Around the 1990 timeframe, I decided that it was time to quit guessing at my velocities (or simply taking the bullet or ammunition manufacturer’s word for same) and get myself a chronograph. But which one? Thankfully, choices were limited. Oehler had been around for some time but (for some reason) seemed daunting to me. Chrony was out there, and much simpler…but I’d heard the stories of shooters inadvertently putting a slug through the unit’s “brain box”. While I’d like to think that I could avoid that, I’ve also amazed myself occasionally with world-class “dumb stunts”. Pass.

PACT caught my eye. A reasonable price point with good features (including a wireless printer!). Great reviews. Texas based. What’s not to love? I opted to give the PACT system a try. Man, if all of my predictive decisions were this good, I’d make a fortune in Vegas…
From the day the PACT chrono arrived until two weeks ago, it consistently measured EVERYTHING I launched across it (with one explainable exception). The ONE glitch involved a Sako in .300 WM, a case full of powder, 200 grain Partitions and a KDF Slim Line recoil Arrestor…and the two rounds I put across the screens showed velocities of more than 4000 fps! Since I hadn’t had to beat the bolt open with a shop hammer and cases and primers looked perfectly normal, I had to believe that it was the withering muzzle blast triggering the screens improperly, and unscrewing the KDF brought MVs back down to the 2700ish range I was expecting!

The PACT and I became fast friends, clocking everything over the decades from .218 Bee to .470 Nitro Express. It got to where I couldn’t remember a time when I HADN’T had immediate access to accurate velocity data of my loads…until two weeks ago. I’d gotten my 9.3x74R Chapuis double to regulate wonderfully with North Fork Cup Point Solids and wanted to verify the MVs of that load. I assembled the PACT chrono, stuck a nine volt in the unit and got: nothing. What the…? Swap batteries. Same result. Drive up to the house and get OTHER new 9Vs. The unit woke up, looked around once…and died. I was crestfallen. This was like losing a favorite shooting buddy to a sudden heart attack. One day he was there, happy and helpful….the next he was gone.

Except the funeral and wake would have to wait…I needed data! (and it now appears that I’m addicted to velocity data as well). I looked around at new (and newer) chrono systems…lots of changes and advancements have occurred in 34 years. Rather than study, I opted to “dance with who brung me”…and ordered a PACT Mark IV unit with the IR skyscreen option. Despite it looking VERY similar to my old friend, I dutifully read through the instructions and set things up accordingly.

Prior to turning the 9.3 loose, I ran a couple of rounds of .218 Bee over the screens to confirm that all was well… and things looked rosy as the rounds reported the velocity I was expecting. Now the big ‘un: BOOM! “900ish fps” and “No Stop Signal” or something similar. When you’re looking for 2000-2100 fps, 900 don’t make it (and getting popped with 40ish ft/lbs of recoil energy plus wasting spendy bullets for NO useable data gets old fast!). Full stop while I troubleshot (and sent a windy note to PACT support).

I didn’t mention that at one point in that first session I wrapped a towel around the unit (which also contains a competition timer) and got ONE decent reading of 1900 and change. The following day (after receiving a maddeningly unhelpful email from the PACT Chief Operating Officer) I set up on my range again; this time with the PACT chrono/timer unit wrapped in the towel as before and covered in a cardboard box (because the PACT literature warns at length about the problems of muzzle blast). This session yielded data on MOST shots, but I’d never know until I removed the box, unwrapped the towel and looked. Sigh.

Now I won’t say that I’ll NEVER use PACT equipment again because I did, after all, enjoy 30+ years of wonderful service with their old stuff. But this new garbage is going back to Euless tomorrow…and on my own dime as the COO sent me an address but no pre-paid return label. Customer service is clearly an unplumbed art form at PACT…

Now: Labradar or Garmin doppler? I’m leaning Garmin…

I've had two Shooting Chronys, a Oehler 35P, and now a Labradar.

I still have the 35P. It's a great chronograph, but takes a few minutes to set up and align between the muzzle and a target. I don't know if I could even give it away these days.

I held out on the Labradar for quite a while because of the expense, but the day came I felt as though I was not spending enough on guns, reloading, shooting, and hunting, etc. etc. so I ordered one. It took very little time to learn to drive it and appreciate the convenience of it all...and within a year the Garmin showed up and guys can't seem to get half their money back out of a Labradar.

Buying new, I'd be tempted to go Garmin myself but there are limitations. I think Labradar offers a bit more flexibility, but at the expense of just a little more in the way of bulk.

If you want to save a few bucks, the Labradar will do what the Garmin unit does (you can snag a used Labradar cheap). The biggest inconvenience, IMO, is that carrying it is like lugging a laptop computer around while the Garmin is admittedly much smaller. Some say the Garmin is easier to work...maybe it is, I haven't fiddled with one, but I think most complaints against the Labradar is from guys who just can't follow instructions (much like the guys who can't get a grip on how to post photos on a forum such as this one). But what the hey---I don't know how to weld. LOL.

Garmin and it’s not even close.

I had a LabRadar for a long long time…one thing the LabRadar can’t do that the Garmin can, not miss shots. The LabRadar was great before I got into suppressors…that’s when it got finicky. An external trigger helps a bunch but even then it’s just not as fool proof as the Garmin.

