Eric/Hornady Redux

[Intheshop]

"Mr. C"...... Mr. Clickbait?

 

[9146gt]

I see three characters in this saga,Speedy,Meyers,Cortina.
I would like to see Keith's test performed.
Looks like the interview with Mr Meyers was done a year or so ago. Who is the lip reader in this group.
Tom

 

[Larry Koch]

In the Cortina video they show a tuner test at zero and ten. They also need to test without a tuner at all.
I am sure turners work, but so does bullet seating depth, and power charge.
Many shooter are looking for a easy button, and I understand with travel, what works in the
West, may not work in the East.

 

[Medic505]

Just more clickbait.

Who out there wants a properly documented, single or double blind study on the effect of tuners?

It wouldn't be hard at all to accomplish. I figure 200 rounds would handle it.

Here is what I'd suggest with an F-class bent: (Requires a 3 person research team - Researcher, Shooter, and Test Operator)

Rifle, 284 win F-Open rifle:
1) Researcher develops handload that shoots well in a fully seasoned barrel with Tuner at starting position (to offset speedup), then loads 200 rounds with that load to full F-class match quality.
2) Shooter conducts the tuner testing as described by the tuner maker (small increments, shooting groups at 100 yards). Test Operator and Researcher are not permitted to see results until after step 4.
3) Shooter determines best , worst, and one random setting in the mediocre range, documenting group size difference and group shape. Targets are retained for later analysis.
4) At 600 yards on an electronic target, Shooter shoots 5 shot groups as directed, shooting randomly selected pieces of ammo, but does not know which setting is being used during any given group (tuner covered from view). Test Operator uses a digital random selection tool to determine which of the three settings determined in step 3 to set and keeps records of tuner setting for each group shot. Researcher documents the groups for Mean Radius, Group Size, and Group Shape without knowledge of tuner setting. Atmospheric and velocity are monitored throughout testing. Testing continues until 7 groups of each setting are shot.
5) Researcher correlates the groups shot at 600 yards with the tuner setting used for each group. Shooter, Researcher, and Test Operator evaluate visually the performance of the three settings in reference to each other. Each independently determines Best, Worst, and Mediocre setting
6) Researcher conducts base data analysis of group data to validate best worst and mediocre setting numerically and conducts statistical tests to determine the confidence level of any differences in performance from setting to setting.
7) All raw data and statistical analysis are published (no hidden data, no agenda, just science).

Anybody interested in something like that?

I was all in till step 4. Conducting a precise experiment on an electronic target is much like spitting in the wind.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

This is a really odd topic. Seems to come up often. I dont think theres a debate that tuners change your group size and shape. Anyone thats used one can see that easily. Now what they do beyond that is where things get opinionated. Some think they shrink their groups over just tuning. Some think they stay it tune better or have a wider window of tune. Some use them to keep the rifle in tune while others never touch them after finding their setting. I talk to a lot of different guys and theres a huge range of thought on this. No doubt they work, but what is the benefit? Thats the discussion they should be having.

 

[Tesoro]

I saved this comment on tuners from Mr Ezell:

ME, tuners will allow you to extract whatever potential a given load and gun have to offer, and to maintain that same level of performance over a wide range, if not any range of temps and conditions.

So, if you have a gun that is only a .3 gun with Varget and 105's(both given for example) without a tuner, it'll still be a .3 gun with one.
BUT..if you have a gun that is a tack driver with lets say 30.0 grains of varget, but it falls off at 30.5, or when temps change significantly, a tuner will allow you to keep that 30.0 grain charge in tune throughout whatever conditions you have to work with.

So, yes, a tuner can "mask" a bad load by tuning the gun to shoot that load, but only within a certain range. It will never make poor powder choices or poor quality bullets into premium performing loads, though.

The benefit of a properly weighted tuner is a wider tune window and the ability to adjust to maintain tune in different conditions. The method that I recommend for tuning a rifle with a tuner is simple..put the tuner on and work up your load as normal..and never touch the tuner until the load is settled upon. Moving the tuner while doing load workup is akin to changing the powder charge twice before shooting it.

That said..if you're dealing with a cartridge that has a known good load..ie. 29.5grins of 133 in a ppc...you can typically go with that known load and fine tune it in with the tuner.

There is nothing complicated about using a tuner. In fact, they can greatly simply tuning and make nodes easier to find. Just keep it simple! It's so very easy to do that I can show someone with a known good gun and load how to use their tuner in 15 minutes or less, in good wind. ---Mike Ezell

 

[Jefferson]

Just more clickbait.

Who out there wants a properly documented, single or double blind study on the effect of tuners?

