Barrel tuners. Good or a waste of time?

[savagedasher]

I remember them well. Definitely a form follows function part. I think that's why they didn't go over very well. I find it very interesting how Browning determined rough settings for different ammo types. I'm thinking it must've been a measure of in bore time. As seen in the video, the fine tuning is what sucked the groups down. I've never seen that video, that I can recall at least. Thanks for posting it Laurie!

Remember the Savage brakes that could be turned on or off? They didn't work very well but was very noticeable. I think it was just a poor brake design...exit hole too big and very little "sail area". I remember seeing them available aftermarket a few years back. Not sure if they're still available today. I think they are a good idea, though.

The give about a 35 % reduction in recoil
I hav several on my hunting gun my children and grandchildren used

 

[JRS]

Tuners work, and the proof has existed for a very long time, starting with the age old tuning fork.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Tuners work, and the proof has existed for a very long time, starting with the age old tuning fork.

They've always worked. We're just now coming around in respect to how to make them work, though. Surely, I'm not the first person to move them in small increments. I've just stayed true to what I found to work best and shared my system openly. Tuners have taken off in br, since. It takes time. Lots of people are slow to accept change. Nothing wrong with that but yes, tuners do work and I think the ones that wait are missing out on something huge.

 

[JRS]

They've always worked. We're just now coming around in respect to how to make them work, though. Surely, I'm not the first person to move them in small increments. I've just stayed true to what I found to work best and shared my system openly. Tuners have taken off in br, since. It takes time. Lots of people are slow to accept change. Nothing wrong with that but yes, tuners do work and I think the ones that wait are missing out on something huge.

It's much like a guitar, Mike. Turning the knobs changes the frequency of the string vibration. Perhaps Norm's University teachers were not aware of this.

 

[alinwa]

I remember them well. Definitely a form follows function part. I think that's why they didn't go over very well. I find it very interesting how Browning determined rough settings for different ammo types. I'm thinking it must've been a measure of in bore time. As seen in the video, the fine tuning is what sucked the groups down. I've never seen that video, that I can recall at least. Thanks for posting it Laurie!

Remember the Savage brakes that could be turned on or off? They didn't work very well but was very noticeable. I think it was just a poor brake design...exit hole too big and very little "sail area". I remember seeing them available aftermarket a few years back. Not sure if they're still available today. I think they are a good idea, though.

There's a very real reason the "turn off" feature is a sticky wicket. I messed with them, built some that actually worked for tuning and braking BUT

When you "turned them off" they attenuated the sound appreciably.

Savage had to show "proof" that they weren't "building a silencer"

This area of the ATF literature is very vague but it can be interpreted as "any attenuation can put you in jail for a long time" and we've all agreed silencers are bad....

I can't type any more on this subject without getting political and saying mean things

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

It's much like a guitar, Mike. Turning the knobs changes the frequency of the string vibration. Perhaps Norm's University teachers were not aware of this.

There's a very real reason the "turn off" feature is a sticky wicket. I messed with them, built some that actually worked for tuning and braking BUT

When you "turned them off" they attenuated the sound appreciably.

Savage had to show "proof" that they weren't "building a silencer"

This area of the ATF literature is very vague but it can be interpreted as "any attenuation can put you in jail for a long time" and we've all agreed silencers are bad....

I can't type any more on this subject without getting political and saying mean things

Gov't logic is a whole nother errr..subject but by that logic, removing a brake would be attenuating the sound level as well. I won't even try to make sense of their thought process, if that was the case.

 

[AckleymanII]

A friend of mine invented the Browning BOSS system. I have shot those on many bolt and semi's they were put on. Everyone of them allowed the rifle to shoot very tiny groups, unbelievable to see to BAR in 7 MAG shooting bug holes. IF nodes changed due to weather or temp, you sure could not tell it in the field on game. I felt for a long time that it would be prudent for every rifle you own to have a tuner on it.

I put a tuner with a brake on a 6xc with a 31" barrel, on a non trued Rem 700 action, in a wood 40x pillar bedded stock. I shot more zero's with that gun than I have in any of the 6 PPC's that I have owned in the dozen or so Hall M Rigs, plus the half a dozen Stolle Panda Rigs. So, my results would leade me(novice) to disagree with the poster that a muzzle break with a tunner is not effective. I also would think that a tuner in conjunction with a can would be very effective in reducing group size, maybe some European shooters have some insight on this.

This thread has amazed me to say the least. Obviously, I never had a clue what I was doing or why I had great results, but the tuners were very easy to tune with the only mistake you could make was to make large adjustments. I shot two shot groups to get the tune, only being satisfied with two bullets in the same bullet hole....then fine tune.

I did something from a novice's point of view, when I found the best tune, say shooting two shot groups in the .100 area or less, I went to three shot groups. If the group remained, then I changed a primer or added .2g more/less powder or changed seating depth a tad. None of these slight changes took long at all. These "wrong headed thinking" type of changes were because I did not know what I was doing, but I ended up shooting many, many groups in a row that could only be measured with high powered magnifying glass. I only mention this because it is WRONG THINKING as we have learned in this thread, and someone else may make the same mistake.

