• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Tuner World

I have a simple question......

Based on the endless controversy in the world of barrel tuners, I will rely on what has been written on the topic. It seems to be 50/50 , depending on the author or engineer as to function.

Question; Is more or less weight required to "tune" the heavier barrel?

Now, lets say that I agree with the design that places the weight beyond the muzzle. Lets use the "0" taper barrel and a diameter of 1.250, a straightpipe if you will. Will the barrel respond to the tuner that is "more or less" in mass..........
 
Good question Straightpipes! The tuners that I have seen on the market vary from 3 oz to 8 oz. How do we choose the most suitable weight? I have a theory about it from having made my own tuner but want to hear from the more experienced first.
 
Tozguy,

lets work on this...... sounds like you know something about tuners. Its said (50/50) that the heavier barrels should require less weight to tune them. Heavier barrels being more rigid should "whip" less, thus requiring less tuner mass.

I will use "whip" instead of getting into frequencies and amplitude. I suppose I could build two, one less in mass than the other. Then shoot up half the barrel life testing them both.
 
Toz,

Put your theory on the table, I have one also. I believe that barrel "length" plays a major role in this stuff. Short and fat or long and fat is where I am at this point.

Sorry for the simple terms, I believe you can read between the lines. I run the machinery faster than I type. :o
 
Tozguy,

Lets not try to re-do the engineering. The concept is suffering some controversy. If you have tried something, does it work or has it failed to do the simple job of producing tight groups.

I am considering the "length" of the tuner at this point.
 
My take on tuners:

First off let me say that I do not pretend to be any kind of expert. The articles on tuners and the research that I have read were very interesting but the most revealing has been my own limited experience.

The first personal experience I had was when a top notch benchrest shooter sat at the table beside me to tune his new 30 cal. barrels. He had a relatively small looking tuner that his gunsmith makes. He orders his barrels with the muzzle threaded and just threads the tuner on a new barrel. This person is a top notch shooter with natural talent and a no nonsense approach to accuracy.

His explanation essentially goes as follows: To get a load and rifle in tune it is easier to tune the rifle than to tune the load. He has not changed his load in four years. Starting with the tuner set all the way in he shoots 2 rounds. If the 2 holes don’t touch he moves the tuner out by a small increment (approx. 1/24th of a revolution) and then shoots two more. He continues this 2 shot /adjust procedure until he gets two shots in the same hole. Then at this same tuner setting he continues to shoot a third, fourth, etc round to confirm that they are all going in the same hole. He said that it usually takes less than 12 shots to tune the rifle. He marks the tuner setting at that point with nail polish.

This was very inspiring to me because I had tried a ladder test on a couple of times on a light varmint rifle with limited results. It never really felt like I was getting anywhere trying to tune the load. Those 5 shot bug holes that I dreamt about remained elusive. It was time to try a tuner. When speaking with a well qualified gunsmith about threading my barrel, he replied that he glues the tuner on his rifles. A glue-on approach opened the door to my being able to make my own tuner. My first session at the range with my homebrew tuner was similar to the one mentioned above. With less than a third of a revolution of my tuner I was finally shooting those 5 shot bug holes of my dreams!

Other than group size, an additional observation was made from my target. Each ‘group’ formed in a different spot with respect to aim point. When the tuner was turned 1/24th of a revolution, the group moved to a different position on the target.

These are some of my thoughts at this point in time:
• A tuner probably has many points of tune throughout its range of adjustment. However some points of tune might be better than others due to harmonics. A tuner is changing more than one frequency of vibration at the same time so some windows of tune might be ‘wider’ than others. A tuner must be adjusted in very small increments so as not to skip over a point of tune. So it might also be a good idea to go beyond the first point of tune that you find to see how far it is to the next one. If the points of tune are too close together, it might be better to repeat the process using finer increments of adjustment.
• Everything attached to the rifle affects how the barrel vibrates. Any change to a rifle (even the torque used on the action screws) might require readjustment of the tuner.
• The lighter a tuner the wider the spacing between points of tune. A heavier tuner would require smaller increments of adjustment. The good news is that a relatively light tuner could still be used to advantage when weight limits of the gun are involved.
• The heavier the barrel the lower the amplitude of barrel vibration. A tuner (even a light one) would still have an influence on the vibration of a heavy barrel. Improvements in grouping with a heavy barrel would be more subtle regardless of the weight of tuner used.
• A tuner can shine only when everything else is consistent (ammo, rifle, and shooter). A tuner only changes the frequencies at which the muzzle vibrates so that the bullet exits the muzzle at a relatively ‘calm’ time. A tuner does not fix or compensate for any sort of problem or deficiency elsewhere in the package.

