Athlon Rangecraft Chronograph at S&S Archery

[kevingm1987]

Can you guys do another round of testing with multiple Athlons? The 15fps error is unacceptable, particularly on archery... I get that it's a small deviation at those speeds, but for archery it isn't a small deviation. Plus the principle of the thing. I'm hoping you just had a bad unit. Did you reach out to Athlon and ask them what gives? I have to imagine that they tested these things and found them to be accurate enough to go toe to to with the Garmin. If it can't do the one thing it is supposed to do with a high degree of accuracy, then I can't trust it for building dope and messing with my arrow set up.

Most likely a software issue not a hardware. Hopefully an update can fix the problem.

 

[wapitibob]

hard pass

 

[Schmo]

@S&S Archery (Rob), I just ordered one of these from your site today. Curious if you know if you have enough in your shipment to satisfy all current orders, or if I’ll have to wait on a restock?

 

[Decker]

As promised.. thanks for your "patience"! Ha!

And be gentle, we cut a few corners getting this out quickly.

Appreciate the review. Little underwhelming on the function tho. I understand not all chronographs will read the same but for archery 15-20 fps is a big jump. Sure some ppl won’t mind but this wasn’t marketed for just rifle shooting. I hope this is solved early with an update.

 

[S&S Archery (Rob)]

I can't speak to exactly how many will be able to ship. But I will say that the most likely cut off is April 1st. Any orders before then will ship Monday Tuesday and Wednesday and any orders after April 1st will ship late May or early June

 

[Kabhere]

As promised.. thanks for your "patience"! Ha!

And be gentle, we cut a few corners getting this out quickly.

Just received mine in the mail today thank you guys for the review & comparisons. Can’t wait to try it out

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[43.6N]

After having watched a few YouTube videos, specifically ones that compare the athlon to the Garmin, I’ve come to a few conclusions. And I think I can explain the difference in measurements:

-Both devices list a measurement error at +/- 0.1%. Both devices report measured velocity to the 1st decimal place. So for a 2700.0fps true speed, margin of error would range from 2697.3-2702.7
-Both devices list very similar SD and ES numbers for shot strings. None of the recorded shot strings are big enough for statistical analysis, but suggest they are deriving their analytical data appropriately.
-in almost every shot string, the athlon is reporting between 5-20 fps higher mean velocities depending on caliber. Based on sea level density altitudes, the calculated velocity for 140eldm starting at 2700fps results in approx 15fps lost in the first 10yds. (AB elite, 350DA)
This velocity discrepancy roughly matches the difference between chronographs.

We do not know where exactly the different chronographs are programmed to sample velocity from. Is it the first 10yds? 15? We also do not know what type of post processing calculations occur before the speed is displayed. Is it displaying data at point of measure? At muzzle? At the location of the chrono( 6-12” behind the muzzle)?

Based on what I’m seeing I think a reasonable explanation for the difference in speeds could be as follows:
The athlon is either
A) programmed to sample data closer to the muzzle than Garmin. It then reports the data at the point of measurement. A difference of 10 yds could account for the velocity differences.
B) It samples data at the same point as the Garmin, BUT is programmed to back calculate to the muzzle, while the Garmin reports velocity at point of measure.
C) some combination of A/B

I’m looking forward to mine arriving, and seeing how it trues to my 1000yd drop calculated velocity.

 

[Schmo]

After having watched a few YouTube videos, specifically ones that compare the athlon to the Garmin, I’ve come to a few conclusions. And I think I can explain the difference in measurements:

-Both devices list a measurement error at +/- 0.1%. Both devices report measured velocity to the 1st decimal place. So for a 2700.0fps true speed, margin of error would range from 2697.3-2702.7
-Both devices list very similar SD and ES numbers for shot strings. None of the recorded shot strings are big enough for statistical analysis, but suggest they are deriving their analytical data appropriately.
-in almost every shot string, the athlon is reporting between 5-20 fps higher mean velocities depending on caliber. Based on sea level density altitudes, the calculated velocity for 140eldm starting at 2700fps results in approx 15fps lost in the first 10yds. (AB elite, 350DA)
This velocity discrepancy roughly matches the difference between chronographs.

