{"id":19783,"date":"2026-09-03T16:15:50","date_gmt":"2026-09-03T16:15:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/?p=19783"},"modified":"2026-09-03T16:15:50","modified_gmt":"2026-09-03T16:15:50","slug":"garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/","title":{"rendered":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph"},"content":{"rendered":"

Chronographs have come a long way in the last few years. When I started using one years ago at the range, it was equipment I tolerated but never really enjoyed. Traditional optical chronographs were fiddly and easy to break, even with minor movement. The lighting had to be just right, the position downrange had to be almost exact, and the stars often had to align if you wanted accurate readings from anything with a shorter barrel. Believe me when I say, it was nothing like using a modern Garmin chronograph today.<\/p>\n

It was a bit like watching television on a coaxial antenna in the 1980’s and 90’s. Your bunny ears could pull in VHF signals, while your hoop could tune UHF stations. It worked fine until the weather changed, or Uncle Bob walked in front of the set. Then you were twisting, turning, standing on things, and wrapping yourself in aluminum foil<\/a> to get your show back on the screen.<\/p>\n

The readings at the range were consistent enough. As long as you made sure to check them against the manufacturer’s listed box speeds. Otherwise, you’d have to head back out the next day to try again and troubleshoot what went wrong with your calibration. To say it was a chore would be an understatement. Thankfully, compact Doppler radar chronographs have changed the industry considerably.<\/p>\n

Let’s dive in and take a look at two of the best options available today.<\/p>\n

Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph<\/h2>\n

Two of the most interesting modern options are the Garmin Xero C1 Pro and the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro<\/a>. Both are small, rechargeable radar chronographs, capable of measuring a wide variety of projectiles at various velocities. Both can be operated independently of the firearm, meaning they don’t need to be attached to the gun or barrel to make them work. They also don’t utilize optical sensors, so you don’t need to shoot projectiles through a set of screens or antennas to get a ballistic reading.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Tech Specs<\/th>\nGarmin Xero C1 Pro<\/th>\nAthlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Dimensions (WxHxD)<\/td>\n3.03″ x 2.38″ x 1.36″<\/td>\n3.5″ x 2.7″ x 1.2″<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Weight<\/td>\n3.7 oz<\/td>\n4.7 oz<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Display<\/td>\n2.2″ (Matte) Transflective Monochrome LCD (240×320)<\/td>\n2.4″ (Gloss) Transflective LCD (240×320)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Battery Life\/Type<\/td>\nUp To 6 Hours\/Internal Lithium-Ion<\/td>\nUp To 6 Hours\/Internal Lithium-Ion<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Charging Port<\/td>\nUSB-C<\/td>\nUSB-C<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Compatibility<\/td>\nRifle, Pistol, Shotgun, Air Rifle, Air Soft, Bow, Crossbow & More<\/td>\nRifle, Pistol, Shotgun, Air Rifle, Air Soft, Bow, Crossbow & More<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Measurement System<\/td>\nDoppler Radar<\/td>\nDoppler Radar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Calculated Outputs<\/td>\nAverage Velocity, Extreme Spread (ES), Standard Deviation (SD), Muzzle Energy, Power Factor<\/td>\nAverage Velocity, Extreme Spread (ES), Standard Deviation (SD), Kinetic Energy, Power Factor<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Velocity Range<\/td>\n100 FPS- 5,000 FPS<\/td>\n65 FPS- 5,000 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Velocity Accuracy<\/td>\n\u00b10.1%<\/td>\n\u00b10.1%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Muzzle\/Light Sensitivity<\/td>\nUnaffected\/Unaffected<\/td>\nUnaffected\/Unaffected<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Internal Data Storage<\/td>\n50 sessions, maximum 100 shots per session<\/td>\n50 sessions, maximum 100 shots per session<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Operating Temperature<\/td>\n14\u00b0F-122\u00b0F<\/td>\n14\u00b0F-131\u00b0F<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Weatherproof<\/td>\nIPX7 (Water)<\/td>\nIP67 (Dust & Water)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Bluetooth<\/td>\n2.4 GHz\/Bluetooth Smart<\/td>\n2.4 GHz\/Bluetooth Smart<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Companion App<\/td>\nYes\/Garmin ShotView<\/td>\nYes\/Ballistics Lite<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tripod Mount<\/td>\n1\/4″ Thread – Tripod Included<\/td>\n1\/4″ Thread – Tripod Included<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Made In<\/td>\nTiawan<\/td>\nChina<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Warranty<\/td>\n1-Year Limited Warranty<\/td>\n1-Year Limited Warranty<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MSRP<\/td>\n$599.99<\/td>\n$499.99<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