This experience, although it did not lead to a greater understanding of the physics principles involved, left me with an appreciation for how easy it is to use a barrel tuner, any barrel tuner.
 
Tozguy,

A very clear reasoning you have there.......... You do know something about tuners ! Let me continue with some of my "very simple" questions.

Gluing the tuner"hub" to the barrel is the way to go. We might even press on a polymer " vibration isolator" between the barrel and the hub..? The tuner weight would thread over the hub. I believe "one" well known benchrester has proven the rubber type isolator can contribute to improved accuracy.

This same tuner(mentioned above) is also somewhere around 4" long. This "length" intrigues me. Most tuners on average are half that length. The diameter is increased to add to the mass on the short versions.

My question is; Will a tuner of the 4" type add to the rigidity of the muzzle end and tune in a completely different manner? Will the 4" actually shorten the effective barrel length.?
 
Toz,

I dont know you personally, but I wonder where your writing style comes from. If your not a "writer" on the topics discussed here, think about it... You might want to "take a shot" at it.

Your not sandbagging me are you? Your speech is very well done. You have answered some basic thoughts that I ponder, can we continue?
 
StraightPipes said:
Tozguy,

A very clear reasoning you have there.......... You do know something about tuners ! Let me continue with some of my "very simple" questions.

Gluing the tuner"hub" to the barrel is the way to go. We might even press on a polymer " vibration isolator" between the barrel and the hub..? The tuner weight would thread over the hub. I believe "one" well known benchrester has proven the rubber type isolator can contribute to improved accuracy.

This same tuner(mentioned above) is also somewhere around 4" long. This "length" intrigues me. Most tuners on average are half that length. The diameter is increased to add to the mass on the short versions.

My question is; Will a tuner of the 4" type add to the rigidity of the muzzle end and tune in a completely different manner? Will the 4" actually shorten the effective barrel length.?

Damping is a different set of rules. I don't know how to factor them in with changes in mass and location for tuners. It is interesting to note that some have reported the necessity of having a thin layer of something in between a barrel and barrel block which might be for damping but who knows. Another approach to damping has been sleeving the whole barrel with a disimilar material. For starters I would say that any provision for damping would have to be consistent over a range of temperatures and be durable.


To my mind, any weight in any shape or position added to the barrel will change its 'tune'. That's why the rubber isolator might work in some cases because of its weight. It is also important that a weight be solidly fixed to the barrel so that it acts as part of the barrel and does not become a new source of vibration itself. A penny attached to a barrel with a hose clamp would be better than a penny held on with duct tape. No matter what is fixed to a barrel it might make things better or it might make things worse. Its a question of luck. However if the weight can be moved in fine increments so that results go from bad to good to bad again that's what I call a tuner.
 
Toz,

Your back. I believe the barrel block issue was due to heat, heat sinking. Now that their gluing them in, There are different parameters. I still clamp mine, no issues with this type.

So, you think the rubber based tuner is a damper? Yes, Im thinking it does just that. Do you think it would "absorb" vibrations and at the same time "would not" create a frequency of its own?

You mentioned "shrouding" the barrel, I want to "shroud" 4'' at the muzzle. It should act (the barrel) as though it were shortened by 4". I realize that it wont overhang the muzzle ( my preferance) but will be able to adjust to overhang if needed.
 
I think that the stiffer the barrel, the more weight is required. Dan Lilja has a free program that can be downloaded from his web site that can be used to calculate barrel stiffness.

The fellow that has had the greatest success (in short range CF group shooting) with tuners is Gene Buckys. He takes an entirely different approach as to how to use a tuner. Based on his experience, he believes that you can get into trouble moving a tuner during a match because if the adjustment threads do not seat perfectly, accuracy can be adversely affected. He has seen this happen. He has also said that he has never had a barrel that shot more accurately because of a tuner, but that the breadth of tuning nodes is increased, making it easier to stay in tune. What he does, is to thread a new barre for a tuner, tune the load for peak accuracy, install the tuner, and adjust it by shooting, and then lock it down, never to be moved again. From there on, he tunes conventionally with his loads. Others that I know have been beguiled by their experiences playing with adjustments, but in the actual heat of battle, where time is short, and pressure high, making a mid match adjustment has not been as successful as when in a more leisurely practice session. One thing that needs to be said is that Gene is a group shooter, and in that game, there are few successful shooters that preload. On the other hand, running something like a .30 BR for score shooting, may be quite a bit different. What will get it done for one, well may not for another.

I have several tuners, and have played with them some, and shot one weekend with one at a group match. Based on that experience, with a 6PPC sporter (10.5#), I am inclined to Mr Buckys' approach for future tuner work.

