Precision Rifle Gear New Athlon Rangecraft Chronograph-Garmin Xero Killer?

[viking78]

That is the correct app. In the “hamburger” menu at top right, you can select “connect device,” and go through a couple steps (within the settings app to connect to the device via Bluetooth, and through the Athlon Ballistics app) to connect the device to your phone. Once connected, again in the “hamburger,” click “manage devices,” which will allow you to open the chronograph data logger and firmware update interface. Typically the data will sync over automatically, if not, simply click the “sync data” button. You can update firmware in this interface as well, if a new firmware update is available (likely is, if you have not yet updated after purchase).

Thank you, sir

 

[ipsullivan]

Just grabbed one for $343 shipped from Bass Pro. 10% Club Members Monday today and 10% military discount.

 

[bene-201]

The communicated "precision" for the Garmins, as well as the LabRadar LX's and the Athlons, is supposed to be +/-0.1% for rifle cartridges (I'm not terribly certain why the precision specification would quadruple for slower projectiles, other than a potential for lower integrity frequency shift - but in theory, the units should be able to hit the projectile more times and do better interpolating velocities). "within 5fps on 2999" would be wider than +/-0.1% by almost double.

But... Given hundreds of rounds in testing with 6 or more chronographs operating side by side, and comparing the disparity between the two units of each brand, and between the units themselves, after ALL of those rounds fired and compared, Garmin is the only brand which could POSSIBLY be within their published specification for accuracy.

How I'm comfortable stating this - example: say I have a true velocity of 2807.0fps. One unit, landing within +/-0.1% of that, +/-2.8fps, could read 2809.8 as the absolutely highest reading which could still be within the specified accuracy, while another unit could read 2804.2fps, as the absolutely slowest reading which could still be within that specified accuracy. In that case, if I believe both are telling the truth, then I could know the 2807.0 is the true velocity, because no other velocity could be shared by the two while still achieving their published specifications. But more realistically, if the two units EVER displayed anything larger than 2x 2.8fps apart, larger than 5.6fps spread between the two units, then at least ONE unit MUST be reporting outside of the published specification for accuracy, in other words, a spread of larger than 5.6 between two units would suggest at least ONE unit is failing to achieve the specified accuracy to truth. In multiple 30, 50, and 100rnd experiments, the Garmins are the only units which have consistently reported velocities close enough together to have both units within the specified accuracy. The LabRadar LX's have been loosely just outside of their published accuracy on average with the max spread doubling the acceptable band, and the Athlons have been MUCH farther outside of their published specification for accuracy - with the Average difference between the two units often being farther apart than the specification would allow.

So this is a non-definitive method, such that ALL of them could be wrong, relative to true velocity, however, in my testing so far, with hundreds of rounds fired, the Garmins have been the only units which have the potential to actually be right. The Garmins MIGHT be reliably within their published spec for accuracy to truth, but by default, I can prove at least one, if not both, of the other brand units are NOT close enough together for them to both be within spec of truth.

Add to that the fact that the radars are probably interfering with each other to some degree when using more than one radar to measure so creating a precise direct side by side for the overage user/youtuber seems out of reach

 

[Turkeytider]

Add to that the fact that the radars are probably interfering with each other to some degree when using more than one radar to measure so creating a precise direct side by side for the overage user/youtuber seems out of reach

I think that it’s been shown ( Varminterror? ) that interference from units in close proximity is or can be a reality.

 

[doubloon]

Add to that the fact that the radars are probably interfering with each other to some degree when using more than one radar to measure so creating a precise direct side by side for the overage user/youtuber seems out of reach

I think that it’s been shown ( Varminterror? ) that interference from units in close proximity is or can be a reality.

What turkeytider said.

Plus Dustin of Athlon has stated on video he observed Rangecraft chrono's interfering with each other during their own testing.

Difference seems to be Garmin put in extra effort to defeat this interference and Athlon said "probably won't happen much at a real range, it's good enough".

I own the Athlon and it serves my needs adequately for ~$200 less than the typical Xero price. Mostly hunting/subsonic applications.

If I was using it for competition purposes, especially where more radars might be used simultaneously, I'd probably spring the extra money for the Garmin.

 

[Mumbles76]

Mine worked flawlessly today - in 100' temps for 3 hours in full sunlight:

 

[Varminterror]

Tested athlon side by side with Labradar original. Didn't miss a shot but did average exactly 15 fps faster over 20 shots.

This has been a relatively common, recurring experience for me, after several sessions repeating side by side comparisons for hundreds of rounds.

Add to that the fact that the radars are probably interfering with each other to some degree when using more than one radar to measure so creating a precise direct side by side for the overage user/youtuber seems out of reach

“Kind of interfering” doesn’t happen in this partial fashion - at least for the adjacent radars. Either we have co-channel interference or we don’t. Meaning the interfering units are emitting on the same channel such each unit can’t tell what is their signal or is that of the opposing unit. This is co-channel interference, such the unit gets confused by a premature or retarded echo within their echo period, which did not originate from that respective unit. So for the Athlon, we can see continuous false triggers, even false readings for shots which did not happen, and incorrect velocities when shots ARE recorded. But these - not coincidentally - are not “wrong” by only 10-20fps, they’re typically wrong by hundreds or thousands of feet per second. The radar triggered Garmin and Athlon units give away co-channel interference very reliably, as they will offer false triggers, indicating to the shooter that interfering radar is reflecting from the field. LabRadar and VelociRadar hide interference behind their recoil and acoustic triggers, so it’s a little harder to detect.

I can also state directly, in testing large sample strings to prove out statistically confirmable averages and SD/ES’s, when I have shot only ONE chronograph at a time during these tests, ONLY the Athlon units have persisted the 10-20fps high readings, even when they were the only radar chronograph operating within miles. It is intermittent, and doesn’t seem to have any rhyme nor reason as to what days it will decide to run higher readings vs. correct readings.

I think that it’s been shown ( Varminterror? ) that interference from units in close proximity is or can be a reality.

I’ve tested this relatively extensively, including an initialization protocol which I used for my side by side testing, and which of my single channel or assignable channel units have to be either reassigned or not shot together.