How Does a Doppler Radar Chronograph Work?<\/h3>\n

A Doppler radar chronograph measures projectile velocity by transmitting radio waves toward the path of the bullet. The chronograph analyzes the signals reflected back from the moving projectile to record the data. As the bullet moves downrange, its motion causes small changes in the frequency of the reflected signal. These small changes are a phenomenon better known as the Doppler effect.<\/p>\n

Radar chronographs use these frequency changes to calculate how fast the bullet is moving. This calculation can be expressed as: Doppler frequency shift \u2248 (2 x projectile velocity x radar frequency) \u00f7 speed of light. The factor of two is important because the radar signal makes a round trip. It travels from the chronograph to the projectile, then is reflected back toward the chronograph.<\/p>\n

How does this method compare to a traditional chronograph? A traditional chronograph requires a bullet to pass through optical sensors (photocells) to collect data. It measures how long a projectile takes to travel a known distance. A radar chronograph primarily measures radial velocity to collect its data. Meaning, it measures movement directly toward or away from the radar.<\/p>\n

Garmin Chronograph: Hands-On Overview<\/h2>\n
\"a

The Garmin chronograph has two screen display options: white or black.<\/p><\/div>\n

Garmin’s\u00a0Xero C1 Pro<\/a> entered the market first. Setting expectations for what shooters should expect from a radar chronograph. It looks and feels like a premium unit. It came with a premium price tag, though it can often be found on sale for around $400. The amount of technology it’s able to fit into such a small size is impressive. It weighs less than 4 ounces, fits in the palm of your hand, and reads more velocities (100 FPS – 5,000 FPS) than most users will ever need. It works well with SBRs and suppressed weapons, along with guns featuring muzzle brakes and compensators.<\/p>\n

The design is modern and minimalistic, allowing you to operate it with one hand. The screen has a matte finish that resists fingerprints and scratches. The included tripod is well thought out and matches the premium feel of the unit. You get an instruction manual, warranty card, and a USB cable in the box, but no protective case. Setup is quick and easy, and pairing it to the supported app only takes a few seconds. Overall, it feels like a good investment, something that will last and allow you to get your money’s worth out of it before it becomes obsolete.<\/p>\n

Athlon Chronograph: Hands-On Overview<\/h2>\n
\"Athlon

The Athlon chronograph has four screen display options: white, grey, black, or dark.<\/p><\/div>\n

The Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro may appear to be a “budget” unit, with an MSRP $100 lower than the Garmin. However, there’s a lot of value packed into this portable radar chronograph. The build quality rivals that of the Garmin unit, with the only downside being the glossy, highly reflective LCD screen. It weighs 1 ounce more, is 15% larger, and offers a slightly larger display. The Athlon covers a wider range of velocities, offers more screen display options, and provides more customization than the Garmin C1 unit.<\/p>\n

It also comes with a nice hardshell zipper case to protect it. In the box, you get a printed manual, warranty card, tripod, Allen key, and a USB cable. Setup does take a few extra steps, but as I mentioned, this allows you more customization. Connecting to the app is quick, and if you already have the app installed for other Athlon products, syncing ballistic data is seamless. Overall, you’re getting a lot of bang for your buck, and a platform that feels well thought out, allowing you to harness the vastness of the Athlon ecosystem.<\/p>\n

Velocity Accuracy Overview<\/h2>\n

Without a doubt, velocity accuracy is the most important aspect of ballistic testing. If your data isn’t good, your numbers aren’t helping you. Both units list a \u00b10.1% margin of error. That may seem minuscule, but even a small offset between unit measurements can make a big difference in accuracy further downrange. It’s also important to remember that the velocity displayed by these units is not the measured velocity, but rather the calculated velocity at the muzzle. The Garmin chronograph measures velocities ranging from 100 FPS to 5,000 FPS, while the Athlon model measures 65 FPS to 5,000 FPS.<\/p>\n

