3 Altimeter Choices: which one and why do you like it?

[gary7]

If you would please pick one of the three and give your reasons for your choice. I am one that likes to keep things simple but reliable. Thanks ahead of time:

RRC3
Adept 22
Stratologger SLCF

 

[markkoelsch]

I would take the rrc3. I have been flying missileworks stuff since they were first released, and have had nothing but good experiences with them. Three channels might be useful if you want airstarts or staging.

That said, I have had a Perfectflight MAWD, and it did its job.

Now, if you step up in price the options change. If I were to go with something more expensive I would likely look at the Marsa, unless I need a smaller package.

 

[Zeus-cat]

I'm a Stratologger guy.

 

[amarillo_rocket]

All 3 have worked flawlessly for me for many years. If you want logging it's a toss up between the Stratalogger and RRC3. It may come down to which one you feel the most comfortable setting up since there are differences. You can download the user manuls for both. The Adept I use as a backup for my primary logging altimeter.

 

[scsager]

If you would please pick one of the three and give your reasons for your choice. I am one that likes to keep things simple but reliable. Thanks ahead of time:

RRC3
Adept 22
Stratologger SLCF

These are three completely different things - that's what I see.

The Adept gives me dual deploy, and max altitude and I have money left over to buy another motor.

The Stratologger adds temperature, and battery voltage to the altitude data, stores 16 flights, lets me print a graph, can be connected to a PC.

The RRC3 does all of the above and lightens my wallet further with all the cool add-on gadgets I can purchase for it.

 

[jd2cylman]

You could also get a Missile Works RRC2+. $45.00 and ready to use out of the box. No computer necessary. All programing options are done right on the altimeter.
I think I have 6 or 7 of them now...

 

[KenRico]

Buy the Stratologger CF .. it is a great altimeter at a good price.

I have flown all (3) . The RRC3 and the Strato are both newer and more feature rich than the Adapt. But long term the smaller form factor of the Strato makes it more useful as it can be regulated to the role of backup altimeter if you upgrade in the future.

Kenny

 

[rharshberger]

I love my RRC3s for the same reasons as the SLCF, but I also like the 3rd channel option for airstarts and buzzers, etc.

 

[mikec]

The RRC3 is the most capable but physically pretty large. I like the SL CF; one plus is that the software works well on Macs (and Linux using WINE) and it doesn't require a lot of extra Micro$oft runtime crud. The Adept has worked well for me but it's a little hard to wire since it has a common high side for both channels.

 

[cbrarick]

stratologger. They just work right out of the box. An added plus is if you hurt it they'll fix it cheap. And they're nice people, when they can dig themselves out of the northern new england snows.

 

[MikeyDSlagle]

I'll have to agree with Scott, these are three different types of devices.
Stratologger is the smallest and is both midway on both price and features and you can download a graph for the flight.
The Adept is larger and does basic dual deployment and recording, no frills and it works, inexpensive.
And the RRC3 is the biggest and most feature rich of them all, and most expensive, also download a graph.

I've only used the Adept and it works great.
I have 2 RRC2+ and a RRC3 but haven't flown them. Jim has great customer service as well.
The RRC2+ is inexpensive and super simple to use.

Mikey D

 

[DAllen]

I've used products from all three of those manufacturers and so have many of my rocketry friends. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them and what it's really going to boil down to is how much you want to spend and what features are most important.

 

[FredA]

MARSA-54....
Not on your list, but should be.....

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

You could also get a Missile Works RRC2+. $45.00 and ready to use out of the box. No computer necessary. All programing options are done right on the altimeter.
I think I have 6 or 7 of them now...

I'll second that. I just bought 2, I've got an older version that I love and have had no issues with. When I have a project that calls for the 3rd channel, I'll get the RRC3.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

Adept, if I remember correctly, uses oddball batteries, so I never tried them for that reason alone.

I may try a Stratologger at some point, but at the moment I'm simply using what I already know and trust, i.e. Missile Works.

 

[DAllen]

Adept, if I remember correctly, uses oddball batteries, so I never tried them for that reason alone.

I may try a Stratologger at some point, but at the moment I'm simply using what I already know and trust, i.e. Missile Works.

adept 22 runs just fine on a standard 9v.

 

[dixontj93060]

I'll have to agree with Scott, these are three different types of devices.
Stratologger is the smallest and is both midway on both price and features and you can download a graph for the flight.
The Adept is larger and does basic dual deployment and recording, no frills and it works, inexpensive.
And the RRC3 is the biggest and most feature rich of them all, and most expensive, also download a graph.

I've only used the Adept and it works great.
I have 2 RRC2+ and a RRC3 but haven't flown them. Jim has great customer service as well.
The RRC2+ is inexpensive and super simple to use.

Mikey D

+1. All are good and meet their respective intended purposes.

 

[SS/EA 6BBL 71 Cuda]

Really in no particular order.

1. Perfectflite Stratologger- Very easy to use and, they work everytime.
2. Missile Works RRC3- Little more tricky but, the third channel for airstarts is awesome...
3. Marsa 54L- When i want a little more data on the flight, i tag one along.

I like simple, i like ease of use and, most of all reliability is paramount!

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

adept 22 runs just fine on a standard 9v.

I thought they had built in snaps for specialty batteries? Or am I thinking of something else?

 

[markkoelsch]

MARSA-54....
Not on your list, but should be.....

Fred, it was in my comments. Obviously more capable, but also at least $100 more. Great unit, and in the list to acquire.

