Fine tuning COAL.

[dmoran]

Does the same as without it . But if my bullet speed is better. I can change the tuner to get the group size . Larry

Good sounding theorem... I would like to see those actual test results proving it.
D

 

[savagedasher]

Good sounding theorem... I would like to see those actual test results proving it.
D

Go to ras tuners they show what tuners do . Jim has the stats But has a couple of articles coming out . Larry

 

[calgarycanada]

Lot of good info, sounds like that Bryan Litz's guy who thinks he's a rocket scientist or something doesn't know anything. He can only design bullets but obviously he doesn't know anything about load development.
His load development is totally opposite of you guys and he still seems to win some big long range competitions with his loads tuned the wrong way at 100 yards. Weird !!!!

BTW I tried to be funny, us new shooters get all confused when different experts are giving totally contradictory suggestions. Bryan's load development happens at 100 yards and he does care about group shape size and ES.

Don't know who to believe anymore

 

[savagedasher]

Good sounding theorem... I would like to see those actual test results proving it.
D

Here is my thoughts everything that goes into tuning a gun is all based off bullet speed . Every tunner has things his gun requires to tune Neck tension primers seating depth powder and on and on but it all goes back to bullet speed.
Tuning is adjusting all the above to a point where all vibratiion are aligned when the bullet exist the barrel . If don't exit at that exact point of vibrations you don't have a tune . A few months ago I found tune works in vibrating circle around the point of aim. Exact same as archery The kicker is you can see That one of the 4 tune area the bullet goes to sleep faster.
Really what a tuner does It gives you adjustment tool to make and keep the exiting bullet angle the same . If conditions changes its all back to bullet speed and the angle of the the bullet is in from a point of aim reference . Larry
I can show what it does . Go to RAS tuners

 

[savagedasher]

Larry,

I searched around on the ras website. The only thing I found as far as "instructional" goes is about an AR 15 with a 16" barrel. The gun averaged .96" 2 shot groups without a tuner. Then with a tuner it was much better at some settings. Where's the information about what it can do for a real rifle?

Tom

Try Bostrom gunsmiths . Be nice we had a ar shoot one of the best targets at 1000 and that was against the real guns . Larry
Pm me with your phone number if you want.

 

[Joe Salt]

Larry! Florida has real guns. How many shots are you shooting at 1000. We shoot 10. calgarycanada I think Bryan Litz knows how to tune a rifle, he gets to test all day with different bullet. The numbers game I don't like, I change things to see what it does. The Mad Scientist stuff is way above my head.

Joe Salt

 

[dmoran]

calgarycanada -
No doubt about it, Brian Litz is a very accomplished 1000yd High Power shooter. And very commendable accomplishments at that!.!.!
Not to take anything away from Brian, but he is shooting different disciplines then some of us who your referring to here. Myself, Tom, Matt (dkhunt14), Joe (Joe Salt), Alex (zfastmalibu) who have responded with statements of needing to develop/tune at distance are all 1000-Benchrest shooters. Different game then HighPower, with different demands to skill and accuracy levels needed to compete at the highest levels. I'm sure if you asked Brian, he would agree.

Us 1000-BR shooters can be guilty of being very picky about raw accuracy and to the levels of accuracy. And is why when Larry, who is always comparing his Mantanee Club Match results to sanctioned 600/1000-Benchrest, continually lays claims of his accuracy levels from 2-shot 100yd testing, low ES on the chronograph, and ability to tune his rifle with a tuner instead of tuning the load, all being done at 100yds that carries through (he claims) to 1000yds, we all have serious doubts.

Regards
Donovan

 

[savagedasher]

Larry! Florida has real guns. How many shots are you shooting at 1000. We shoot 10. calgarycanada I think Bryan Litz knows how to tune a rifle, he gets to test all day with different bullet. The numbers game I don't like, I change things to see what it does. The Mad Scientist stuff is way above my head.