Rifle Velocity Accuracy<\/h3>\n

Rifle data recorded as follows. Sig Sauer Speer rifle, chambered in .277 SIG Fury, with a 16″ barrel. Ammo used is .277 SIG Fury 135gr FMJ, box speed listed as 2,750 FPS. Chrono data recorded as follows. Garmin Xero C1 Pro and the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro set to rifle caliber; 1,800-5,000 FPS selected, custom grain weight set to 135gr. The chronograph units were placed approximately 12″ behind the muzzle and 12″ to the right of the muzzle per the manufacturer’s instructions. Data recorded are as follows:<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n
Chronograph<\/th>\nCaliber<\/b><\/th>\nBullet Type\/Weight<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 1)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 2)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 3)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 4)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 5)<\/b><\/th>\n5-Shot Average<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Garmin Xero C1<\/td>\n.277 Sig Fury<\/td>\nFMJ\/135gr<\/td>\n2,714 FPS<\/td>\n2,710 FPS<\/td>\n2,720 FPS<\/td>\n2,712 FPS<\/td>\n2,722 FPS<\/td>\n2,715 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Athlon Rangecraft Pro<\/td>\n.277 Sig Fury<\/td>\nFMJ\/135gr<\/td>\n2,733 FPS<\/td>\n2,724 FPS<\/td>\n2,735 FPS<\/td>\n2,730 FPS<\/td>\n2,728 FPS<\/td>\n2,730 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

We see an average muzzle velocity of 2,715 FPS with the Garmin Xero C1 Pro. In comparison, we see an average muzzle velocity of 2,730 FPS with the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro. A difference of 14.4 FPS on average between the two units, with the Garmin having a higher standard deviation of 4.63 FPS. The Athlon, in comparison, had the tighter extreme spread by 1 FPS (10 FPS VS 11 FPS). My theory is that the velocity differences here have more to do with the interpolation of the data being processed by the units at distance than variances in the ammo. The two sets are remarkably close in consistency, with the Athlon reading an average of 0.53% higher in velocities than the Garmin chronograph.<\/p>\n

Pistol Velocity Accuracy<\/h3>\n
\"photo

Both radar chronographs can measure velocities of rifles, pistols, shotguns, air rifles, airsoft guns, bows, crossbows, and more.<\/p><\/div>\n

Pistol data recorded as follows. Glock Model 45 pistol, chambered in 9x19mm, with a 4.02″ barrel. Ammo used is 9x19mm 124gr Federal HST +P JHP<\/a>, box speed listed as 1,200 FPS. Chrono data recorded as follows. Garmin Xero C1 Pro and the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro set to pistol caliber; 600-1,8000 FPS selected, custom grain weight set to 124gr. The chronograph units were placed approximately 12″ behind the muzzle and 12″ to the right of the muzzle per the manufacturer’s instructions. Data recorded are as follows:<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n
Chronograph<\/th>\nCaliber<\/b><\/th>\nBullet Type\/Weight<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 1)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 2)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 3)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 4)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 5)<\/b><\/th>\n5-Shot Average<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Garmin Xero C1<\/td>\n9x19mm<\/td>\nJHP\/124gr +P<\/td>\n1,181 FPS<\/td>\n1,187 FPS<\/td>\n1,191 FPS<\/td>\n1,181 FPS<\/td>\n1,185 FPS<\/td>\n1,185 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Athlon Rangecraft Pro<\/td>\n9x19mm<\/td>\nJHP\/124gr +P<\/td>\n1,199 FPS<\/td>\n1,202 FPS<\/td>\n1,190 FPS<\/td>\n1,203 FPS<\/td>\n1,195 FPS<\/td>\n1,197 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

The pistol data is even closer. We see an average muzzle velocity of 1,185 FPS with the Garmin Xero C1 Pro. We also see an average muzzle velocity of 1,195 FPS with the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro. A difference of 12.8 FPS on average between the two units, with the Athlon having a higher standard deviation of 4.71 FPS. The Garmin, in comparison, had the tighter extreme spread by 3 FPS (10 FPS VS 13 FPS). Again, we see the Athlon unit recording higher velocities, averaging 1.08% higher than the Garmin chronograph. The data appears to support my interpolation theory, indicating that the units likely “ping” the bullets at different downrange distances.<\/p>\n

