Setting a Tuner one method used by a lot of SR BR group shooters

[JMayo]

Im like a blind hog ....i get lucky sometime !

50/50 chance .... I'll pick the wrong one 95% !

 

[Fuj]

I went the full long haul of going screwed in then .001" at a time
with 3 shot groups and glad I did. I seen much valued information
gained I would have missed doing such a large jump.....I'll note that
the tuner did have it's best moments, but not until I was past one
full turn out !! By the time I was one full turn out and up to #14
the second time, the 3 shot group was tight and match worthy.
The first #14 just past 1/4 turn out was a 3/8ths inch horizontal.
I'll also note that when I came around to #14 the second time, it
was on the bottom of the sine wave. I did not explore further since
I had a 300 yard UBR match to get to where I placed a hotly contested
second place.....Next tuner I purchase for the next build, I may start
a turn and a half out and work backwards. it would be another method ??

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

I went the full long haul of going screwed in then .001" at a time
with 3 shot groups and glad I did. I seen much valued information
gained I would have missed doing such a large jump.....I'll note that
the tuner did have it's best moments, but not until I was past one
full turn out !! By the time I was one full turn out and up to #14
the second time, the 3 shot group was tight and match worthy.
The first #14 just past 1/4 turn out was a 3/8ths inch horizontal.
I'll also note that when I came around to #14 the second time, it
was on the bottom of the sine wave. I did not explore further since
I had a 300 yard UBR match to get to where I placed a hotly contested
second place.....Next tuner I purchase for the next build, I may start
a turn and a half out and work backwards. it would be another method ??

Good job, doing the work to know what your gun needed. That test not only shows the sweet spots and where they are, but also what the groups look like on either side of a sweet spot. That's what tells you which way to go and by how far, when the tune goes away. Kudos! That's exactly what I get people to try and do right there. Finding a spot that shoots small is the easy part. Knowing what to do when it goes out of tune is why small increments and quantifying the group size and shape...that's the rest of the story and what separates tuner users into two groups. Those that know how to use a tuner and those that move and hope.

Yes, some tuners need a little more movement to get the shapes to do what you're looking for than others. Even my own. My light tuner takes between 3-3.5 times as much tuner travel to get the same repeatable group shapes as the standard weight model. We did the leg work to quantify that and changed the mark values. The standard tuner has 32 marks around it and the light one has 10 full numbers. So that 2 ounces of weight difference made a pretty huge difference in how far to move one vs the other. This is why I don't make blanket statements regarding different styles of tuners. IMO, if you don't test yours very thoroughly and methodically, there's just no way any of us can know the value of 1 mark or 10...or any other increment. They all work on the same principle but they don't all respond the same to the same amount of tuner travel. If your tuner needs to be moved more, move it more...but please just know what to expect with ANY movement and be methodical, whichever tuner you have and use.

Again, Good Job!

 

[AlNyhus]

I'm just starting to work a tuner on my 30BR...the Ezell PDT seven oz. unit. With my standard load and the tuner out far enough from the face of the barrel to orient #0 at 12:00, I shot three shot groups using Mike's prescribed target and moving the tuner 1 number at a time toward the muzzle.

The next day, I reshot it starting at #12 to see if it would repeat and how far past #14 it would carry. It repeated #12 to #14 exactly. It got a little loose at #15, which is what I was expecting.

Two weeks later, I shot the NBRSA Iowa State Score Tournament. On Friday's test session, #12 and #13 again repeated with things getting loose at #14. The weather was quite a bit hotter than my first two outings. In retrospect, starting at #10 may have yielded some more info in those different temps.

Good shootin' -Al

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

I'm just starting to work a tuner on my 30BR...the Ezell PDT seven oz. unit. With my standard load and the tuner out far enough from the face of the barreel to orient #1 at 12:00, I shot three shot groups using Mike's prescribed target and moving the tuner 1 number at a time.

The next day, I reshot it starting at #12 to see if it would repeat and how far past #14 it would carry. It repeated #12 to #14 exactly. It got a little loose at #15, which is what I was expecting.

Two weeks later, I shot the NBRSA Iowa State Score Tournament. On Friday's test session, #12 and #13 again repeated with things getting loose at #14. The weather was quite a bit hotter than my first two outings. In retrospect, starting at #10 may have yielded some more info in those different temps.

Good shootin' -Al

Modest Al, IIRC, won that Iowa State match, fwiw! Good shooting Al! First match with a tuner.

 

[Fuj]

#14 might be a built in automatic feature Mike is'nt giving up
about.....LOL In my above post I used the Ezell PDT, but with my
284-ELF wild cat.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

#14 might be a built in automatic feature Mike is'nt giving up
about.....LOL In my above post I used the Ezell PDT, but with my
284-ELF wild cat.