Joe Salt

We use to shoot twice a month at 1000 Gong and paper. We had 15 to 20 shooting
Now we have 6 on a good shoot . When we started making good shooting guns they stopped . I wanted to make a pro class .
I don't see how the long range shooting is going to exist .. Same thing happened to our bench rest shoots Lack of attendance
The shoot that is growing is 3 gun .
You should of Ben here when we did the tuner testing .
I tested the new design TB when fire forum brass . With a new dasher 3 adjustment And I put 10 shots in a .645 hole . Larry

 

[vinny]

That was an exhausting "read"

 

[savagedasher]

That was an exhausting "read"

I was exhausted when I wrote it . Larry

 

[Joe Salt]

Larry We usually have 80+ shooters at a match. But yes we have lost a lot of shooters, a lot do to Deaths. But there are some that just quite because they don't like getting beat! 1000 yard benchrest is getting tougher every year. The records are in the 2'' and 3''So when someone keeps shooting in the teens you have to keep encouraging them or they may go fishing.

Joe Salt

 

[savagedasher]

Larry We usually have 80+ shooters at a match. But yes we have lost a lot of shooters, a lot do to Deaths. But there are some that just quite because they don't like getting beat! 1000 yard benchrest is getting tougher every year. The records are in the 2'' and 3''So when someone keeps shooting in the teens you have to keep encouraging them or they may go fishing.

Joe Salt

Joe your correct I agree we are shooting in dieing sport you cover both ends .
Gong shooting seen to have a larger foweling . It more like shooting score spread over a hour and a half With no practice and everyone knows the results . If the conditions at good they see everyone results. The difference is that your shooting at a little larger 10 ring and only the 10 counts.
Larry

 

[bsumoba]

IMO (and this applies to F-Class ), but I think the load development process could be as simple as what Bryan Litz's says, for the most part. I believe a lot of things we do while handloading are merely feel good things that give us more confidence in our ammo rather than actually making a difference on paper...consistently.

An example is loaded concentricity, which I think is exaggerated in the sense that it probably isn't as critical when you measure the round because it will "correct" itself later on. Look at your reamer print. The freebore diameter is probably around 0.00025" clearance on both sides, maybe a little more. This means as your round is chambered, that freebore area is most likely straightening out a lot of the runout because there is so little room between the wall and the bullet itself. I do not measure concentricity anymore and have not seen a difference. I measure runout on 1-2 rounds in the beginning to make sure I do not have a cluster* because excessive runout tells me something in my setup is out of whack. My runout normally runs less than 0.002", with most around 0.001".

Now, back to seating depth. IMO, I think the seating depth measurement is more of a relationship to quantify pressure in a sense. If you have consistent pressure, you will most likely have consistent ammo from an ES/SD standpoint and if you can tune your ammo to the accuracy nodes and have minimal vertical, then now you have what all of us strive for. I think of the powder charge as a gross adjustment for pressure and then the seating depth as a fine tune adjustment for pressure.

At the end of the day, in F-Class, it comes down to reading the wind over a period of say 7-30 minutes and having a gun maintain good vertical and less than 1/2 minute groups out to 1K over that same period.

IMO, in Benchrest it is about a good shooting gun and picking a condition and getting them all down there as fast as possible in the same condition. The targets are a little smaller, so the group sizes and accuracy requirements are more critical than in F-Class. How they get that accuracy....ask the BR guys .

 

[savagedasher]

IMO (and this applies to F-Class ), but I think the load development process could be as simple as what Bryan Litz's says, for the most part. I believe a lot of things we do while handloading are merely feel good things that give us more confidence in our ammo rather than actually making a difference on paper...consistently.

An example is loaded concentricity, which I think is exaggerated in the sense that it probably isn't as critical when you measure the round because it will "correct" itself later on. I will explain what my opinion is. Look at your reamer print. The freebore diameter is probably around 0.00025" clearance on both sides. This means as your round is chambered, that freebore area is most likely straightening out a lot of the runout because there is so little room between the wall and the bullet itself. I do not measure concentricity anymore and have not seen a difference. I measure runout on 1-2 rounds in the beginning to make sure I do not have a cluster* because excessive runout tells me something in my setup is out of whack. My runout normally runs less than 0.002", with most around 0.001".