Rimfire Velocity Accuracy<\/h3>\n

Rimfire data recorded as follows. Ruger 10-22 model rifle, chambered in .22 LR, with a 16″ barrel. Ammo used is CCI Standard Velocity .22 LR 40gr LRN<\/a>, box speed listed as 1,070 FPS. Chrono data recorded as follows. Garmin Xero C1 Pro and the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro set to rifle caliber; 600-1,8000 FPS selected, custom grain weight set to 124gr. The chronograph units were placed approximately 12″ behind the muzzle and 12″ to the right of the muzzle per the manufacturer’s instructions. Data recorded are as follows:<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n
Chronograph<\/th>\nCaliber<\/b><\/th>\nBullet Type\/Weight<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 1)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 2)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 3)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 4)<\/b><\/th>\nMuzzle Velocity (Shot 5)<\/b><\/th>\n5-Shot Average<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Garmin Xero C1<\/td>\n.22 LR<\/td>\nLRN\/40gr<\/td>\n1,055 FPS<\/td>\n1,041 FPS<\/td>\n1,038 FPS<\/td>\n1,040 FPS<\/td>\n1,033 FPS<\/td>\n1,041 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Athlon Rangecraft Pro<\/td>\n.22 LR<\/td>\nLRN\/40gr<\/td>\n1,067 FPS<\/td>\n1,058 FPS<\/td>\n1,050 FPS<\/td>\n1,045 FPS<\/td>\n1,050 FPS<\/td>\n1,054 FPS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

The rimfire data is interesting. We see an average muzzle velocity of 1,041 FPS with the Garmin Xero C1 Pro. We also see a higher average muzzle velocity of 1,054 FPS with the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro. A difference of 12.6 FPS on average between the two units, with the Athlon having a higher standard deviation of 7.72 FPS. In comparison, both units had the same extreme spread measured at 22 FPS. The Athlon unit recorded higher rimfire velocities, averaging 1.21% higher than the Garmin chronograph.<\/p>\n

Down the Rabbit Hole: Velocity Accuracy<\/h2>\n

How accurate does velocity accuracy need to be? From the data collected, it’s clear that the radar chronograph units tested in the article exhibit variations, in part due to their factory calibrations. Both manufacturers calibrate the units to their own standards, using their own methods and software. Because these standards are not publicly disclosed, consumers must place a certain degree of trust in each manufacturer’s testing methods and claims. Any company can claim that their velocity accuracy is\u00a0 \u00b10.1%. However, if you’re producing thousands of units, there will be quality-control variances.<\/p>\n

So, which unit’s velocity accuracy data is the most accurate? Honestly, I don’t know. Both units produced consistent data sets. If you take into account variations in ammo performance, the chronograph units are not the weakest link in the chain. That becomes clear when you look at the rimfire velocity data. Ideally, to find out, you’d need a lot more data to take averages from. You’d need to test (at least) 5 of each chronograph unit, with the same ammo, from the same batch, in the same weather conditions, with the guns all in the exact same position. Then take averages to compare.<\/p>\n

Even then, you’d still need a proven, consistent average from a properly calibrated third-party unit to compare the test data against. The Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro consistently recorded higher velocities. The largest difference was a +14.4 FPS in the rifle velocity category. At 100 yards, that’s roughly a hundredth of an inch (+0.01″) vertical difference in bullet impact. At 300 yards, it’s a difference of -0.2″ in bullet impact. If you’re shooting past 300 yards, you’ll need a Kestrel<\/a> to calculate accurate velocity data away. So, I don’t think it’s worth losing any sleep over.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Screen Display & Aesthetics<\/h2>\n
\"a

Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: The screen size difference is minimal in real-world applications.<\/p><\/div>\n

While the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro appears larger in photos, its screen is only marginally larger than the Garmin unit’s. The Athlon screen display measures 2.4″ horizontally, while the Garmin measures 2.2″ horizontally. The data on the Athlon screen is displayed roughly 9% larger than the Garmin screen. This may sound like a benefit for those with vision issues, but be aware that both screens have the same resolution (240×320). The data displayed on the Garmin screen looks sharper and has fewer jaggies around the edges, because it isn’t stretched past its native resolution.<\/p>\n

When I pulled the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro out of its box, I thought there was a protective plastic cover over it I needed to remove. Nope. It’s just that shiny. The screen has a gloss finish with good clarity but is prone to fingerprints and scratches. It’s fine if you view it straight on (as intended), but once you get 30\u00b0 off, from any angle, you start getting reflections that\u00a0make it difficult to see. The Garmin, on the other hand, has a matte screen that kills reflections and is visible from pretty much any angle.<\/p>\n

