Labradar

[gitano]

Not the mis-spelled name of a state in Canada, nor the mis-spelled name of a popular breed of hunting dog. Rather, the name of a new chronograph. Let's get the important part first - Retail = $560 plus S&H.

As some of you may know, I'm rather an inveterate reloader and wildcatter. (Not doing too much wildcatting lately, but did just make a .338-06.) My PERSONAL opinion, is that one is at a distinct disadvantage when reloading and especially if wildcatting, if one doesn't have a chronograph with which one can get the velocity of your handloads.

Until fairly recently, all "regular Joe" chronographs were "light-activated" systems. Even the most sophisticated of them - the "consumer" versions of the Oehler bunch - required light for use. Some of them provided infra-red light and sensors to use in low-light or dark conditions, but they still used "light" and required the shooter to shoot "through" (actually 'over') at least a pair, and sometimes 3 light sensors. The 'shadow' of the bullet would trigger the 'start' and 'stop' sensors. The time between start and stop, and the distance between the sensors, allows the calculation of speed from the classic formula:

r = d/t - or in words,
rate (speed) equals the distance divided by the time. If you consider the units, the equation is clear - speed (feet/second) equals distance (feet) divided by time (seconds).

Those types of chronos had their 'issues' - not the least of which was having the 'right' light. (Often tough in Alaska.) Another was getting everything "lined up" at the range. For one, you have to place the chronos about 12 to 15 feet from the muzzle of the firearm. Therefore, you have to stop the range to set up the chrono. Then you have to make sure the firearm, chrono, and target are aligned so that you can see what kind of precision you get with what kind of MV. Also, getting velocities at two or more points in the projectile's path required 1) multiple chronos, 2) perfect alignment, and 3) a straight shooting rifle/shooter combination. Also, for very small projectiles, (like .172 caliber), going very fast, (over 4000 f/s), they are prone to 'miss' the firing. That's very annoying. Also, they tend to get confused by lots of 'muzzle blast'. Especially from muzzle loaders.

A few years back, a company came out with a sensor that clamped onto the muzzle of your firearm and detected the bullet's speed based on magnetic sensors in the 'bayonet' clamped to the muzzle. This device called the MagnetoSpeed eliminated almost all of the issues associated with the light-sensor-based chronos. Didn't have to stop the firing line to set up. Didn't have to align anything. Didn't need light. Again, as some of you know, I bought one of those literally the day I found out about them. I am very pleased with it, but it has one significant drawback (besides price), and one not so significant. The significant issue is how clamping something to the muzzle of a rifle effects the point of impact of the bullet. For those that subscribe to the "barrel timing theory" (me, for one, Browning and "Winchester", for another couple), this is a BIG deal. The second not-so-significant issue is that you cannot get a down-range velocity without the use of a light-based chrono.

Enter the Labradar. (If it had been me, I would have spelled it LabRadar, but they didn't call me up and ask my opinion. No one seems to ever do that. ) This is a "doppler" type radar that tracks the bullet as it moves downrange. "Doppler" is a convenient word (named after a German physicist that measured, clarified, and reported on a phenomenon even animals instinctively know): Sound from an object moving towards you has a higher frequency than the same sound from the same object moving away from you, AND the frequency of the sound is a function of the speed of the object. The classic example is the whistle from the locomotive of a train as it approaches you, passes you, and moves away from you. All of us that have heard such an event know exactly how that sounds. The effect is called the "Doppler effect" and the physics community named the phenomenon after Herr Doktor Doppler because he quantified the relationship between the fundamental frequency and the shifted frequency as a fuction of the velocity.  

The Doppler effect can be used to estimate speed IF one knows the 'fundamental' frequency of the sound. (This is a technique we used often as submarine sonarmen.) In radar - as in the Labradar - it "knows" the fundamental frequency of the radar signal it is transmitting. As it tracks the bullet and the bullet slows down, the difference in the fundamental frequency and the frequency of the signal returning from the bullet that is going AWAY, reveals the velocity of the bullet. Labradar claims a precision of 0.1%.