I can't take any credit for that but there is a pretty predictable number of increments between sweet spots and a lot of people tune the load with the tuner set at zero or in Al's case 1. So I could guess and might get close but I certainly couldn't promise that. FWIW, knowing what you've posted and what I know from both of you, I would've GUESSED 15 but it would've just been a swag at it for no good reason except to try. I'd liked to have seen 15 on Al's target in the conditions he tested in too...but.

 

[Bill Norris]

I'm just starting to work a tuner on my 30BR...the Ezell PDT seven oz. unit. With my standard load and the tuner out far enough from the face of the barrel to orient #0 at 12:00, I shot three shot groups using Mike's prescribed target and moving the tuner 1 number at a time.

The next day, I reshot it starting at #12 to see if it would repeat and how far past #14 it would carry. It repeated #12 to #14 exactly. It got a little loose at #15, which is what I was expecting.

Two weeks later, I shot the NBRSA Iowa State Score Tournament. On Friday's test session, #12 and #13 again repeated with things getting loose at #14. The weather was quite a bit hotter than my first two outings. In retrospect, starting at #10 may have yielded some more info in those different temps.

Good shootin' -Al

I can't take any credit for that but there is a pretty predictable number of increments between sweet spots and a lot of people tune the load with the tuner set at zero or in Al's case 1. So I could guess and might get close but I certainly couldn't promise that. FWIW, knowing what you've posted and what I know from both of you, I would've GUESSED 15 but it would've just been a swag at it for no good reason except to try. I'd liked to have seen 15 on Al's target in the conditions he tested in too...but.

Whatever we call it we have to say both of these guys were on top of their game with building the tuner and using the tuner. Fine work no doubt.

 

[AlNyhus]

I'd liked to have seen 15 on Al's target in the conditions he tested in too...but.

Mike, this is the target I shot the next day...picking it up at #12 and running it out to #17. I missed the tails lifting for one shot on #13. -Al

 

[Leeinmichigan]

Hi All, Since this posted started by my article back on 2018, I thought I should jump in. I view a stationary (non-adjustable) tuner as a weight that’s placed on an end of a barrel to dampen the harmonics (flexing) of the long tube. Which theory says, should make it more accurate as variables change (such as powder, temperature, etc.). Last year in the spring, I broke in three new barrels and tuned them to provide me the best results. I used the above technique to position the Bukys’s Tuner. The results speak for themselves (see picture). This year, I replaced my heavy Varmint barrel, and did the same thing. My HV rifle shot great at the IBS Group Nationals this past week (my load over two different days changed by only 0.2 grains. I don’t know why my technique works. I can only say if the tuner works with one complete revolution (with the small incremental moves) and also works with five or more complete revolutions, why wouldn’t you want it set the furthest away from the chamber? Just food for thought….

 

[AlNyhus]

Lee, first of all...congratulations! That's some rare air to be in, sir.

I'm a tuner neophyte but my gut is telling me my tuner wants to be further ahead on the barrel. I'm restocking the gun now and will test this soon. -Al

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Hi All, Since this posted started by my article back on 2018, I thought I should jump in. I view a stationary (non-adjustable) tuner as a weight that’s placed on an end of a barrel to dampen the harmonics (flexing) of the long tube. Which theory says, should make it more accurate as variables change (such as powder, temperature, etc.). Last year in the spring, I broke in three new barrels and tuned them to provide me the best results. I used the above technique to position the Bukys’s Tuner. The results speak for themselves (see picture). This year, I replaced my heavy Varmint barrel, and did the same thing. My HV rifle shot great at the IBS Group Nationals this past week (my load over two different days changed by only 0.2 grains. I don’t know why my technique works. I can only say if the tuner works with one complete revolution (with the small incremental moves) and also works with five or more complete revolutions, why wouldn’t you want it set the furthest away from the chamber? Just food for thought….

Congrats Lee! I don't knock results man. If it works, do it. I just try my best to convey the importance of being very methodical and explain some of why what we see happens. I agree about dampening and even just mass having benefits on their own. The weight alone dampens and slightly widens the tune window. I'd say if you shot my sine wave test you'd find bullet exit is happening at either top or bottom. That's where nice wide nodes will be. I don't care as much about top vs bottom as I do what the next couple of groups in particular look like. That's where quantifying mark values on YOUR tuner is of so much importance if you tune strictly with the tuner. Yes, if you use it to broaden the tune window and adjust load as needed to keep it shooting, that works too. I just think it's leaving the best part of a tuner on the table but not that it won't work. A sine wave test in small increments is golden if you fire enough groups to take it through a complete nodal cycle. That being, far enough to go from top tune all the way through bottom tune. It helps to have a couple more groups before and after those two sweet spots to see what happens before and after them to confirm it's either rising or falling and the shape of those couple of groups on either side. Keep up the good shooting Lee!--Mike

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Lee, first of all...congratulations! That's some rare air to be in, sir.