Let’s jump into screen brightness. I think this may be the weakest spot for the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro. It’s not that the screen isn’t bright; it’s just that the Garmin Xero C1 Pro screen is so much brighter. It’s not as noticeable indoors, but outdoors, it’s a pretty big deal. The Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro has more adjustable screen brightness levels, but even at 100%, it’s noticeably dimmer than the Garmin screen. I couldn’t find any published NIT brightness ratings for either unit, but I’m going to have to give this one to Garmin.<\/p>\n

Pushing Buttons<\/h3>\n

Both units have tactile “clicking” buttons that feel good to push. They aren’t mushy or overly pressure-sensitive; I didn’t have any issues operating them with bare hands or with tactical gloves. The Garmin Xero C1 Pro has all of its buttons at the top; this makes one-handed operation of the unit much easier. It also has a dedicated back button, which is well marked. Neither unit has backlit buttons, so if you are using them in low lighting, you may need a flashlight or headlamp.<\/p>\n

The Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro takes a bit longer to navigate. Its operational buttons are on top, but its navigation buttons are on the right-hand side (sorry, lefties). I wasn’t able to easily make changes to the unit one-handed, but once you have everything dialed in, you don’t really need to use the navigational buttons. I did find that the rubber (weather-sealed) flap covering the USB-C charging port was easier to open and close on the Athlon unit than the more recessed flap on the Garmin.<\/p>\n

If you’re right-handed, either of these units is easy to operate. Are you a lefty? You’ll have to reach around the side of the Athlon to make changes. If one-handed operation is a must, go with the Garmin. If you like more buttons and control features, go for the Athlon. I’ll call this one a draw.<\/p>\n

Texture, Fit & Finish<\/h3>\n
\"a

The Garmin chronograph’s screen brightness outshines that of the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro, indoors and outside.<\/p><\/div>\n

This may seem like a small thing, but I wasn’t overly impressed with the external texture of either unit. Both were slippery in hand despite having a minimal texture on the case. These units are not cheap. They are small and are very easy to drop or knock over. Our outdoor gun range isn’t a very forgiving place. I suspect the concrete floor of an indoor range wouldn’t be forgiving either. I’d like to see more aggressive texturing on the units, or perhaps a rubberized slip-on protective case included from the manufacturer in the future.<\/p>\n

Another thing I would like to see on future models would be the addition of a metal eyelet. Either the standard camera type that extrudes from a corner, or the built-in type with a short bar that fits inside of a corner. This addition would allow the use of a lanyard or compatible handstrap.<\/p>\n

Both units feel well-made in hand and have tight seams that suggest an internal weather seal. The high-impact polymer material they are made of feels similar.\u00a0 There are visible screws on both, and they appear to be either epoxy- or polymer-coated to resist corrosion. The tripod sockets for both are exactly where you’d want them, centered on the bottom. Both units mount and dismount easily from their included tripods. Both units stand up well and have good physical balance when not attached to a tripod.<\/p>\n

Again, a draw.<\/p>\n

Weather Sealing & Temperatures<\/h3>\n

The Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro has an IP67 weather seal rating. This means the device is dust-tight and can survive being temporarily submerged in water up to 1 meter (3.3′) for up to 30 minutes. The Garmin chronograph has an IPX7 weather seal rating. Meaning the device is not dust-sealed, but it can survive being temporarily submerged in water up to 1 meter (3.3′) for up to 30 minutes.<\/p>\n

I didn’t think much of this at first. But after firing hundreds of rounds of dirty ammo in close proximity (roughly 12″ behind the muzzle) to\u00a0the Garmin Xero C1 Pro, I did notice some residue\/buildup on the side of the unit. It wiped right off with a lead wipe, but it did make me wonder if dust\/debris could be an issue for the unit over time. Both units have a 1-year limited warranty; if you shoot a lot, it’s worth considering.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, the Garmin chronograph can handle operating temperatures a bit higher (14\u00b0F-131\u00b0F) than the Athlon unit (14\u00b0F-122\u00b0F). However, I had no issues using either unit in direct sunlight on multiple days, with published temps ranging from 95\u00b0 to 100\u00b0 outdoors.\u00a0 Humidity also didn’t seem to affect either unit; the weather sealing works as advertised, at least in East Tennessee.<\/p>\n

Slight advantage to the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro on this one.<\/p>\n