We do not know where exactly the different chronographs are programmed to sample velocity from. Is it the first 10yds? 15? We also do not know what type of post processing calculations occur before the speed is displayed. Is it displaying data at point of measure? At muzzle? At the location of the chrono( 6-12” behind the muzzle)?

Based on what I’m seeing I think a reasonable explanation for the difference in speeds could be as follows:
The athlon is either
A) programmed to sample data closer to the muzzle than Garmin. It then reports the data at the point of measurement. A difference of 10 yds could account for the velocity differences.
B) It samples data at the same point as the Garmin, BUT is programmed to back calculate to the muzzle, while the Garmin reports velocity at point of measure.
C) some combination of A/B

I’m looking forward to mine arriving, and seeing how it trues to my 1000yd drop calculated velocity.

Seems like you’re probably right. Can’t wait for mine to come!

 

[Schmo]

Found this to be interesting. Not saying it’s a relevant data size, but maybe something along the lines of this could be done further. You’ll need to watch the whole thing to get what I mean, but where it comes in is about 9 minutes in.

 

[Schmo]

Another thing I would ask, because I honestly don’t know. Is there a possibility that running more than 1 radar unit at the same time, trying to ping the same projectile, would cause incorrect readings? It makes sense to me that the signals could conflict with each other, but I’m know nothing about Doppler radar.

 

[Turkeytider]

Another thing I would ask, because I honestly don’t know. Is there a possibility that running more than 1 radar unit at the same time, trying to ping the same projectile, would cause incorrect readings? It makes sense to me that the signals could conflict with each other, but I’m know nothing about Doppler radar.

Well, FWIW, I posed the question on google concerning possible interference between Doppler units in close proximity, leading to inaccurate and spurious readings. It would appear that it can indeed occur. A well known poster on The High Road, Varminterror, is doing some rather extensive comparison. In one of his posts, he confirmed seeing interference.

 

[Schmo]

Well, FWIW, I posed the question on google concerning possible interference between Doppler units in close proximity, leading to inaccurate and spurious readings. It would appear that it can indeed occur. A well known poster on The High Road, Varminterror, is doing some rather extensive comparison. In one of his posts, he confirmed seeing interference.

The following is from Chat GPT


Yes, multiple Doppler radar chronographs placed in close proximity can interfere with each other, potentially leading to inaccurate or inconsistent readings. Here’s why:



How Interference Happens:

1. Similar Frequencies: Most Doppler radar chronographs operate using similar frequency bands (often in the microwave spectrum). If two units are transmitting at or near the same frequency, their signals can overlap and cause interference.

2. Overlapping Detection Zones: If the devices are aimed similarly and in close proximity, their radar beams can cross or bounce off the same surfaces (including the projectile), confusing the signal processing algorithms.

3. Cross-triggering: One unit might pick up the projectile and the radar reflections from another chronograph, mistaking it for part of the target’s motion.



Likely Effects:

• Incorrect velocity readings

• Missed shots (no read)

• Erratic or highly variable numbers

• Reduced reliability, especially in multi-shot sequences



Best Practices to Avoid Interference:

• Space the chronographs apart — ideally several feet between units.

• Angle the radar units slightly away from each other to prevent overlapping beams.

• Use only one at a time for critical measurements, unless you’re intentionally comparing units.

• Check manufacturer guidance — some models have specific recommendations or shielding methods.



If you’re testing with multiple units (e.g., comparing LabRadar vs. Garmin Xero C1), it’s usually best to run one at a time for clean, dependable data.

 

[Turkeytider]

The following is from Chat GPT


Yes, multiple Doppler radar chronographs placed in close proximity can interfere with each other, potentially leading to inaccurate or inconsistent readings. Here’s why:



How Interference Happens:

1. Similar Frequencies: Most Doppler radar chronographs operate using similar frequency bands (often in the microwave spectrum). If two units are transmitting at or near the same frequency, their signals can overlap and cause interference.

2. Overlapping Detection Zones: If the devices are aimed similarly and in close proximity, their radar beams can cross or bounce off the same surfaces (including the projectile), confusing the signal processing algorithms.