I'm a tuner neophyte but my gut is telling me my tuner wants to be further ahead on the barrel. I'm restocking the gun now and will test this soon. -Al

We talked about this a little and I definitely would try that or adding or removing a little weight. You're off to a good start. I knew you'd do well with this. Thanks for being so easy to talk to and willing to test things.

 

[Leeinmichigan]

Again, I agree with all of you. I guess if you take the incremental process (with three shot groups) to completion, would you find other sweet spot(s) out a quarter or a half inch further away from the muzzle? I’m thinking you would, and it might be where my technique shows the best results (with few rounds). If that’s true, you may have wasted one Aggregate of wear and tear on a new barrel. I shot my first Agg with that new HV barrel at WWCCA’s June match with only 30 rounds on it (won the 100HV and HV Grand). Isn’t this benchrest shit fun, LOL!

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Again, I agree with all of you. I guess if you take the incremental process (with three shot groups) to completion, would you find other sweet spot(s) out a quarter or a half inch further away from the muzzle? I’m thinking you would, and it might be where my technique shows the best results (with few rounds). If that’s true, you may have wasted one Aggregate of wear and tear on a new barrel. I shot my first Agg with that new HV barrel at WWCCA’s June match with only 30 rounds on it (won the 100HV and HV Grand). Isn’t this benchrest shit fun, LOL!

Lee, I don't think it'd be anywhere near that far out/apart. IME with Gene's tuner, it takes just a tad more than mine to get the same effect on target. Mine is typically about 4 marks from in tune to all the way out and because tune just repeats over and over with frequency, it's basically double that amount from all the way out to all the way back into tone. Each mark on my standard tuner is .001" of tuner travel. So, only about .008 between in tune and top and in tune at bottom on a typical short range br contour rifle bbl. On his tuner, I'd say it's about the equivalent of 10-12 marks between sweet spots, or about .010-.012 of tuner travel. Try it and see. You can always go back where you have it. I think you'll find it pretty quick in that area. Feel free to give me a call any time or Al and I have discussed it a lot and it's pretty close on his but his is a little different than I typically see. It's there, predictably and repeataby but a little closer together on his than I see most always. That's why we were talking about going out further or playing with the weight some.

 

[tom]

I had a thread yesterday about a 1k target I was sent using a similar method. Its interesting.View attachment 1456500View attachment 1456501

@GlennK and I had the planets align pretty good for this 3+ minutes it took to do this. I can't remember direction and angle and speed and mirage agreeing for that long EVER at deep creek. I would say you were seeing the barrel point them to their destination as near as we could guess. I went back in to load more and didn't have as good of conditions for the groups/tuner moves......you could probably trust the shape of each individual group however.


Tom

 

[Tim Singleton]

Congrats Lee! I don't knock results man. If it works, do it. I just try my best to convey the importance of being very methodical and explain some of why what we see happens. I agree about dampening and even just mass having benefits on their own. The weight alone dampens and slightly widens the tune window. I'd say if you shot my sine wave test you'd find bullet exit is happening at either top or bottom. That's where nice wide nodes will be. I don't care as much about top vs bottom as I do what the next couple of groups in particular look like. That's where quantifying mark values on YOUR tuner is of so much importance if you tune strictly with the tuner. Yes, if you use it to broaden the tune window and adjust load as needed to keep it shooting, that works too. I just think it's leaving the best part of a tuner on the table but not that it won't work. A sine wave test in small increments is golden if you fire enough groups to take it through a complete nodal cycle. That being, far enough to go from top tune all the way through bottom tune. It helps to have a couple more groups before and after those two sweet spots to see what happens before and after them to confirm it's either rising or falling and the shape of those couple of groups on either side. Keep up the good shooting Lee!--Mike

Good morning
I've read back thru all the posts a couple of times. and this one stuck out on my second time thru
Mike, we may not be as far a part in method as we think
In the above post you like to see a full sine wave test all the way in and out of tune top to bottom.
You like to see a couple groups shapes on either side of the best group
sounds like you are looking for the widest node
I think the method Lee outlined in his article is trying to get to the widest spot possible with least amount of rounds fired

