AndiScan micro A2

[hounddawg]

Looks as if at least one new new doppler radar chrono will be out this year to compete against the LR. While at first glance it solves all of the issues I have with Labradar I am still hesitant about dropping $800 for something I really don't need. However being a tech junkie I can see me picking one up for the brag factor once it has been out a few months and I am satisfied it is bug free and will pick up 99% of my shots reliably. Just being small enough to fit in my range bag has me drooling.

web page - https://www.sqi-andix.com/?page_id=666

user manual - https://www.sqi-andix.com/wp-content...-A1_A1.0.0.pdf

F Class John unboxing video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GPcSZWBL3Q

Fclass John should have a demo video up in the next couple of days.

edited to add user manual link

[markr6754]

I watched the unboxing video and my interest was piqued, until I heard the anticipated price. I know the technology is inside the box, but it just didn't seem justified at an $800 price. Some will jump on it....I'll wait for further developments.

I'm really incredulous that this device can be mounted anywhere, considering how often the LabRadar fails to trigger with the muzzle right alongside in close proximity. But...hey, maybe that's where the technology is these days.

[hounddawg]

At the moment the LR is 600 bare bones, by the time you add in a carry bag, a base plate, remote trigger, aiming device and external battery you would have over 700 into it so the price is competitive considering the current competition. Keep in mind the Caldwell doppler unit should be out by the end of the year and it is priced at around $300. A lot more reasonable for something I regard as a luxury/ego item

That said I agree the price is high for the LR and this unit. At the moment my ProChrono gives me everything I need from a chrono and I also keep a Magnetospeed sporter in my bag for those emergency spot checks. I certainly will not be a early adopter, but when prices drop who knows. I will not buying anything to replace my optical until the Calwell hits the market, and possibly not even then

[Unclenick]

Amazing what 3D printers can do these days, even unto production.

I like the statistical information they give in the manual and on the screen. It lacks some of LR's features, though. For one, at 20°×10°, the beam diverges faster, so it measures only its best estimate of muzzle velocity and nothing further downrange, where the S/N ratio would worsen rapidly. If you are going to mount it to a rifle, MV is all you could ask for, as recoil will quickly re-aim it anyway. It does not appear to have an input argument for the mounting distance from the gun, so it can't correct the output for that aspect of the geometry as LR does. You have to use their table for that.

[hounddawg]

Is Labradar supposed to estimate muzzle velocity? If so it does a lousy job.
it appears to be measuring at about 12 feet out, which is where I had my Prochrono setup. See attached graphic

As far as your other concerns we will just have to wait and see how the actual tests work out. FClass John will be testing the beta version side by side with the Labradar and his initial video should be out this week

In regard to myself since I already have 2 chronos, the magnetospeed for convenience and the prochrono for load development I have no need of a third. If I decide to pick up a doppler unit just for grins I will wait until the Caldwell is released. I think competition is great though, when the Caldwell unit hits the market prices may drop and the Labradar may finally address some of the flaws it has had since it's release 7 years ago

edited to include the latest version of the spreadsheet

[Unclenick]

I may have been unclear. The AndiScan only measures a near-muzzle number for the reasons I explained. "Near" in this context being a fairly normal chronograph distance, from what I can tell. When you read the manual it says they favor putting the unit as close to the bore axis as possible to minimize the error introduced in the measurement from the radar being further from the bore axis and "seeing" the bullet at an angle. They diagram the cause. It's a vector angle problem you can solve with trig or by the Pythagorean theorem with simple algebra. For a 2500 fps bullet at 15 feet from the muzzle, a reading by radar taken one half a foot to the side of the muzzle will be 2499 fps. Taken one foot to the side it will be 2495 fps. Taken three feet to the side it will be 2467 fps. If you know you are one half, one, or three feet to the side you can correct for the error, which the LabRadar does by having you enter that offset distance, and knowing the angle of dispersion of your beam. That, combined with the offset distance, tells you how far away the bullet will be when you first pick up it's microwave reflection provided you have the center of the beam aimed reasonably accurately at the center of the bullet's POI on the target. When you tell the LabRadar how far to the side (or under or over would be the same) it is, it makes the compensating calculation. The AndiScan does not, so it depends on keeping the offset small to maintain accuracy.

[hounddawg]

all true Nick, the vector problem is why one either needs to input the correct values into it each time or discrepancies will occur between uses. I have pointed that out many times in the past. With my optical I set it up with a tape measure and a laser bore guide each time to make sure that the distance from the muzzle and bullets path over the sensors is the same from session to session for consistency. LR users should do the same to ensure the bullet is picked up at the same point each time.

With Andiscans small footprint of appx 3.5 inches by 2.5 inches keeping it aligned with the bore should be easy. Since it can either be mounted on the rifle itself, on the rest, or under the rifle on the bench consistency will be easier than either with a LR or a optical. Mounting it on the rifle or directly under the barrel on the bench should make aiming a no brainer. Possibly it could be mounted on, beside or above the scope as well. Time will tell, I am sure once it is released we will see some interesting innovations

I have made it pretty clear in past threads I don't rely on chrono numbers for my load developments, the target does not lie. So while I will not be a early adopter the tech geek in me is looking forward the videos and reviews of the beta testers.

[hounddawg]

my biggest takeaways from this video

- retail units will use injection molded housings rather than 3D printed
- when using the rail mount it picked up much more consistently
- works great with .22 LR
- the wifi never dropped
- unit is still in beta and developer seems to be very open to suggestions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkBBzGPIJHU&t=2s

once it goes commercial I will have a hard time stopping myself from buying one even though my common sense says spending that kind of money on a chrono is just plain stupid

[HKGuns]

Has this unit been officially produced yet? Seems there is a V2 imminent but no feedback other than F-Class John’s pre-prod videos from earlier this year?

[stagpanther]

I wonder how sensitive the unit is--often the "acid test" for me is how well it can go down to very small signatures--like a 17HMR or 22 lr. I see the logic behind keeping its line of sight as close to that of the bore as possible, similar to a magnetospeed. I may have missed it--can you "set and forget" no matter what kind of cartridge you are using? The only weak spot I have with labradar is the transition zone for settings between pistol and rifle around 1700 fps, sometimes I have to reverse the type of gun depending on what velocities I'm getting. No big deal deal, except I have to remember the setting.

[HKGuns]

The issue I have with LR is it’s size as compared to this one you can keep in your pocket. I have enough crap to take to the range as it stands now.

[stagpanther]

The issue I have with LR is it’s size as compared to this one you can keep in your pocket. I have enough crap to take to the range as it stands now.

For me no other product does what LR does so I don't mind the hassle of hauling it along. I have it pretty well integrated into my system of hand-load development along with QuickLoad. Doesn't mean I'm not open to newer stuff.

[stagpanther]

I like the statistical information they give in the manual and on the screen. It lacks some of LR's features, though. For one, at 20°×10°, the beam diverges faster, so it measures only its best estimate of muzzle velocity and nothing further downrange, where the S/N ratio would worsen rapidly. If you are going to mount it to a rifle, MV is all you could ask for, as recoil will quickly re-aim it anyway.

Does this mean it gives you at the muzzle only velocity? That would be a deal-breaker for me compared to LR.

[HKGuns]

Originally Posted by stagpanther

Does this mean it gives you at the muzzle only velocity? That would be a deal-breaker for me compared to LR.

No it normally gives a reading 1 to 2 meters, 3 to 5 maximum in front of the muzzle.