It wouldn't be hard at all to accomplish. I figure 200 rounds would handle it.

Here is what I'd suggest with an F-class bent: (Requires a 3 person research team - Researcher, Shooter, and Test Operator)

Rifle, 284 win F-Open rifle:
1) Researcher develops handload that shoots well in a fully seasoned barrel with Tuner at starting position (to offset speedup), then loads 200 rounds with that load to full F-class match quality.
2) Shooter conducts the tuner testing as described by the tuner maker (small increments, shooting groups at 100 yards). Test Operator and Researcher are not permitted to see results until after step 4.
3) Shooter determines best , worst, and one random setting in the mediocre range, documenting group size difference and group shape. Targets are retained for later analysis.
4) At 600 yards on an electronic target, Shooter shoots 5 shot groups as directed, shooting randomly selected pieces of ammo, but does not know which setting is being used during any given group (tuner covered from view). Test Operator uses a digital random selection tool to determine which of the three settings determined in step 3 to set and keeps records of tuner setting for each group shot. Researcher documents the groups for Mean Radius, Group Size, and Group Shape without knowledge of tuner setting. Atmospheric and velocity are monitored throughout testing. Testing continues until 7 groups of each setting are shot.
5) Researcher correlates the groups shot at 600 yards with the tuner setting used for each group. Shooter, Researcher, and Test Operator evaluate visually the performance of the three settings in reference to each other. Each independently determines Best, Worst, and Mediocre setting
6) Researcher conducts base data analysis of group data to validate best worst and mediocre setting numerically and conducts statistical tests to determine the confidence level of any differences in performance from setting to setting.
7) All raw data and statistical analysis are published (no hidden data, no agenda, just science).

Anybody interested in something like that?

wind tunnels or with a rail gun ?

 

[Jefferson]

I saved this comment on tuners from Mr Ezell:

ME, tuners will allow you to extract whatever potential a given load and gun have to offer, and to maintain that same level of performance over a wide range, if not any range of temps and conditions.

So, if you have a gun that is only a .3 gun with Varget and 105's(both given for example) without a tuner, it'll still be a .3 gun with one.
BUT..if you have a gun that is a tack driver with lets say 30.0 grains of varget, but it falls off at 30.5, or when temps change significantly, a tuner will allow you to keep that 30.0 grain charge in tune throughout whatever conditions you have to work with.

So, yes, a tuner can "mask" a bad load by tuning the gun to shoot that load, but only within a certain range. It will never make poor powder choices or poor quality bullets into premium performing loads, though.

The benefit of a properly weighted tuner is a wider tune window and the ability to adjust to maintain tune in different conditions. The method that I recommend for tuning a rifle with a tuner is simple..put the tuner on and work up your load as normal..and never touch the tuner until the load is settled upon. Moving the tuner while doing load workup is akin to changing the powder charge twice before shooting it.

That said..if you're dealing with a cartridge that has a known good load..ie. 29.5grins of 133 in a ppc...you can typically go with that known load and fine tune it in with the tuner.

There is nothing complicated about using a tuner. In fact, they can greatly simply tuning and make nodes easier to find. Just keep it simple! It's so very easy to do that I can show someone with a known good gun and load how to use their tuner in 15 minutes or less, in good wind. ---Mike Ezell

‘my opinion

Mike is a genius

seriously

respectfully

Jefferson

 

[Tesoro]

I am barely on my first tuner so cant contribute other than my saved statement from Ezell. What surprised me is that Erik Cortina did not bring up adjusting for environmentals in his rebuttal. It seems like that is what he uses a tuner for and it is the one thing the Hornady nerd team never tested for.

 

[Fclassfool]

This is a really odd topic. Seems to come up often. I dont think theres a debate that tuners change your group size and shape. Anyone thats used one can see that easily. Now what they do beyond that is where things get opinionated. Some think they shrink their groups over just tuning. Some think they stay it tune better or have a wider window of tune. Some use them to keep the rifle in tune while others never touch them after finding their setting. I talk to a lot of different guys and theres a huge range of thought on this. No doubt they work, but what is the benefit? Thats the discussion they should be having.

I think some of these "testers" go into it thinking it's gonna shrink groups tremendously and that's just not the case.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I think some of these "testers" go into it thinking it's gonna shrink groups tremendously and that's just not the case.

I think your right. The whole argument about if they work or not should start with defining the word "work". What do you expect them to do? I have been around them and used them on and off for over 15 years. I have my opinions, so does everyone else. They should jive more than they do.