Learning in this thread how to predict subtle changes in tune and how to compensate for those changes is HUGE!

For the average guy, a tuner will be THE THING that takes his shooting to his/her personal best next high level.

Having tuners for 6 or more barrels is an expensive proposition, as tuners can not be changed from barrel to barrel unless you start all over. Someone needs to fix this cost issue in changing the profit structure to a volume issue.
$250 or more for a tuner plus $100 or more for threading is NOT going to leade to a lot of guys getting tuners installed.

Perhaps this thread will encourage more people to spend $400 on a tuner as they may have a better understanding on the principals involved. Most guys think in terms that they will start talking with a lisp or walk limp wristed if they put a tuner on their barrel.

I certainly appreciate all the work that has been done to develop the tuner technology, and most of all the people that are willing to stick their neck out and share their knowledge.

From a practical stand point, all the Varmint hunters, long range deer hunters, long range steel shooters(with and without cans), and casual benchrest shooters should have tuners on their barrels. Cost and perceived success are huge factors, and I would hope this thread would become a sticky on this site to teach those brave souls that would care to venture in uncharted waters to take the plunge into tuners.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

A friend of mine invented the Browning BOSS system. I have shot those on many bolt and semi's they were put on. Everyone of them allowed the rifle to shoot very tiny groups, unbelievable to see to BAR in 7 MAG shooting bug holes. IF nodes changed due to weather or temp, you sure could not tell it in the field on game. I felt for a long time that it would be prudent for every rifle you own to have a tuner on it.

I put a tuner with a brake on a 6xc with a 31" barrel, on a non trued Rem 700 action, in a wood 40x pillar bedded stock. I shot more zero's with that gun than I have in any of the 6 PPC's that I have owned in the dozen or so Hall M Rigs, plus the half a dozen Stolle Panda Rigs. So, my results would leade me(novice) to disagree with the poster that a muzzle break with a tunner is not effective. I also would think that a tuner in conjunction with a can would be very effective in reducing group size, maybe some European shooters have some insight on this.

This thread has amazed me to say the least. Obviously, I never had a clue what I was doing or why I had great results, but the tuners were very easy to tune with the only mistake you could make was to make large adjustments. I shot two shot groups to get the tune, only being satisfied with two bullets in the same bullet hole....then fine tune.

I did something from a novice's point of view, when I found the best tune, say shooting two shot groups in the .100 area or less, I went to three shot groups. If the group remained, then I changed a primer or added .2g more/less powder or changed seating depth a tad. None of these slight changes took long at all. These "wrong headed thinking" type of changes were because I did not know what I was doing, but I ended up shooting many, many groups in a row that could only be measured with high powered magnifying glass. I only mention this because it is WRONG THINKING as we have learned in this thread, and someone else may make the same mistake.

Learning in this thread how to predict subtle changes in tune and how to compensate for those changes is HUGE!

For the average guy, a tuner will be THE THING that takes his shooting to his/her personal best next high level.

Having tuners for 6 or more barrels is an expensive proposition, as tuners can not be changed from barrel to barrel unless you start all over. Someone needs to fix this cost issue in changing the profit structure to a volume issue.
$250 or more for a tuner plus $100 or more for threading is NOT going to leade to a lot of guys getting tuners installed.

Perhaps this thread will encourage more people to spend $400 on a tuner as they may have a better understanding on the principals involved. Most guys think in terms that they will start talking with a lisp or walk limp wristed if they put a tuner on their barrel.

I certainly appreciate all the work that has been done to develop the tuner technology, and most of all the people that are willing to stick their neck out and share their knowledge.

From a practical stand point, all the Varmint hunters, long range deer hunters, long range steel shooters(with and without cans), and casual benchrest shooters should have tuners on their barrels. Cost and perceived success are huge factors, and I would hope this thread would become a sticky on this site to teach those brave souls that would care to venture in uncharted waters to take the plunge into tuners.

Good and funny post, especially the part about the limp wristed lisp! Lol!

I'll say this, with my tuner, you can swap it from barrel to barrel. You won't be more than a mark or two out and usually pretty much right on. A depth mic or the long stem on a caliper is helpful. It gives the length beyond the muzzle. Just go to that length and tuner setting. The nylon tipped set screws around the outside should be backed off and reset just to prevent unnecessary wear to them while screwing it on and off. No need while adjusting during normal use. Proper adjustment of the set screws is to run them in to just touch the barrel threads, plus 1/4-3/8 of a turn tighter. They are NOT intended to be locked solid.
As to cost, I currently charge $160 for the centerfire tuner and $75 to install. So, it's not quite as bad as your experience.

I appreciate hearing your experienced feedback regarding tuners. It closely mirrors my own. That's why I get so excited talking about them and really believe they are game changers.

I will add this...they don't make a perfectly tuned rifle shoot smaller. Perfect is perfect! But, they greatly simplify getting tuned and maintaining peak tune of the rifle. If you judge your smallest groups without a tuner to your smallest with one, you may be disappointed, but that's just not the point of tuners. And, if you think your rifle is in perfect tune, it may not be but the tuner can get it there. That's where they can improve on best groups.