Apps & Data Transfer<\/strong><\/h2>\n

I spent a week using both apps (Athlon here<\/a>, Garmin here<\/a>) at the range and, honestly, they are fine. The UI and UX feel well-developed and intuitive for anyone familiar with ballistic apps. Even if you’re not familiar with that app style, it only takes a few uses to figure out the basics for viewing and transferring your ballistic data. That being said, both apps suffer from Bluetooth connectivity issues. Multiple times, I wasted a first shot in a sequence, thinking the app was connected to the unit. After firing the shot, I discovered it was lagging or not connected at all.<\/p>\n

Garmin’s ShotView app allows you to manage shot data, review sessions, add notes, and examine velocity across calibers and grain weights. Both units store up to 50 sessions, with up to 100 shots per session, before you need to sync the data with the apps to save it. Athlon integrates its ballistics app with the Rangecraft Velocity Pro, so if you already have their optics or spotting scopes, the transition is seamless. You can import chronograph sessions associated with specific guns and ammo, add notes, make changes, organize data, and export.<\/p>\n

Transfer Errors?<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Data transfer is straightforward (Athlon manual here<\/a>, Garmin manual here<\/a>). Both units transfer ballistic data via Bluetooth to their respective apps (or via the USB-C cable to a computer). Make sure to sync your session before you start and confirm that the data is transferring while shooting. Both apps can export the data to Excel\/CSV files for collection. Be aware that each app exports ballistic data differently, placing it in specific columns, so you’ll need to edit the imported data sets to suit your needs.<\/p>\n

Rare errors can also occur in both units when data imports as text rather than\u00a0<\/span>numerals. You can find the fix here<\/a>. Be sure to check your unit’s firmware to make sure it is up to date.<\/p>\n

Having real-time access to your ballistic data is a game changer. This was a pipe dream at best a few years ago. However, I’m hesitant to pick a winner for the app category until Athlon resolves the spreadsheet export errors and Bluetooth connectivity issues.<\/p>\n

Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Best Buy?<\/h2>\n
\"a

Both radar chronographs offer a good value for the money; it comes down to which system you’d rather invest in long-term.<\/p><\/div>\n

There’s no denying the similarities between these two units. Both the Garmin Xero C1 Pro and the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro excel at what they were designed to do. It’s clear they’ve had a lot of engineering, research, and development, and real-world use feedback put into the designs. Does that mean they are without flaws? No. However, they do provide serious shooters with the tools needed to record ballistic data on the go.<\/p>\n

Both provide compact Doppler radar systems, rechargeable internal batteries, customizable features, and Bluetooth connectivity. How you plan to access the recorded data could influence your decision. It certainly did in mine. The app support and ease of use also have to be taken into consideration. Both leave room for future improvement but offer a good overall user experience that translates into time savings in the field.<\/p>\n

If your range is prone to inclement weather, as ours is, the IP67 rating on the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro is attractive. The IPX7 rating on the Garmin chronograph isn’t bad either. However, I would be more hesitant to haul it around in the back of a 4×4 Polaris Ranger without a cover. The battery life on both units is excellent; I’ve used them for hours at the range in the summer heat and never had to stop to recharge.<\/p>\n