I have a Garmin a Magnetospeed and the old style Caldwell. By far the Garmin is the best. Last time at the range I fired a few rounds stopped and changed rifles without moving the Garmin. Actually forgot about due to technical difficulties. Look down when I remembered it and it had recorded every shot. Also like the way processes and produces data in Excel format. Still getting used to it because of the fewer steps in operation. In short I love it.

G

I've got a LabRadar I'll sell cheap. It works every time, until I'm shooting suppressed.

Garmin is what I have now and it is hard to beat. The new LabRadar LX has bad reviews, most seem to be the unit is not capturing all the shots in a string.

I doubt if I ever own anything LabRadar again, mine went back twice for the same issue before it was fixed and it was a real ordeal with their customer service.

I have an old Oehler 35 and a Labradar. Labradar has worked well for me, provided you keep it aimed just right and use an external trigger when suppressed. Then, it will give you ghost shots when you cycle the bolt that you have to delete. A good friend bought the Garmin, he simply pulls it out of his pocket and haphazardly places it near the rifle and it works like a champion. I do prefer the SD card in the LR, it is handy to move the Excel file to a folder with the records and data on the rifle I am working with. I have put the Labradar, Oehler 35 and Garmin side by side and measured shots, and they were all within 1.6 FPS of each other. The LR and Garmin use slightly different algorithms to calculate SD’s and the Garmin will display a 1-2 FPS lower result. I hand calculated these to figure out why there was a discrepancy. Personally I dont give thought to it, I just want a small ES and don’t care about SD’s. On another note, I know a guy that has a really nice LR with tripod, trigger, external battery and hard case that would sell pretty cheap😆

Garmin is the answer.

Garmin is the way to go. So easy & small. I have an ARCA mount and I'll often just strap the Chrono to the gun during a stage to double check everything is working as expected at matches.

The new Caldwell seems really interesting though with its ability to measure BC of bullets. I might grab one just so people can verify data if anything seems a little squirrelly with their dope.

Garmin, not even close. So far I've chrono'ed bb guns, slingshots, pellet guns, arrows, and rifles. Never misses a beat.

Labrador and Garmin have both given me incorrect velocities. When I can trust the BC of certain bullet makers, I can leave that alone and then true up the ballistic calculator, by adjusting MV. Two days ago was a .243 Win. Wearing a Night Force NXS 2.5-10X. Garmin said 2900 fps, ES of 15. DOPE to 800 yards said 2970 fps.

You won't see big discrepancies, between chronograph and DOPE, until you are 500 yards and beyond.

I'd disagree. I think you can easily put two chronos next to each other and see that they agree to within a couple fps.

The truing using MV is really compensating for other factors like scope adjustments that aren't really accurate, incorrect BCs, incorrect scope height over bore, etc, etc.

You might be able to accurately true by adjusting MV in your calculator, but it's not because your MV is wrong.

Disagree all you want. I go through this several times per week. And even chronoed shots with a LabRadar reading and a Gamin simultaneously reading. They were 30 fps off from each other.

Sight height error is far more important less than 100 yards than it is beyond 100 yards. We've played with it, intentionally making it wrong, and not large changes happen to corrections beyond 100 yards

Calculator vs DOPE can be proven without adjusting a turret. Using a reticle only, removes that potential for mechanical error.

I've even trued the calculator on my range. Then took the system to 1400 yards and go a bold bore hit. Then three hits at a mile. 1760 yards. 600 to 800 yards tells me a better story of true MV than any chronograph does.

I've been using chrono's for over 20 years. The Lab Radar seemed to have too much baggage for what I wanted. Yesterday my new Garmin went to the range for the first time. It was only handguns but ran perfectly and never missed a beat. The software was quick to comprehend and straightforward. I would say the Garmin worked very hard to keep it as simple as it is small. Maybe Lab Radar spent too much time resting on their laurels (though well deserved).

Yep. There are test after test all over the internet that verify the Garmin, Labradar, and Magnetospeed all give a reading within a few fps of each other. My own tests showed the same between my MS and Garmin.

Garmin

Up and running in 30 seconds

Problem with al the 'radar' chronys is FOV and distance. Trnsmit power is restricted by FCC.

Buy the Garmin and don't look back. Had mine 2 weeks and only 1 range trip but worked 100% right out of the box. I dumped my LR. It was an absolute PITA to deal with. You never knew if you would get data or not. I shoot almost 100% suppressed. It didn't matter what I did, it never worked.

The Garmin is small enough you will always have it in your range bag. I have mine in a small Pelican 1040 case with the tripod and charging cord.

I ordered a cover for extra protection. https://www.ashtonprecision.com/pro...ue&sa=true&sbp=false&q=false

I've got Comp Electronics Pro, LabRadar, Oehler 35P and Garmin. The ONLY time I use anything except the Garmin is when I use the LabRadar to get near/far velocity to calculate BC. If the Garmin would record downrange velocity it would be PERFECT !!!

Don't waste time or money on anything except a Garmin

I've had a Shooting Chrony,, CED Millennium, Labradar and now Garmin. Garmin is the way to go.

I hardly EVER concede, but I think it's obvious everyone justifiably loves the Garmin. My Labradar is so much easier to use than my old Oehler 35P that I just couldn't make myself complain so I am not likely to ever replace it, but if I was upgrading from the 35P I think I'd have to go with Garmin.

I DO like the Labradar's ability to show me velocity decay of a shot at multiple distances, and I suppose that could be valuable info in some situation or another but I don't see that as an indispensable feature at all.

Garmin and as said above, the new Caldwell could be a player. Give it a few months and we should start getting reviews on it.