 

[DarkStar]

There is one metal way higher than stainless, but unless someone is making barrels from Beryllium. we can ignore that one!

Go on. . .

 

[AckleymanII]

[/URL]

Here is a picture of the tuner/brake that I was using that was so effective and easy to tune. I don't know if this brake is being made anymore, as a friend sent the brake to me to try. I do believe that any baboon could use this brake and get stellar results.

I would love to know the maker of this tuner/brake.

 

[alinwa]

[/URL]

Here is a picture of the tuner/brake that I was using that was so effective and easy to tune. I don't know if this brake is being made anymore, as a friend sent the brake to me to try. I do believe that any baboon could use this brake and get stellar results.

I would love to know the maker of this tuner/brake.

It looks home-ade..... I've got several that look just like that, right down to where I didn't bother to chamfer the holes LOL

 

[ebostrom]

This is one of our very early RAS tuners. It is not "home-ade".We have since greatly improved the looks but the function is the same. I have been watching this thread with interest. I have not wanted to chime in but someone asked who's tuner it is so I answered.Fun to read all of the opinions some have. Especially those who have not shot thousands of rounds testing tuners. Thanks. Eric

 

[dcali]

OK, so I'ma' give YOU something to chew on..... I've got several prototype tuning systems I'm working with where there's a lobe, a weight, a cam-shaped plate sandwiched between the two locking rings. The lobe can be oriented wherever you want it.

This thing will walk shots into any box of the quadrant.

Ain't saying I GOT anything..... just dinking around with ideas cuz barrels are crooked, and it kinda' coincides with your "quadrants" expression.

Thank you for taking the time, looking forward to tomorrow.

This is the most interesting post in this thread. Don’t want it to get lost.

Every tuner I’ve ever witnessed is symmetrical - you simply move a weight in and out along the barrel. Which is basically a good idea. How far to move it is a matter of experimentation.

But the forces that drive vibration are *not* symmetrical. It stands to reason that an asymmetrical tuner could be a good thing. But how on earth do you optimize the position without burning the barrel up in the process...

 

[savagedasher]

[/URL]

Here is a picture of the tuner/brake that I was using that was so effective and easy to tune. I don't know if this brake is being made anymore, as a friend sent the brake to me to try. I do believe that any baboon could use this brake and get stellar results.

I would love to know the maker of this tuner/brake.

Ras tuner break Bostrom gun smith sell them The new ones have 56 thread per inch the threads

 

[savagedasher]

Ras tuner break Bostrom gun smith sell them The new ones have 56 thread per inch the threads

 

[ebostrom]

In response to damoncali, our tuners are more than just a weight moving in and out along a barrel. We use a certain type of O ring to dampen harmonic frequency's. Turning the tuning ring changes the durometer of the O ring adjusting the frequency's it will dampen. Thanks. Eric

 

[ergonsdad]

[/URL]

Here is a picture of the tuner/brake that I was using that was so effective and easy to tune. I don't know if this brake is being made anymore, as a friend sent the brake to me to try. I do believe that any baboon could use this brake and get stellar results.

I would love to know the maker of this tuner/brake.

That looks like an early model of the RAS TB150 tuner

 

[6BRinNZ]

Ok Mike you tell Me

In the target below I am looking for the optimum place to set the tuner. As you can see there are plenty of nice groups. This is with a 6BR shooting 3 shot groups with 105 gr Hammers at 100 yards! Row 4 is the final test to see which quadrant I will use.
The final Tuner settings at 4A,4B and 4C all look good. I can't tell which is the correct one. So I run the same three tuner settings, except this time I shot the groups with three different loads into each (30.0, 30.3, 30.6 of varget). If you shoot a 6BR you know that's a humongous change in load and velocity. So groups 4D and 5A are vertical, but 4e is a nice 3 shot .185. Groups 5b and 5c are to see if it will repeat. It does! So now I will tweak the tuner as necessary during match time. This is what I took to the 600 yard Nationals.

Looking at my notes, this year I've had 23 first place finishes, 18 second place finishes, set Two World records and won 600 Yard Shooter of The Year! Not trying to have a pissing contest but there is an optimum spot or quadrant.

Bart


View attachment 1075834

Tuners aside I'm keen to know why 4a, 4b and 4c got picked over 3a, 3b and 3c. To my eye 3a, 3B and 3c are holding the same POI but are slightly smaller.

 

[Ned Ludd]

AL,

I’ll show you tomorrow what I’m doing and how I arrive at what I’m doing. It’s not Jim’s sine wave method. You can’t do what I’m doing without a tuner.

In fairness Mike Ezell’s tuner is a great piece of work. The problem is Mike doesn’t realize there’s another Level to using a tuner.

I’m going to explain this one time on the board. After that I’m Never going to mention or discuss it on this board again!

Hope everyone has a good night!

Bart

Bart - when you do explain your approach, can you please make it obvious in a new/separate thread? I'd very much like to hear it and would hate to accidentally miss the explanation. Thank you!

 

[Tim Singleton]

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