX unit so what? as long as it's always 10fps.

    If you want the best buy a SKAN for $5k, then you will never have to query the results will you? well yes you will if the muzzle distance is wrong or the barrel isn't perfectly square or in line with the bore etc.

    The FX unit brings portability and IME ease of use to the table, that is it's big advantage.

    Portability certainly but ease of use?  Not IMO.  If movement of the standard (the Caldwell in this case) produced only minor variations but small movement of the FX produced major variations then how useful is the FX?  Seems you could only truly rely on it for one gun in one position for one session.

     

    Link

    Centercut
    Participant
    Member

    I'm not seeing the problem with accuracy as the major issue.  As described above, I'm seeing the variations in accuracy with minute changes in placement, and the ease of use. I never worry when shooting over my Caldwell, and 90% of the time I don't even use the sun shades and they both work perfectly.  But unit placement on this FX Radar unit is truly critical.  And anyone who's done a lot of shooting knows that you don't always shoot from some perfect cement Benchrest where the perfect positioning is even possible…  So were a person to own one of these as his/her only chronograph, how would they know if the speed were accurate based on position?  I know what my guns shoot at, so I know ballpark when shooting with the FX Radar when its in a position to give valid results. But what if I didn't?  So now I'm shooting and say it says 850 and keeps going at plus or minus 5 FPS.  But the speed is actually 890 fps?  It could result in a lot of problems from calculating holdover to determining BC for use in Strelok or Chairgun.  These are my issues, not just a couple of FPS in accuracy…

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 81 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.