Barrel tuners. Good or a waste of time?

[Dusty Stevens]

I don’t want anyone to take this wrong. It’s just my thoughts
I’ve often wondered why more of the top tier men in our sports don’t come on these boards and help grow their sport by sharing hard paid for knowledge. Lots of reasons most don’t
Very few do you can name them on one hand that are willing to. They have to get frustrated and wonder why they even thought of sharing anything when these threads go down hill

If tony boyer came on here and said he uses copper bullets some prairie dog shooter would tell him he shouldnt then proceed to post a pic of a 3 shot 1/2” group they shot with something else and 3 engineers would quote studies on how copper is probably not the best thing to use. Used to happen back when forums started up

 

[Mulligan]

I don’t want anyone to take this wrong. It’s just my thoughts
I’ve often wondered why more of the top tier men in our sports don’t come on these boards and help grow their sport by sharing hard paid for knowledge. Lots of reasons most don’t
Very few do you can name them on one hand that are willing to. They have to get frustrated and wonder why they even thought of sharing anything when these threads go down hill

Tim,
I have been shooting competitively for three years (F-class), just starting SR benchrest (total rookie here). I have been a member of this forum about as long. I started writing down some notes about a year ago based on what I have learned in the last few years. Nearly all of which came from knowledge gleaned from this website and and few “Mentors” I have had the pleasure of learning from-most of which I “met” on this forum. Someday I will clean it up and share it here, there is some real gold in some of these threads and it is fun to “pan for it”. Having folks like yourself and the group you were speaking of help the rest of us seperate the wheat from the chafe is extremely valuable.

I have witnessed bashing and outright rudeness between members here, however, many of us are really just trying to learn and we fully understand the value of what is being shared. I (and I think I can lump a few others into this) really appreciate the efforts given to sharing good quality information. Most of us do not “get in the mix” mostly out of respect.

I bought a tuner from Ezell a couple of months ago and am hanging on every word of this thread. I suspect the discussion in the 7 pages prior could be boiled down to differing experiences and I fully suspect many of us can learn from both.

Just hope the good folks who want to share understand many of us fully understand the expense in time, equipment, and expendables it takes to do this testing and sincerely hope they continue to share their knowledge freely.
Kind Regards
CW

 

[JMayo]

EVERYTHING I think I KNOW '......
is subject to revision !
(Basictext)

 

[Gene Beggs]

EVERYTHING I think I KNOW '......
is subject to revision !
(Basictext)

Yes sir ! I'm delighted when someone convinces me of where I'm mistaken. That's how we learn. It pays to keep an open mind and listen carefully to what others say.

Later,

Gene Beggs

 

[Bugs]

what many of you guys are saying about tuners and their effect on barrel harmonics and how to adjust them is way, way over my head but I will say this. . . . I have several barrels that were kind of so-so but they improved (and significantly so) after a tuner-brake combination was installed and I learned how to use them even if only in a very rudimentary way. Maybe I'm just not very good at tuning a rifle without a tuner but I would hate to go back to shooting without one.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

If tony boyer came on here and said he uses copper bullets some prairie dog shooter would tell him he shouldnt then proceed to post a pic of a 3 shot 1/2” group they shot with something else and 3 engineers would quote studies on how copper is probably not the best thing to use. Used to happen back when forums started up

NAILED IT! Its so true its not even funny.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

what many of you guys are saying about tuners and their effect on barrel harmonics and how to adjust them is way, way over my head but I will say this. . . . I have several barrels that were kind of so-so but they improved (and significantly so) after a tuner-brake combination was installed and I learned how to use them even if only in a very rudimentary way. Maybe I'm just not very good at tuning a rifle without a tuner but I would hate to go back to shooting without one.

I agree Bugs!
Talk with the maker, as they likely have a fair amount of experience with their product but, in a nutshell, just move it a mark at a time. It'll quickly show the distance from completely in tune to completely out of tune. Once you know this, focus on group size and shape at the different marks, again, one at a time within that range of movement. What you're after here is correlating group size and shape to tuner setting, so that you can look at a target and know how far to move it to bring it back in when it goes out. With my tuner, that range is only about 4 marks typically and I've never had to move my tuner more than two marks due to condition changes. BTW, that was a 45° temp swing from start to finish of the match.

Once you get this much down, you've got it whipped. Move it in if temps have gone up and out if they've gone down.