 

[SparkyVT]

stratologger. They just work right out of the box. An added plus is if you hurt it they'll fix it cheap. And they're nice people, when they can dig themselves out of the northern new england snows.

They recently declined to fix mine. Here's a quote from their tech support:

"Sorry... We used to work on corroded units (for free...), but not only is the long-term reliability going to be compromised, but it takes several hours of work to clean, replace damaged components, test, document, etc. which ends up costing us considerably more than the price of a brand new unit..."

That said, I have a Stratologger in every high-power bird. I have owned 3X MAWDs, 1X HiAlt 45K, 2X Stratologgers, and 3X Stratologger CFs. Combined they have flown over 439 high-power flights. On my biggest L3 projects, they serve as a backup unit for my homebrew Arduino system.

 

[Buckeye]

MARSA-54....
Not on your list, but should be.....

No, it should not be on this list. Marsa is a different class of computer and belongs on a list with Raven and maybe a Tele-something.

RRC3 may be pushing it in this list as well. RRC2 is probably a better comparison to basic DD computers like SLCF and Adept22.

Anyway, I am looking at a similar purchase and will probably go with SLCF. I like the small size, the data logging, the price, and my past experience with PF products (3X MAWDs).

 

[Steve Shannon]

If you would please pick one of the three and give your reasons for your choice. I am one that likes to keep things simple but reliable. Thanks ahead of time:

RRC3
Adept 22
Stratologger SLCF

RRC3 because I've never yet been let down by them, because they're part of a system that includes GPS, Bluetooth, a local LCD terminal, and because I've met and like Jim Amos.
With all that said, you can't go wrong with any of those three.


Steve Shannon

 

[Buckeye]

There is an interesting 2016 NARAM R&D report that has surprisingly received no attention on this forum.

Altimeter Performance (NARAM-58 Altimeter Buddies Again)

You must have NAR Member login credentials to view this.

The authors have overall very positive conclusions of Perfectflite altimeters. Other products received good and and bad comments. Missileworks and Adept products were not tested, as they are apparently not approved for NAR competition, for whatever reason.

If you are into data precision from the altimeters, then be aware that lots of variation is possible in the data collection and processing. That's why I like simulations. They are always correct! :wink:

 

[MikeyDSlagle]

I thought they had built in snaps for specialty batteries? Or am I thinking of something else?

Notnthe Adept 22. Everything but their "22" series seems to have an on board battery.

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

adept 22 runs just fine on a standard 9v.

I stand corrected. I was looking at some of their other offerings.

 

[ksaves2]

There is an interesting 2016 NARAM R&D report that has surprisingly received no attention on this forum.

Altimeter Performance (NARAM-58 Altimeter Buddies Again)

You must have NAR Member login credentials to view this.

The authors have overall very positive conclusions of Perfectflite altimeters. Other products received good and and bad comments. Missileworks and Adept products were not tested, as they are apparently not approved for NAR competition, for whatever reason.

If you are into data precision from the altimeters, then be aware that lots of variation is possible in the data collection and processing. That's why I like simulations. They are always correct! :wink:

So the Altimeter One is the best. So what? Didn't do deployment altimeters so it's a non-issue in regards to deployment devices. Kurt

 

[Buckeye]

So the Altimeter One is the best. So what? Didn't do deployment altimeters so it's a non-issue in regards to deployment devices. Kurt

Please show us where this thread says anything about "deployment issues only." Certainly not in post #1. Relax, chief.

 

[jd2cylman]

Please show us where this thread says anything about "deployment issues only." Certainly not in post #1. Relax, chief.

I think you're misreading what Kurt is saying. The OP has listed three DUAL deployment altimeters. Thus why the NAR report (no, I didn't log in to read it,but based on Kurt's comment, I assume the NAR report is on reading altimeters only) is a non issue. I also agree that the Marsa IS not one to consider, when the OP listed two plug and play altimeters. The RRC3 is also, but does much more. Which is why I suggested the RRC2+, as it more closely matches the other 2 altimeters listed. The Marsa is a fine unit, but HUGE size wise and far more complicated to set up. I used mine once so far, and had deployment issues(nothing serious, just popped at the top), but that was not the altimeter's fault. I'm not entirely sure I programmed it correctly, AND I used an unfamiliar altimeter as back up. SO, as the old saying goes YMMV. And enjoy the foray into dual deployment!!!

 

[ksaves2]

I think you're misreading what Kurt is saying. The OP has listed three DUAL deployment altimeters. Thus why the NAR report (no, I didn't log in to read it,but based on Kurt's comment, I assume the NAR report is on reading altimeters only) is a non issue. I also agree that the Marsa IS not one to consider, when the OP listed two plug and play altimeters. The RRC3 is also, but does much more. Which is why I suggested the RRC2+, as it more closely matches the other 2 altimeters listed. The Marsa is a fine unit, but HUGE size wise and far more complicated to set up. I used mine once so far, and had deployment issues(nothing serious, just popped at the top), but that was not the altimeter's fault. I'm not entirely sure I programmed it correctly, AND I used an unfamiliar altimeter as back up. SO, as the old saying goes YMMV. And enjoy the foray into dual deployment!!!

I did think the report was a bit interesting but the science behind it is not light reading. The authors/testers obviously know what they are doing. The conclusion that the Alt One is a pretty good device is helpful to some. I thought the folks were more interested in deployment devices though. Kurt