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Good morning
I've read back thru all the posts a couple of times. and this one stuck out on my second time thru
Mike, we may not be as far a part in method as we think
In the above post you like to see a full sine wave test all the way in and out of tune top to bottom.
You like to see a couple groups shapes on either side of the best group
sounds like you are looking for the widest node
I think the method Lee outlined in his article is getting to the widest spot possible with least amount of rounds fired

Yes, the widest sweet spot will be at top or bottom. So, yes, we're closer than it might have seemed at first. I just break it down...Lets say there's 4 marks(very common on SR BR bbls) between all the way in to all the way out of tune. I'm just breaking tune down to repeatable group shapes in 1 mark intervals and you only have to recognize those 4 shapes relative to tune. Hope that makes sense. Frequency is essentially a constant, so if it's 4 marks from in to out(all the way), it'll alway be 4 marks on that bbl. It can never be more than 4 marks from shooting small again. That gets to why I'm so adamant about knowing the value of each increment and only moving in
KNOWN and SMALL increments. Again, we're dealing with frequency here and it just repeats over and over. So, if you're in tune at the top of the bbl swing, and there are 4 marks on your tuner, from in to out, then double that, 8 marks will be very close to in tune again but at the bottom of bbl swing. Now, my standard tuner has 32 marks around it, so if moving it in big amounts, you can see that you're skipping over sweet spots. But more importantly, you're skipping over those other group shapes that are all important(to me) at telling me how far I am from being back in tune. As you move the tuner out, it'll have a little more authority(leverage) and it might be 7 marks rather than 8 between sweet spots.

But yes, the wide spots are at anti-nodes at top or bottom, so we're closer than it might have seemed. That sine test shows, if moved in small enough and methodical increments, it shows top and bottom as well as when it's really close and may only need a mark or maybe two to be back in, as well as showing which direction to go to fix it! That's huge and is why I think that sine wave test is just solid freakin gold! It shows all you need to know to use your tuner. It shows top and bottom, group shapes along the way and which way to go based on those shapes. I think it's absolutely amazing and it's so predictable that the group shapes are what I use to recognize state of tune and I'm never more than 4 marks(in this scenario) away and more realistically, if you don't change anything about the load, I find two marks to be a big swing and worth roughly 40-45° of temp change. That's a little different subject.

I'm so glad that I think you and I are getting on the same page as to this. We don't have to use the exact same process to get there but yes, it sounds like most of our differences have been terminology or just getting to the same place with different ways of stating it.

I do want to remind people that YOUR tuner might require a little more or less travel to get to the same point and that's why I try my best not to state this as matter of fact for all tuner designs. They're all very similar though but yes, there are differences and testing is the only way to know mark values with YOUR tuner and rifle.

I've had people call me up and proclaim adamantly that a mark or two doesn't make any difference with THEIR tuner. That may well be true with THEIR tuner and occasionally I see them where it's only 3 marks(my tuner). Al's target appears to be an example of this but I see so many of these test targets that I'm comfortable saying that this is not the norm.

Also, a lighter tuner may not have as much "authority" but less weight lowers frequency less than a heavier one, so the nodes(and anti-nodes) are closer together, literally so... but that doesn't mean fewer marks on YOUR tuner. That scenario is essentially like changing two things at a time. Less weight but different mark increments, for example.

Rambling and I've gotta get busy but thanks Tim! I feel better about all of this now. I think we are closer than we have been, even if it's just in how we converse about it.

 

[Dave M.]

When moving any tuner, one question that should always have a clear answer is, why do I move it in the respective amounts that we choose to use. We should only move it with a known and anticipated result. Anything else is random and with random movement, I think we can all agree that we should expect random results. Even if 180° is appropriate for the tuner in the article(it's not), different tuners, different weights and thread pitches, along with different relative stiffness of individual barrels play a role in this. This is exactly why I'm careful to only give instruction for my own tuner designs. There can not be blanket statements for all tuners.

I reply to tuner threads because there is so much confusion and just plain wrong information about how to properly go about using them. We need less confusing, not more. Sometimes it's like people wish there was a different approach but that is not really the case. IMO, there are two ways. One is to set it and forget it, changing powder charge or other load parameters to maintain tune. The other is to move the tuner in known values to achieve the same. Establishing those values is paramount with each tuner design and even bbl stiffness, to some degree. They really are easy to use but randomly moving one or moving in big increments is a terrible way to establish mark values and mostly leaves people scratching their head, especially when tune goes away. It's not at all going out on a limb to say that being very methodical is the best way to establish mark values and I think we can all agree with that simple statement.

Mike is an awesome guy and knows his stuff. He is so willing to help those that are open minded and ready to learn. We should be thankful to have a great guy like Mike that is willing to lend his expertise.
Dave