I think its much more accurate to shoot in marks for 30 and 60 along with a short mark (like 5 yards) and then let Archers Advantage create the tape. For example; the tape that AA generated for my setup calculated a speed of 304.3 FPS. All the marks are dead on for all distances right out to 140 yards. When i shoot thru a chrono it shows 309 FPS. So if i simply plugged in 309 to get a tape that tape would be off.

 

Definitely think there’s some tweaking and validation that will need to be done. It did seem fairly accurate the tapes that were made from velocities at launch, 60/40/20. Then again… I don’t want to fall for everything I see on YouTube since some is paid content 😂

 

Garmin is really nice. Very consistent, portable, easy to use.

With Precision Cut Archery you can shoot two distance points with the chronograph and build a tape off of it, which is faster than shooting in a tape. For example, shoot an arrow and build the tape off of the speed at launch and 60 yards.

 

Garmin is really nice. Very consistent, portable, easy to use.

With Precision Cut Archery you can shoot two distance points with the chronograph and build a tape off of it, which is faster than shooting in a tape. For example, shoot an arrow and build the tape off of the speed at launch and 60 yards.

Thats what I was thinking. I liked the portability and usability of the Garmin, but know it’s not as easy to measure down range velos. Have you had any experience doing that?

 

I used my garmin and precision cut to make a tape. Way faster than AA. Shot over the chrono at 15 yards and then backed up and left the chrono where it was and shot 60. Plugged in the speeds from each along with launch speed and arrow weight etc etc etc tape came out perfect.

 

ANY chrono you use, shoot several arrows, 5-7, and average them out. I always chrono mine then run the number through AA and verify.

 

Shooting in marks with archers advantage absolutely works.

I recently bought a LabRadar for a steal and created a tape in precision cut archery.

It was very very accurate as well.

 

Every time I feel like I have the decision made, I freeze. I understand the frustrations with the labradar that people cite, but not sure that applies to archery as much. The Garmin seems awesome, but for the price difference… just hard to decide.

 

I’ve done a fair bit of testing with both the Lab Radar and Garmin. Honestly, at this point, I’m not sure which I’d recommend spending money on.

I’d say the Garmin is a much cleaner system and 100x more enjoyable to use. The Lab Radar is ‘clunky,’ the app does not work well at all, and it’s generally a bit of a pain.

The sole drawback to the Garmin is needing to move it downrange to get downrange velocity readings for making tapes with our software, if you choose that route. For a tape every now and then, it’s certainly doable.

I’ve made tapes / measured downrange velocities with each. The readings have been virtually identical (within 0.2-0.3 fps consistently), and tapes produced are indistinguishable.

When I’m going to specifically make a tape, I grab the Lab Radar just because I can get everything in a few shots. For everything else, I grab the Garmin.

Shooting in marks is just fine. It just takes a while, and depending on the archer’s ability, shooter error is always a factor to some extent. A perfect tape in just a few shots is pretty awesome.

PS: Full disclosure, we don’t pay anyone for content of any kind. 🙂

 

I’ve done a fair bit of testing with both the Lab Radar and Garmin. Honestly, at this point, I’m not sure which I’d recommend spending money on.

I’d say the Garmin is a much cleaner system and 100x more enjoyable to use. The Lab Radar is ‘clunky,’ the app does not work well at all, and it’s generally a bit of a pain.

The sole drawback to the Garmin is needing to move it downrange to get downrange velocity readings for making tapes with our software, if you choose that route. For a tape every now and then, it’s certainly doable.

I’ve made tapes / measured downrange velocities with each. The readings have been virtually identical (within 0.2-0.3 fps consistently), and tapes produced are indistinguishable.

When I’m going to specifically make a tape, I grab the Lab Radar just because I can get everything in a few shots. For everything else, I grab the Garmin.

Shooting in marks is just fine. It just takes a while, and depending on the archer’s ability, shooter error is always a factor to some extent. A perfect tape in just a few shots is pretty awesome.

PS: Full disclosure, we don’t pay anyone for content of any kind. 🙂

This is incredibly helpful to have the insight. That said… I feel the same way! The labradar has its flaws, but for the speed, hard to argue. That said… I love the Garmin for all the other reasons. I really like the idea of the walk back shooting and making it more simplistic. For $200, it just seems like there’s no simple answer ha.
And appreciate that it’s not paid content! There were a few things in the past I wish I had checked multiple sources on, and glad to hear this was likely a legit review I saw.

 

I got the Garmin and used it to make a tape with Precision Cut. I measured launch speed and speed at 65. I found that the arrow doesn't have to be directly over the Garmin - it can be to the side of it. So I positioned a tripod offset within about a yard of where I estimated the arrow would travel about 10 yards from the target. Then I shot from 75.

I'm really impressed with the tape it made. I shot out to 115 yesterday and the tape is as accurate as I can shoot.