That's the "how". Here is WHY I "like" this thing. (But hate the price.) It has the same "niceties" about not stopping the firing line to set up, because it is placed right besied the muzzle. (But behind muzzles with brakes.) It doesn't need light. It doesn't care about weather. But here are two BIG deals for me...

1) It doesn't hang anything from the muzzle of the rifle, and
2) IT CALCULATES VELOCITY AT UP TO FIVE RANGES DOWN-RANGE!

Let me digress from the subject of chronographs for a moment.

The $560 +S&H is almost worth it to buy a bunch of Barnes bullets and provide irrefutable PROOF about what @!#$%^&*ing LIARS they are about the ballistic coefficients of their bullets! (It isn't that I loathe Barnes Bullets 'especially'. I just LOATHE LIARS. Especially liars that are LYING to STEAL money. And REALLY ESPECIALLY when the LIARS LIE about the PERFORMANCE of something they SELL, KNOWING that most people don't have the means to PROVE that they are LYING. They're also "in bed" with the anti-hunters regarding "lead", BECAUSE THEY MAKE "MONOLITHIC" (no lead) bullets and want THE LAW to FORCE people to buy THEIR bullets or go without! Just in case that didn't come through loud and clear enough, I hate the company that is Barnes Bullets.)

Getting off of one of my favorite hobby horses, and back on topic...

Not all the reviews of the Labradar are "glowing". Some of them that are particularly bad are stupid, but some of them raise relevant issues. If you're interested, look up videos on Labradar on YouTube. If the price was HALF of that $560, I would have already bought one. :)  I "want" one. And I might get one here in the next 6 months. We'll see. If I do;
1) I will review it and report it here, and
2) I will be happy to determine the TRUE ballistic coefficient of any bullet of any member of THL. (Keep in mind, that when determining the BC of a given bullet, it doesn't matter what cartridge the bullet comes out of. The only thing that matters is muzzle velocity. Well, actually temperature, altitude/barometric pressure, and humidity have an impact on BC, but, those are all recordable variables.)

There is also an 'issue' with respect to downrange velocities. (Of course, that feature in which I am MOST interested! ) The smaller the projectile, the shorter the distance it can be 'tracked' down range. Labradar claims to be able to track a FLAT-BASED, .308 caliber bullet out to 80-100 yards. A .17 caliber "pellet", only to 30 yards. I suspect a .308 caliber VLD, (long boat-tail), might not get to 80 yards. Out to 100 would be 'nice', but the fact is, even out to 30 "works" because if you can get 5 separate values (even three would be sufficient), within that 30 yards, you can determine the mathematical function that describes the trajectory (and BC) for any range out to reasonable hunting ranges.

I like this Labradar, but I really hate the price tag.

Paul

PS - I just caught this in reading another part of the company's page:

LabRadar measures velocities up to 3,900 f.p.s. with 0.1%

I don't know if that means the top speed it is capable of measuring is 3900 f/s OR if it means that the precision above 3900 f/s is worse than 0.1%. I will ask them for clarification.

PPS - But then I read this:

Records velocities from 65 fps to 3,900 fps

So that clears that up. Can't go over 3900 f/s is a 'problem' for me. I like to shoot my .17s well over 4000.

Paul

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

Looked at it last year, did not think much of it (for the limitations that you pointed out). quite happy with the magnetospeed but then I do not zero and chrono at the same time so do not have that particular problem.