From there, the natural progression for many is to wonder if one tuner sweet spot is better or wider than the last. Theoretically yes and I've seen it many times. That said, I find that one spot will shoot just as small as the next but that there may be a beneficial difference in how long it stays in tune at one than the other. So, just test different ones by going to the next sweet spot. The distance to the next one will be approximately twice as far as from in to out. IOW, in to out is a half node. In, out and back in is a full node or cycle. The tune just repeats itself up and down the tuners travel. Remember, you're moving the weight out so it won't be 100% linear, but close to it IME. So, if there are 4 marks from in tune to completely out(shooting BIG), it's about 8 marks from one sweet spot to the next sweet spot...give or take a mark roughly. See which is best.

I THINK this is what Bart was alluding to. He gave the example of changing powder charges at a given tuner setting and it stayed in tune across those charges. IME, that's what will happen when you're on one of those wide nodes. Also, they seem to correlate with poi, IME. See the link I posted a few pages back. If you can fire and see your sighters in your discipline, this is of less value than otherwise but still worth doing, regardless, IMO.

There are other methods that I've applied such as a tuning method called the Purdy Prescription, which several rimfire shooters believe helps. It's based on the length of the column of air in a tube(your barrel). My rimfire tuners come with a tube meant to be cut to the prescribed length calculated by this method. The centerfire version can usually be moved enough to reach it without the tube. I'll be right up front about it...I've tested it quite a bit on both rf and cf and I feel like I can tune just as well without it...but there are others who feel it's very good. Google it and read up on the theory if you're interested. Here's but one link. There are several but this should get you started in your search. At this point, I much prefer to keep things as simple as possible. Not that I know everything but that tuning methods being all over the place is why I think there has been so much confusion about using tuners. I suggest my aforementioned method and let nature take its course toward testing other methods that may or may not pan out for you. --Mike Ezell

https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=544427

 

[Gene Beggs]

Mike, your response to 'Bugs' in post 147 was right on and so well worded. I wish I could express myself as well.

You're doing a wonderful job of introducing a whole new world to the centerfire benchrest shooters and I agree wholeheartedly with the way you're doing it !

Keep up the good work.

Sincerely,

Gene Beggs

 

[Mulligan]

I agree Bugs!
Talk with the maker, as they likely have a fair amount of experience with their product but, in a nutshell, just move it a mark at a time. It'll quickly show the distance from completely in tune to completely out of tune. Once you know this, focus on group size and shape at the different marks, again, one at a time within that range of movement. What you're after here is correlating group size and shape to tuner setting, so that you can look at a target and know how far to move it to bring it back in when it goes out. With my tuner, that range is only about 4 marks typically and I've never had to move my tuner more than two marks due to condition changes. BTW, that was a 45° temp swing from start to finish of the match.

Once you get this much down, you've got it whipped. Move it in if temps have gone up and out if they've gone down.

From there, the natural progression for many is to wonder if one tuner sweet spot is better or wider than the last. Theoretically yes and I've seen it many times. That said, I find that one spot will shoot just as small as the next but that there may be a beneficial difference in how long it stays in tune at one than the other. So, just test different ones by going to the next sweet spot. The distance to the next one will be approximately twice as far as from in to out. IOW, in to out is a half node. In, out and back in is a full node or cycle. The tune just repeats itself up and down the tuners travel. Remember, you're moving the weight out so it won't be 100% linear, but close to it IME. So, if there are 4 marks from in tune to completely out(shooting BIG), it's about 8 marks from one sweet spot to the next sweet spot...give or take a mark roughly. See which is best.

I THINK this is what Bart was alluding to. He gave the example of changing powder charges at a given tuner setting and it stayed in tune across those charges. IME, that's what will happen when you're on one of those wide nodes. Also, they seem to correlate with poi, IME. See the link I posted a few pages back. If you can fire and see your sighters in your discipline, this is of less value than otherwise but still worth doing, regardless, IMO.