The matte monochrome backlit screen, button layout, and form factor of the Garmin Xero C1 Pro give it an edge. Albeit an edge you have to pay more to acquire. If the reflective glossy screen of the Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro isn’t an issue for you, there’s no real reason not to save yourself a few bucks. At the end of the day, the ability to capture and view the ballistic data you need to make decisions in real time is priceless. The future is now in the world of radar chronographs, and the decision is yours to make.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Chronographs have come a long way in the last few years. When I started using one years ago at the range, it was equipment I tolerated but never really enjoyed. Traditional optical chronographs were fiddly and easy to break, even with minor movement. The lighting had to be just right, the position downrange had to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":19785,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[396],"tags":[3637,3638,3639,3634,452,384,3643,3644,3642,3645,3635,3636,3641,3633,3646,3640,2189,1107],"class_list":["post-19783","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-reviews","tag-athlon","tag-athlon-chronograph","tag-athlon-optics","tag-athlon-rangecraft-velocity-pro","tag-ballistics","tag-chronograph","tag-chronograph-review","tag-doppler-effect","tag-doppler-radar-chronograph","tag-frequency","tag-garmin","tag-garmin-chronograph","tag-garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph","tag-garmin-xero-c1-pro","tag-radar","tag-radar-chronograph","tag-review","tag-velocity"],"yoast_head":"\nGarmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Compare accuracy, features, and value to see which ballistic chronograph comes out on top.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Compare accuracy, features, and value to see which ballistic chronograph comes out on top.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Wideners Shooting, Hunting & Gun Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-03T16:15:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/DSC5195-Web.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"683\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jacob\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jacob\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jacob\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d2abdb8d05ffcd8d8dfdc82eceac8d85\"},\"headline\":\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-03T16:15:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4046,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/DSC5195-Web.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Athlon\",\"Athlon chronograph\",\"Athlon optics\",\"Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro\",\"ballistics\",\"chronograph\",\"chronograph review\",\"Doppler effect\",\"Doppler Radar Chronograph\",\"frequency\",\"Garmin\",\"Garmin chronograph\",\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph\",\"Garmin Xero C1 Pro\",\"radar\",\"radar chronograph\",\"review\",\"velocity\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Reviews\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/\",\"name\":\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/DSC5195-Web.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-03T16:15:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d2abdb8d05ffcd8d8dfdc82eceac8d85\"},\"description\":\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Compare accuracy, features, and value to see which ballistic chronograph comes out on top.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/DSC5195-Web.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/DSC5195-Web.jpg\",\"width\":1024,\"height\":683,\"caption\":\"Garmin Chronograph\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Wideners Shooting, Hunting & Gun Blog\",\"description\":\"Tips for shooting, self-defense, hunting and more\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d2abdb8d05ffcd8d8dfdc82eceac8d85\",\"name\":\"Jacob\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/5bdba7577a660520515347744ce0021410b59d9014114ab3102fe61b012fd341?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/5bdba7577a660520515347744ce0021410b59d9014114ab3102fe61b012fd341?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/5bdba7577a660520515347744ce0021410b59d9014114ab3102fe61b012fd341?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Jacob\"},\"description\":\"Jacob is a general firearms enthusiast, hobby gunsmith and avid plinker based out of East Tennessee. He has a bachelor's degree from Carson-Newman University and enjoys writing and covering firearms related articles and events. He has a background in the journalism industry.\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.wideners.com\\\/blog\\\/author\\\/jacob\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph","description":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Compare accuracy, features, and value to see which ballistic chronograph comes out on top.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph","og_description":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Compare accuracy, features, and value to see which ballistic chronograph comes out on top.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/","og_site_name":"Wideners Shooting, Hunting & Gun Blog","article_published_time":"2026-09-03T16:15:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":683,"url":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/DSC5195-Web.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jacob","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jacob","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/"},"author":{"name":"Jacob","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d2abdb8d05ffcd8d8dfdc82eceac8d85"},"headline":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph","datePublished":"2026-09-03T16:15:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/"},"wordCount":4046,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/DSC5195-Web.jpg","keywords":["Athlon","Athlon chronograph","Athlon optics","Athlon Rangecraft Velocity Pro","ballistics","chronograph","chronograph review","Doppler effect","Doppler Radar Chronograph","frequency","Garmin","Garmin chronograph","Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph","Garmin Xero C1 Pro","radar","radar chronograph","review","velocity"],"articleSection":["Reviews"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/","url":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/","name":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/DSC5195-Web.jpg","datePublished":"2026-09-03T16:15:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d2abdb8d05ffcd8d8dfdc82eceac8d85"},"description":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph: Compare accuracy, features, and value to see which ballistic chronograph comes out on top.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/DSC5195-Web.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/DSC5195-Web.jpg","width":1024,"height":683,"caption":"Garmin Chronograph"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/garmin-chronograph-vs-athlon-chronograph\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Garmin Chronograph VS Athlon Chronograph"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/","name":"Wideners Shooting, Hunting & Gun Blog","description":"Tips for shooting, self-defense, hunting and more","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d2abdb8d05ffcd8d8dfdc82eceac8d85","name":"Jacob","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bdba7577a660520515347744ce0021410b59d9014114ab3102fe61b012fd341?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bdba7577a660520515347744ce0021410b59d9014114ab3102fe61b012fd341?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/5bdba7577a660520515347744ce0021410b59d9014114ab3102fe61b012fd341?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Jacob"},"description":"Jacob is a general firearms enthusiast, hobby gunsmith and avid plinker based out of East Tennessee. He has a bachelor's degree from Carson-Newman University and enjoys writing and covering firearms related articles and events. He has a background in the journalism industry.","url":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/author\/jacob\/"}]}},"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19783","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19783"}],"version-history":[{"count":49,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19783\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19841,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19783\/revisions\/19841"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/19785"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19783"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19783"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wideners.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19783"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}