[Paul Hoskins]

I have never let any of this bother me. I don't care what the BC of a bullet is as long as it is accurate. I know there are people that have interest in such matters but as long as I know the trajectory of a bullet at a given speed, I'm fine with that. I'll agree with Paul completely about liars advertising by using lies to sell. It's somewhat like car makers advertising "UP TO" 35 miles per gallon. I don't give a dam about the "UP TO." I want to know the actual or "DOWN TO" miles per gallon. Their "UP TO" is actually an estimate & not "FACT." This number is like advertising false ballistic efficiency of a bullet. I don't like Barnes bullets any more since Fred Barnes got rid of the business. Their so called "X" bullets are not what they're cracked up to be. I have a bunch of 53 grain 224 "X" bullets I'll sell cheap. I don't buy anything made by Barnes any more. ......Paul H

[recoil junky]

Heck Paul, I coulda told you the :cens: polecats at Barnes are a pack of lying Hyenas, no that's not right, Hyenas are better than that. Uh, um, hmmm, lying coyotes, 'cuz coyotes are about the sneakiest of sneaks and lie about everything. Polecats are even better than hyenas so my apologies to polecats as well.

Having almost endless acres of BLM, I can actually test paper whipped results (bullet drop, velocities) against the real thing. Mostly they are close, or at least as close as my ability to hold a rifle.

No, I'm NOT going to set my PACT chrony out at 500 yards and shoot at it, but 300, yeah I'd do that . . . . . . . . . maybe, 200 for certain.

I am awaiting some Paul tested results from the labradoodle thing.

RJ

[gitano]

I am awaiting some Paul tested results from the labradoodle thing.

Hopefully, "coming soon to a forum near you".

Paul

[sakorick]

I am still in the stone age with a old junker.....but I do have targets in my "back yard" to verify the perceived vs actual BC. The older I get the BC deal has become less important. I like making itty bitty groups....I can always firgure out where I need to aim.....my max shot never being more than 400 yards. I  don't hate Barnes bullets I just don't like them as they don't shoot itty biddy groups in my targets.

[gitano]

I don't use Barnes bullets because they don't shoot straight for me. I don't like - to say the least - the Barnes company because they are liars, (about BCs at least), and actually work against the shooting community to feed their greed, (by working with anti-hunters to get laws passed that outlaw lead-core bullets).

I understand that Barnes bullets shoot well for some people from some rifles. As far as I know, there isn't a SINGLE benchrest shooter that uses Barnes bullets. If Barnes bullets could be MADE to shoot straight, you can bet your life Barnes would pay someone BIG money to use them in benchrest competitions. The bullets are so bad, on the whole, that no benchrest shooter will use them because the shooter will NEVER be "in the money" in competition, and no business will pay to sponsor a competitor that is NEVER 'in the money'.

Under 200 yards, BCs don't really matter in hunting applications. Out to 300, they matter for precision placement of bullets so that big game is not wounded and small game is not missed. Beyond 300, BCs matter if you want to hit your target.

Furthermore, most people think about BCs in terms of trajectory only. That's a mistake. BC matters a great deal to delivered energy, and you don't have to get very 'far out' for the differences to REALLY matter. If you 'live' WAY above the lethal threshold with all of your bullets over all of the ranges you use, then BC matters less. However, changing the impact energy by as little as 25%, (250 to 350 ft-lbs), MATTERS if you care about animals being "dead right there" or animals running off 100(s) of yards and then dying. Relative to other bullets available, the bullets I use in my 7mm magnums have BCs about like barn doors. 'Within range', they hammer ALL big game. 'Beyond range' they are not a 'hammer', and are certain to allow some running after the shot if the animal isn't struck somewhere in the central nervous system.

In my later years, I try to use cartridges and bullets that deliver energy WAY above the lethal threshold for the animals I hunt at the ranges I am willing to shoot. BC plays a role in the selection process. Therefore, when a company absurdly exaggerates the specs on their products, (thereby confounding my efforts to "do good work"), AND their products don't perform as well as other company's products, why on God's earth would I use them?

Paul

[recoil junky]

I still see Barnes bullets the same way since they went solid copper or guilding metal or whatever. ALL hype. You physically need to be at the perfect yardage to expect them to work like they are supposed to. Even the Hornady solid copper offering is a POS.

 I'm currently trying to get some Perigrine solid "copper" bullets in .308 for testing in the 30-06 AI and 300RUM. They claim fantastic things too.

RJ