There are other methods that I've applied such as a tuning method called the Purdy Prescription, which several rimfire shooters believe helps. It's based on the length of the column of air in a tube(your barrel). My rimfire tuners come with a tube meant to be cut to the prescribed length calculated by this method. The centerfire version can usually be moved enough to reach it without the tube. I'll be right up front about it...I've tested it quite a bit on both rf and cf and I feel like I can tune just as well without it...but there are others who feel it's very good. Google it and read up on the theory if you're interested. Here's but one link. There are several but this should get you started in your search. At this point, I much prefer to keep things as simple as possible. Not that I know everything but that tuning methods being all over the place is why I think there has been so much confusion about using tuners. I suggest my aforementioned method and let nature take its course toward testing other methods that may or may not pan out for you. --Mike Ezell

https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=544427

Just to be clear, a difference 45*F required only two marks movement on the tuner to keep in in tune?
CW

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Just to be clear, a difference 45*F required only two marks movement on the tuner to keep in in tune?
CW

Yes sir...that's correct. I've seen it play out that way several times but those kind of swings are hard to get to test in, in this area.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Mike, your response to 'Bugs' in post 147 was right on and so well worded. I wish I could express myself as well.

You're doing a wonderful job of introducing a whole new world to the centerfire benchrest shooters and I agree wholeheartedly with the way you're doing it !

Keep up the good work.

Sincerely,

Gene Beggs

Gene, thank you again for your kind words and support. The goal is just to get more people to see tuners work. I like to keep things in terms that everyone can understand without getting into theories and controversial methods. I don't know everything, by a long shot but we've come a long way.
BTW, I believe you are about as well spoken and versed on tuners as anyone. You should step on in here and share what you know. Just a small portion of it will be a lot of great info.
For those that don't know, Gene is what I consider one of the pioneers in tuner development.

 

[Mulligan]

Yes sir...that's correct. I've seen it play out that way several times but those kind of swings are hard to get to test in, in this area.

https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/grand-junction/colorado/united-states/usco0166
Climate Grand Junction - Colorado
°C | °F
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Average high in °F: 38 45 56 65 76 88
Average low in °F: 17 24 31 38 47 56
Av. precipitation in inch: 0.59 0.55 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.47


Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Average high in °F: 93 90 80 66 50 38
Average low in °F: 63 61 52 40 28 19
Av. precipitation in inch: 0.59 0.94 1.18 1.06 0.75 0.59

Here in Western Colorado, we are not big on rain days but you have to get up pretty early in the day to get ahead of us on temp swings.

That helps
Thanks Mike
CW

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/grand-junction/colorado/united-states/usco0166
Climate Grand Junction - Colorado
°C | °F
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Average high in °F: 38 45 56 65 76 88
Average low in °F: 17 24 31 38 47 56
Av. precipitation in inch: 0.59 0.55 0.91 0.91 0.87 0.47


Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Average high in °F: 93 90 80 66 50 38
Average low in °F: 63 61 52 40 28 19
Av. precipitation in inch: 0.59 0.94 1.18 1.06 0.75 0.59

Here in Western Colorado, we are not big on rain days but you have to get up pretty early in the day to get ahead of us on temp swings.

That helps
Thanks Mike
CW

No kidding! Those swings will make a tuner out of you, I'd say.

 

[Bart B.]

Here's a graph showing a cartridge zeroed at 300 yards with a small velocity spread and tuner set for minimum vertical spread at 300.

Center trajectory is the average muzzle velocity.

Top trajectory short of 300 yards is the lowest muzzle velocity.

Bottom trajectory short of 300 yards is the highest muzzle velocity.

Lowest and highest ones reverse past 300 yards.



I don't think one tuner setting works perfect at several ranges.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Here's a graph showing a cartridge zeroed at 300 yards with a small velocity spread and tuner set for minimum vertical spread at 300.

Center trajectory is the average muzzle velocity.

Top trajectory short of 300 yards is the lowest muzzle velocity.

Bottom trajectory short of 300 yards is the highest muzzle velocity.

Lowest and highest ones reverse past 300 yards.

View attachment 1076328

I don't one tuner setting works perfect at several ranges.

I agree that tuner settings change slightly at different distances but I don't think is as much the tuner, specifically, as positive compensation being affected by the tuner via where it puts the barrel during its vibrational pattern. This gets back to optimizing poi. I think this should be done at the yardage you're shooting. In practice, I don't see much change...typically about 1 mark with my tuner, from 100 to 1000. I can shoot to right at 570 from my shop but have to go to another place on my farm for 1000, so most of my testing is between 100 and about 570. From what I can see, it's slightly less than a full mark for that difference and I believe right at a full mark at 1000. It's one of those things that can get lost in the noise if you're not paying attention. Either way, it seems the difference is small on the tuner. I like to tune first at 100 and then stretch it out and tweak the tuner as needed.