 

[LVLAaron]

This is a really odd topic. Seems to come up often. I dont think theres a debate that tuners change your group size and shape. Anyone thats used one can see that easily. Now what they do beyond that is where things get opinionated. Some think they shrink their groups over just tuning. Some think they stay it tune better or have a wider window of tune. Some use them to keep the rifle in tune while others never touch them after finding their setting. I talk to a lot of different guys and theres a huge range of thought on this. No doubt they work, but what is the benefit? Thats the discussion they should be having.

This makes sense. Since they are called "tuners" and not "group shrinkers"

The guys that have figured out how to use them over the life of their barrel, are at a real advantage.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

This makes sense. Since they are called "tuners" and not "group shrinkers"

The guys that have figured out how to use them over the life of their barrel, are at a real advantage.

Its an interesting topic. I install a lot of tuners. And I have got the full range of opinions on what the benefit is. But I have to just look at the facts. My rifles are up to 42 records at the moment, and not one had a tuner on it. Now this is all long range. So Im in the camp that they are not necessary. Doesnt mean they hurt. However, I do think for some things they are very helpful. But if someone like Keith was going to do a test, Id like to see it on what benefits are seen. Do your powder windows with and without, or shoot groups across temps or humidity's with and without one. We all know they can alter the groups, but how do they help you win matches? Thats what people need to see.

 

[Jefferson]

Its an interesting topic. I install a lot of tuners. And I have got the full range of opinions on what the benefit is. But I have to just look at the facts. My rifles are up to 42 records at the moment, and not one had a tuner on it. Now this is all long range. So Im in the camp that they are not necessary. Doesnt mean they hurt. However, I do think for some things they are very helpful. But if someone like Keith was going to do a test, Id like to see it on what benefits are seen. Do your powder windows with and without, or shoot groups across temps or humidity's with and without one. We all know they can alter the groups, but how do they help you win matches? Thats what people need to see.

also I when shooting short range benchrest didn't use a tuner
‘more trouble than what they are worth at the time a few years ago
more to contend with and another variable to work with

SRBR use tuners but I see no need IF YOU USE A LOWER POWDER CHARGE THUS GIVING YOU A WIDER TUNE WINDOW

so many who use a tuner STILL COMPLAIN my load blew up and my group at 100 yards is now a medium 4

oh well

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

They're much like loading to conditions at the range but without lugging all of your loading equipment around to every match. And IMHO, way easier. It appears there's still some that expect their best tune to be even better. You can get there with or without a tuner but tune changes and a tuner lets you stay at peak tune throughout them, but one should not expect to improve upon perfect tune by moving a tuner. You are in fact changing where the bbl is when the bullet reaches the muzzle by either tuning method.

 

[Tesoro]

They're much like loading to conditions at the range but without lugging all of your loading equipment around to every match. And IMHO, way easier. It appears there's still some that expect their best tune to be even better. You can get there with or without a tuner but tune changes and a tuner lets you stay at peak tune throughout them, but one should not expect to improve upon perfect tune by moving a tuner. You are in fact changing where the bbl is when the bullet reaches the muzzle by either tuning method.

So if you go to your match and want to tune to conditions then would you shoot like 5 2-3x test groups each time to dial in?
If you did a long session with same ammo of lets say 150-200 rds then you would expect there to be enough throat erosion to affect your tune. Is there a rule of thumb on this? ie you screw out or you screw in to keep harmonics similar to original jump?

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

So if you go to your match and want to tune to conditions then would you shoot like 5 2-3x test groups each time to dial in?
If you did a long session with same ammo of lets say 150-200 rds then you would expect there to be enough throat erosion to affect your tune. Is there a rule of thumb on this? ie you screw out or you screw in to keep harmonics similar to original jump?

Nah, you're overthinking it. I check tune on the first warmup with a 3 shot group. It won't be out far if everything else is the same, such as load. If it's out, it a mark or two, you should know that as well as which way to go by prior testing. So, I move it based on that and confirm it with another 3 shot group. That's about it. The key is testing beforehand and knowing what each move equates to in terms of group shape. It becomes 2nd nature pretty fast.

 

[Richard Jones]

"Just more clickbait." @Keith Glasscock

I don't know sh!t from third base about tuners but I agree with this..........

 

[CNC-Dude]

The Hornady tuning evaluation was conducted in steps of one full revolution, using their self declared three statistically insufficient shots. What could go wrong?

Its ironic that all these tests done by Litz and Hornady keep using the same flawed techniques to test them. Why would you think that a device that has 50+ settings can be evaluated by only using 3 or 4 of them instead of all the settings....?

 

[Bill Norris]

Was this documented?

Absolutely documented by Erik himself on a "Believe the Target" podcast with Tim Sellars.