3. Cross-triggering: One unit might pick up the projectile and the radar reflections from another chronograph, mistaking it for part of the target’s motion.



Likely Effects:

• Incorrect velocity readings

• Missed shots (no read)

• Erratic or highly variable numbers

• Reduced reliability, especially in multi-shot sequences



Best Practices to Avoid Interference:

• Space the chronographs apart — ideally several feet between units.

• Angle the radar units slightly away from each other to prevent overlapping beams.

• Use only one at a time for critical measurements, unless you’re intentionally comparing units.

• Check manufacturer guidance — some models have specific recommendations or shielding methods.



If you’re testing with multiple units (e.g., comparing LabRadar vs. Garmin Xero C1), it’s usually best to run one at a time for clean, dependable data.

JMO, but this kind of throws shade on the METHODOLOGY, not the individual units, that is being used in a number of the on line comparison reviews. In some they’re lining these Doppler units practically right up next to each other.

 

[Schmo]

JMO, but this kind of throws shade on the METHODOLOGY, not the individual units, that is being used in a number of the on line comparison reviews. In some they’re lining these Doppler units practically right up next to each other.

Exactly!

 

[Magnumwill]

What I have seen with a lot of tests, is that the units they are testing are not point in the same angles, not the same distance on both sides of the rifles etc. If someone really wanted to put together a rock-solid test, they would make a test fixture where those variables could be controlled.

 

[43.6N]

I got my chrono from S&S yesterday.
Took it out and put 40 rounds of factory Hornady Match 140eldm out of my 18” tikka 6.5 CM.

Device was positioned as recommended just behind the muzzle and about 4 inches to the side.

Without suppressor I averaged 2498fps over 20 shots. Then placed the suppressor on and shot another 20. Suppressed it averaged 2518fps.

Both have matched up to previous chrono measurements I’ve taken. Even down to the 20fps bump from the can.

Important to note that my real world 1100yd ballistic drop trued with a mv of 2504 for this lot of ammo (performed without suppressor).

I find the results acceptable and am happy with my purchase.

 

[KyleR1985]

I got my chrono from S&S yesterday.
Took it out and put 40 rounds of factory Hornady Match 140eldm out of my 18” tikka 6.5 CM.

Device was positioned as recommended just behind the muzzle and about 4 inches to the side.

Without suppressor I averaged 2498fps over 20 shots. Then placed the suppressor on and shot another 20. Suppressed it averaged 2518fps.

Both have matched up to previous chrono measurements I’ve taken. Even down to the 20fps bump from the can.

Important to note that my real world 1100yd ballistic drop trued with a mv of 2504 for this lot of ammo (performed without suppressor).

I find the results acceptable and am happy with my purchase.

+/- .23% ain’t bad. Ain’t bad at all.

Thanks for the real world data, especially with the dope backing it up.

 

[Tired03]

Did anyone receive their order yet? I am just waiting on a few more good reviews to decide between garmin/athlon.

 

[Tired03]

I got my chrono from S&S yesterday.
Took it out and put 40 rounds of factory Hornady Match 140eldm out of my 18” tikka 6.5 CM.

Device was positioned as recommended just behind the muzzle and about 4 inches to the side.

Without suppressor I averaged 2498fps over 20 shots. Then placed the suppressor on and shot another 20. Suppressed it averaged 2518fps.

Both have matched up to previous chrono measurements I’ve taken. Even down to the 20fps bump from the can.

Important to note that my real world 1100yd ballistic drop trued with a mv of 2504 for this lot of ammo (performed without suppressor).

I find the results acceptable and am happy with my purchase.

Thanks for the review! I am going to get one on order soon.

 

[TheCougar]

I posted this on the other thread:

I’m not satisfied with the unit. I took it to the range and had it next to 2 other garmins, swapping sides, moving around positions - the Athlon consistently read high by 10-15fps average. The garmins were showing right around the dope that I have verified for my rifle (we shot out to 900). It also read 10fps fast on my bow for the cold bow challenge. I didn’t have anything to check it against, but I know my bow isn’t pushing 296fps+. Last I checked it was mid 280s.