Avoid if/else in constructor - NavigableMap?
A NavigableMap would just move the current logic into an object.  You'd get something like 

final static NavigableMap&lt;Long, Calibrated&gt; OD_CALIBRATIONS = new TreeMap();

static {
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(Long.MIN_VALUE, new Calibrated(K0, H0, K0_INV, H0_INV, F0));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(762, new Calibrated(K1, H1, K0_INV, H0_INV, F1));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(858, new Calibrated(K2, H2, K2_INV, H2_INV, F2));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(859, new Calibrated(K1, H1, K0_INV, H0_INV, F1));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(866, new Calibrated(K2, H2, K2_INV, H2_INV, F2));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(1005, new Calibrated(K3, H3, K3_INV, H3_INV, F3));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(1006, new Calibrated(K2, H2, K2_INV, H2_INV, F2));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(1011, new Calibrated(K3, H3, K3_INV, H3_INV, F3));
}

private void setCalibratedValues(long odNumber) {
    this.calibratedValues = OD_CALIBRATIONS.floorEntry(odNumber).getValue();
}


Note:  I'm not sure about the map key initializations.  They get kind of weird since you are mixing less than ranges with single value equalities.  You could pull the exceptions out of the NavigableMap and put them in a regular Map instead.  That would make the code look something like 

final static MAP&lt;Long, Calibrated&gt; OD_EXCEPTION_CALIBRATIONS = new HashMap();
final static NavigableMap&lt;Long, Calibrated&gt; OD_CALIBRATIONS = new TreeMap();

static {
    OD_EXCEPTION_CALIBRATIONS.put(858, new Calibrated(K2, H2, K2_INV, H2_INV, F2));
    OD_EXCEPTION_CALIBRATIONS.put(1005, new Calibrated(K3, H3, K3_INV, H3_INV, F3));

    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(Long.MIN_VALUE, new Calibrated(K0, H0, K0_INV, H0_INV, F0));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(762, new Calibrated(K1, H1, K0_INV, H0_INV, F1));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(866, new Calibrated(K2, H2, K2_INV, H2_INV, F2));
    OD_CALIBRATIONS.put(1011, new Calibrated(K3, H3, K3_INV, H3_INV, F3));
}

private void setCalibratedValues(long odNumber) {
    if (OD_EXCEPTION_CALIBRATIONS.containsKey(odNumber)) {
        this.calibratedValues = OD_EXCEPTION_CALIBRATIONS.get(odNumber);
    } else {
        this.calibratedValues = OD_CALIBRATIONS.floorEntry(odNumber).getValue();
    }
}


Note that calling setCalibratedValues with both 762 and 763 will give each the same Calibrated object.  If that's not what you want, you could give Calibrated a copy constructor and make a new one each time.  Also note that this method requires creating all the calibrations at the beginning.  This can be wasteful if you only use one per program invocation.  Not so bad now, but what if you get more calibration sets?  

It would be possible to put the rules into a file or files and then read them into the objects.  That would eliminate most of the constants.  You'd have to make sure that you read the file by the first time that you needed the values.  Perhaps put them into a Singleton object?  At worst case then, the Singleton constructor could read the file the first time that it was needed.  Or you could prime it earlier.  

Some things that I don't like about setCalibratedValues that you didn't mention:  


What's an odNumber?  Unless odNumber means something, you might as well call it n.  If odNumber does mean something, you should tell me so that I know it too.  If odNumber isn't a standard name, then I'd much prefer it was written out.  Why write out number which should be obvious from the type and leave od obscured?  
Similarly, do k, h, k_inv, h_inv, and f have meaning?  I'd have trouble editing that code, as I have no idea what each of those means.  I sort of think that k and k_inv have something to do with each other, but no idea what.  
Also, why are most of them arrays?  This should be understandable from the code, and it isn't here.  
Your constants are named K0, H1, etc.  Why not give these more meaningful names rather than just 0, 1, 2, 3?  Of course, this could also argue in favor of moving these out of code entirely.  If position is all that separates them, why give them names at all?  
You're repeating the exact same calibratedValues and overwriting previous values.  


Why not something like  

private void setCalibratedValues(long odNumber) {
    if (odNumber &lt; 762) {
        this.calibratedValues = new Calibrated(K0, H0, K0_INV, H0_INV, F0);
    } else if (odNumber &lt; 866 &amp;&amp; odNumber != 858) {
        this.calibratedValues = new Calibrated(K1, H1, K0_INV, H0_INV, F1);
    } else if (odNumber &lt; 1011 &amp;&amp; odNumber != 1005) {
        this.calibratedValues = new Calibrated(K2, H2, K2_INV, H2_INV, F2);
    } else {
        this.calibratedValues = new Calibrated(K3, H3, K3_INV, H3_INV, F3);
    }
}


This reduces your repeated code.  Of course, it won't work as well if the exceptions aren't just off by one in the ranges.  Although if 1050 were supposed to get the 0 set, then you could use an || to move that value from the 3 set to the 0.  

We might be able to suggest something better if we knew what odNumber, k, h, k_inv, h_inv, and f were and why they are related.  For example, if odNumber is the Orson Dines catalog number of a set and the other numbers are dimensions of the parts, you might put those in a database.  Then you could read the values from the database as necessary.