Now, back to seating depth. IMO, I think the seating depth measurement is more of a relationship to quantify pressure in a sense. If you have consistent pressure, you will most likely have consistent ammo from an ES/SD standpoint and if you can tune your ammo to the accuracy nodes and have minimal vertical, then now you have what all of us strive for. So when Berger says to try certain seating depths in rather large seating depth increments, the end goal is to find a seating depth that gets the right amount of pressure that puts us in an accuracy node. I think of the powder charge as a gross adjustment for pressure and then the seating depth as a fine tune adjustment for pressure.

At the end of the day, in F-Class, it comes down to reading the wind over a period of say 7-30 minutes and having a gun maintain good vertical and less than 1/2 minute groups out to 1K over that same period.

IMO, in Benchrest it is about a good shooting gun and picking a condition and getting them all down there as fast as possible in the same condition.

You covered it all . Benchrest shooting is all about the gun and and conditions no shooter skills is involved . F class it is more in the shooter hand then equipment . That is why F class is growing and BR is decining.
Larry

 

[bsumoba]

Yea Bryan, I would say 1k benchrest shooters look for a tad smaller than 1/2 moa vertical.
Of course we also believe if we tweak the c.o.a.l. about a thousands, and put a little vertical in em that they shoot through the condition better. But that's just some of that black magic stuff. Benchrest is a sport of excellence, it always was.
Ask Larry how he did at world open if you want to know why he has a hard on for sanctioned benchrest lol. Here's a hint.........

Is he walking, while holding his pooch??? What a lazy dog

There is no doubt that from a precision standpoint, look no further than benchrest type shooting. That is where you will typically find the best shooting guns from 100/200 yard BR all the way out to the 1K BR guys.

 

[Joe Salt]

Larry you were there and didn't look me up, I might have been able to help. At least Matt he is the one that can make them shoot!

Joe Salt

 

[Endyo]

Lot of good info, sounds like that Bryan Litz's guy who thinks he's a rocket scientist or something doesn't know anything. He can only design bullets but obviously he doesn't know anything about load development.
His load development is totally opposite of you guys and he still seems to win some big long range competitions with his loads tuned the wrong way at 100 yards. Weird !!!!

BTW I tried to be funny, us new shooters get all confused when different experts are giving totally contradictory suggestions. Bryan's load development happens at 100 yards and he does care about group shape size and ES.

Don't know who to believe anymore

That's why I'm on these forums. I ask (at times) a lot remedial questions and a lot of times I know the answer but I want to see what results are posted. When a consistent message appears or someone sounds like they really know what they're talking about I'll try to do what they say. If it works GREAT, if not than I ask more remedial questions until I start seeing results.

FWIW I do 95% of my load development at 100 yards. Final verification is at distance. I'm not in the same caliber as these other gentlemen and I'm shooting a difference discipline, but there's still plenty to learn from them!

 

[savagedasher]

Larry you were there and didn't look me up, I might have been able to help. At least Matt he is the one that can make them shoot!

Joe Salt

Joe
I talked to so many nice people . What a great club the PA is. Evey one treated us wonderful . I finished mid pack. Heavy gun I was out it with the first shot . 9 on target and one never got there . One thing I learned don't take a single shot to a machine gun shoot . Matt was shooting next to me he was putting he stuff away as I was shooting my second shot . Larry

 

[calgarycanada]

Thanks guys, this last page explained a lot and cleared up lot of confusion. Different disciplines = different requirements
Thanks again

 

[swed6.5]

as much as bench rest is to fcass don't for a minute believe accuracy in requirements are more or less, be it you shoot em all quick or wait for pitts to mark the individual shots, I know if my rig isn't shooting with a 99% tuned round going in it, I know my wind call will be off in any direction unknown, if its tuned right it will shoot as good as the mind pulling the trigger, before each match if possible I will test and re test every possible criteria until I know its at its best. getting back to seating depths start jammed and work back .005 increments , re evaluate, and pick your best. retest again, re evaluate, and then work in .002 changes and that should put u close, then re evaluate that 3 more times that should get real close, then if that don't help try going to the bar and re evaluate what your doing.