I also think that pc is affected by the whole rifle as well as the fron/rear rest and other factors, so your rifle may be a tad different but all have been close, from what I can tell. I've seen some radically designed stocks, built specifically to optimize pc. Such a drastic departure from the "norm" may require a bit more or maybe less because if it. Namely, the stock was built to have the centerline and cg very different than a typical stock. It was/is an interesting concept. A very smart guy by the name of Keith Sharp owns the one I'm speaking of. He's a professor at UofL and a fellow BR shooter. I don't know if I've ever seen him post here but he use to on brc. He may be here under a name I don't recognize.

 

[Terry]

I remember reading that Positive Compensation was distance specific.
Does the tuner change that?

 

[Gene Beggs]

Here's a graph showing a cartridge zeroed at 300 yards with a small velocity spread and tuner set for minimum vertical spread at 300.

Center trajectory is the average muzzle velocity.

Top trajectory short of 300 yards is the lowest muzzle velocity.

Bottom trajectory short of 300 yards is the highest muzzle velocity.

Lowest and highest ones reverse past 300 yards.

View attachment 1076328

I don't one tuner setting works perfect at several ranges.

Bart, you bring up a good point and are so right; tuner settings ARE yardage specific. Me, being only a short-range group shooter, never realized this until I began experimenting with tuners several years ago and came to a better understanding of what we call 'Positive compensation.' I'm glad to know you are venturing out into long-range shooting. I hope you will keep us informed on how it's going. There seems to be a great deal of interest in long range and extreme long range in recent years.

Thanks for joining our discussions. I understand why you and your 'fast track' buddies wouldn't want you to share too much of what you guys have taken so many years to learn. I do understand; really. We are all different and have our own reasons for pursuing this madness called benchrest. What I must keep in mind is that some people are far more competitive than I am and winning means far more to them than it does to me.

Oh sure,, at one time, when I was much younger, winning was very important to me because I felt I had something to prove but I got over that long ago. During the past fifteen years or so, I find myself more and more just enjoying the study of extreme rifle accuracy and the machining and product development that goes along with it.

It's great to get your input ! Keep up the good work and best of luck in 2019 !

Sincerely, and with best regards.

Gene Beggs

 

[alinwa]

Bart, you bring up a good point and are so right; tuner settings ARE yardage specific. Me, being only a short-range group shooter, never realized this until I began experimenting with tuners several years ago and came to a better understanding of what we call 'Positive compensation.' I'm glad to know you are venturing out into long-range shooting. I hope you will keep us informed on how it's going. There seems to be a great deal of interest in long range and extreme long range in recent years.

Thanks for joining our discussions. I understand why you and your 'fast track' buddies wouldn't want you to share too much of what you guys have taken so many years to learn. I do understand; really. We are all different and have our own reasons for pursuing this madness called benchrest. What I must keep in mind is that some people are far more competitive than I am and winning means far more to them than it does to me.

Oh sure,, at one time, when I was much younger, winning was very important to me because I felt I had something to prove but I got over that long ago. During the past fifteen years or so, I find myself more and more just enjoying the study of extreme rifle accuracy and the machining and product development that goes along with it.

It's great to get your input ! Keep up the good work and best of luck in 2019 !

Sincerely, and with best regards.

Gene Beggs

Gene..... Bart B DID make a nice graph but I think you're posting to Bart S

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

I remember reading that Positive Compensation was distance specific.
Does the tuner change that?

I see them as two different things but tuners do affect it, just like a different stock or a barrel that is less/more stiff.I guess what I'm saying is that tuners are just one factor to pc. I do believe that pc is what's distance specific and hence, tuners are because the affect pc. Clear as mud?
We have pc whether we have a tuner or not. I believe that tuners give us more pc than without and make it possible to get what the rifle/whole package has to offer. Whereas changing stocks might give more or less but you're stuck with whatever it gives.
Wheeler has been testing some different stock designs with that in mind, I believe. I think there is something to it and we're headed in the right direction. I don't know if getting 100% pc is possible. To my knowledge, there's no way to know. You just get what your setup gives and that's your baseline. PC is a big reason why my tuner weighs more than some or most. I found a real gain in pc from just weight alone and that's also why I use the particle dampening...

 

[Terry]

Please tell us more. How does stock stiffness or flexibility affect it ?