Anyone using an Athlon Rangecraft?

[SLT223]

Reviews look good. Looks easy to use...easier than the Garmin...and cheaper. Any real life negatives to this device in YOUR experience?

 

[rockquarry]

I'm curious, too. I just bought a Garmin and have probably chronographed about 250 shots. It's hard to imagine anything that would work better, but I know nothing about the Athlon.

 

[The Norseman]

I recently bought the Athlon Rangecraft
Chronograph $400 at the great Scheels
Sports Store.

It’s compact, easy to use, turn on, point
towards target, and get your velocities.

Rangecraft comes with a nice modern
looking carry case, USB charging cord, a
nice metal tripod, and instruction booklet.
I like it.

A friend and I tried it out on Bow/Arrow
speeds. He said the Athlon Rangecraft
processed the velocities faster than the
competitions pocket chronograph.

To set up the App on your cell phone watch
the Athlon video.

I would say these new miniature chrono-
graphs annihilated old conventions.

If time and weather permits I’m going to
use it on testing some reloads this weekend.

Handier than a pocket on a T-shirt.

 

[HeloMt]

I've had mine for a little over a month. I've got three range sessions on it and love it. Easy set-up, fast processing and very compact. I shopped around and found one for $349 shipped.
Its a great deal for the money. I've used a Garmin and liked it...but honestly can't justify the higher cost compared to the Athlon.

 

[Krogen]

A buddy and I conducts some tests comparing two Garmins and an Oehler against an Athlon Rangecraft. I can post the spreadsheet if anybody wants to have a look.

There were some variations in the acquired data. Some of them are differences in consistency. The rest can be attributed to different distances at which the chronographs determine bullet velocity. The Oehler is obvious; it depends on where you put the skyscreens. The RADAR chronographs? No idea. One thing did stand out about the Athlon. The display is brighter, larger, and significantly faster than the Garmin. I'd buy an Athlon in a heartbeat if I didn't already have a Garmin.

 

[yeti]

The Garmin was/is ground breaking. Worth the extra two hundred bucks over the Athlon, IDK?
We are lucky to have both now.

Post up what you have or PM me, Krogen. I would be most interested in what you found.

 

[jem102]

Yes please post what you have. I'm sure it will be much appreciated.

 

[Krogen]

I attempted to post the test data spreadsheet. I wanted to leave it in Excel so you could look "under the hood" to see what's what. Unfortunately the forum won't let me attach a .xlsx, so here are the .pdf files for each tab.

@SWF Staff Am I missing something, or are .xlsx files not allowed? Danger of macros and all that?

 

[rockquarry]

My spreadsheet is a spiral notebook that works perfectly even when the power is out or batteries are depleted. I think I've had seven chronographs in the last forty+ years. All worked well most of the time and appeared to be accurate. Chrony was adequate if you seldom needed a chronograph.

 

[SWF Staff]

I attempted to post the test data spreadsheet. I wanted to leave it in Excel so you could look "under the hood" to see what's what. Unfortunately the forum won't let me attach a .xlsx, so here are the .pdf files for each tab.

@SWF Staff Am I missing something, or are .xlsx files not allowed? Danger of macros and all that?

Correct, please zip them and you can post them, but excel documents are extremely powerful to spread things.

 

[Shootist00]

Have had the Rangecraft for about 1.5 months. Originally set it up outdoors with the CED Millennium sky screen chrono that I've used for over 20 years (USPSA used the same chrono, 2 of them back to back, at the national matches I've been to through the early 2000). The Athlon read 8 to 15 FPS faster than the CED. CED was about 5' in front of muzzle Athlon under and slightly behind muzzle. Then used it next to a Garmin at an indoor range. Athlon read around 4 -10 FPS faster.

I find it does not like communicating with my phone. When I use the APP and download the data, Sync, only some of the data shows up even though is sees the other sessions. They list 0 (zero) shots fired but on the unit itself all the data is there. Kind of PMO.

All in all I am happy I bought it. Much easier to use than the older sky screen chrono.

 

[OysterHill]

Expertvoice.com has them for $299. Unfortunately they show out of stock. If you don't have either of the two, I think it would be worth the wait at that price based on reviews I've seen.

 

[venomballistics]

I attempted to post the test data spreadsheet. I wanted to leave it in Excel so you could look "under the hood" to see what's what. Unfortunately the forum won't let me attach a .xlsx, so here are the .pdf files for each tab.

@SWF Staff Am I missing something, or are .xlsx files not allowed? Danger of macros and all that?

that'd be a function of forum software defaults.
a link to a shared google drive would be an effective work around

 

[venomballistics]

A buddy and I conducts some tests comparing two Garmins and an Oehler against an Athlon Rangecraft. I can post the spreadsheet if anybody wants to have a look.

There were some variations in the acquired data. Some of them are differences in consistency. The rest can be attributed to different distances at which the chronographs determine bullet velocity. The Oehler is obvious; it depends on where you put the skyscreens. The RADAR chronographs? No idea. One thing did stand out about the Athlon. The display is brighter, larger, and significantly faster than the Garmin. I'd buy an Athlon in a heartbeat if I didn't already have a Garmin.

seems like the radar types read a half a hair higher than optical, though all seem to be at least close enough for the home gamer.
I've clipped a sky screen in a former life, but never destroyed my chrono.
The prospect of removing the possibility from the equation is worth the price of admission, be it garmin, Athlon or LabRadar

 

[stansdds]

A variation of 10 fps is inconsequential unless you are loading ammo to meet a certain velocity for competition and you are on the ragged edge of not meeting that velocity. Back in my USPSA days, I shot a regional match and ended up having to submit additional rounds to be chronographed. I did not have a chrono then and I simply followed a well known recipe, but in my pistol, that recipe was just a few fps above the major power factor minimum. I was so close to not making major that the match staff felt it necessary to test additional rounds.

I learned some lessons. First, a well known recipe may not be quite enough for every pistol. Second, it's best to not be on the edge of your ammo not meeting the power floor. Third, a chronograph (expensive items in the 1990's) really is an invaluable tool when developing loads.