For rifles that are of the same weight as mine, if they are to be shot free recoil, the issue of balance becomes very important. (If the rifle is shot with some other style, that is less of a consideration.) In order to keep a rifle balanced for free recoil shooting, I think that it is best to not have too heavy of a barrel profile. When I set up my rifle for the first tuner that I tried, I was already at the weight limit, so we took off the same amount from the barrel as the tuner weighs. This barrel had been middle of the pack at best, throughout its life, and after installing the tuner, shot quite a bit better than it had, even though it had a lot of rounds on it at that point. For this reason, I think that tuners probably hold some hope for one barrel at a time shooters. While they may not improve the absolute accuracy of the finest barrels, I believe that they can for more average barrels. This is not only based on my experience, but that of a shooter who actually had this happen with several barrels that had not been competitive.

As a final thought, I would recommend that anyone who wants to learn more about tuner theory works study Varmint Al's web site, reading and rereading that material as many times as it may take to fully understand all of the subtitles that it contains. He has made a tremendous contribution to my understanding of what can be a difficult subject.

I enjoy reading of others' experiments, and always try to keep an open mind.
 
Hi Boyd,

I go along with parts of your comment. Using the tuner to "fine tune" after we have determined that we have a "shooter"is what Im after. The last possible reduction in group size will determine the value of my tuner. If it proves itself, yes it will be locked down never to be moved again. I suspect it will show me when the barrel heads south also.

The adjustment threads will be turned to "drag" slightly in fit so it does not promote what you had said in your post.

The "length" of the tuner I believe will change the logic, lets see.

I have looked at Varmint Als work for years, its his fault Im coming out of the box with my thinking.. :o
 
Boyd mentioned Buckys. You have Buckys, Beggs, Lambert and Schmit and many others Im sure. From what I have had the chance to see or read about, Jackie Schmit I believe is onto something. I believe his tuner/damper has the mechanical advantage.

I have my own opinion as to why Jackies arrangement is doing its job so well. The length plays a role in his design. I wont say as to why, if the man stops by here maybe he has an opinion.

Its not typical or in the box, thats why I mentioned "out of the box". So many tuners so far are typical in design. I think the "longer " versions will be more affective.

I probably shouldnt have mentioned names, but they are the prime examples. Im not speaking for any of them and not looking to start any wars.
 
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?s=Saguaro+action&submit=Search
Are you aware of Mr. Buckys degree of success both nationally and internationally? I don't think that there is anyone that has done as well with a tuner in competition. This is not to say that there is not more than one skin this particular cat, or that he would not have done as well without one.
 
StraightPipes said:
Boyd mentioned Buckys. You have Buckys, Beggs, Lambert and Schmit and many others Im sure. From what I have had the chance to see or read about, Jackie Schmit I believe is onto something. I believe his tuner/damper has the mechanical advantage.

I have my own opinion as to why Jackies arrangement is doing its job so well. The length plays a role in his design. I wont say as to why, if the man stops by here maybe he has an opinion.

Its not typical or in the box, thats why I mentioned "out of the box". So many tuners so far are typical in design. I think the "longer " versions will be more affective.

I probably shouldnt have mentioned names, but they are the prime examples. Im not speaking for any of them and not looking to start any wars.

Until Jackie joins in, could you describe his tuner for us and mention what is unique about it? Is it more than just the length that sets it apart from other tuners?
 
If I remember correctly, Jackie's tuner is a hair under three inches long, with fine threads that are either .9 or 15/16 in diameter (He has made them both ways, depending on the available muzzle diameter.), and 2" long, cut directly onto the barrel. It weighs about 5.5 oz, and the entire weight moves on the threaded barrel. The body of the tuner is aluminum, with a built in clamping ring that features a split across the diameter and two screws that close the split, on opposite sides. Pressed onto the aluminum part is a cut down marine bearing that has a ribbed rubber layer that contacts the aluminum part, and has a brass sleeve on the outside. The length of the pressed on part and the thickness of the brass are cut down to fit, and adjust the total weight respectively. Both he and Gene Buckys have come to the conclusion that having a damping element incorporated in the tuner is desirable. If you click on this link, and scroll down, there is a picture. http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/07/details-of-jackie-schmidts-1118-100-yard-agg-for-the-ages/ Although the length is listed as 2 5/8 in the article, looking at the picture, it looks to be the same proportions as the one that he made me, that is an earlier model, made before the marine bearing was incorporated in the design.
 
Boyd, thank you very much. How do you keep track of all those old articles?
I remember reading that article back when it first appeared. But when I read that Jackie was not putting them on the market (sob) I moved on. Can you get him to change his mind about not selling them? :)
 
I just Googled Jackie's tuner and Gene Buckys tuner, and did image searches. Piece of cake. Check your PMs.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,232
Messages
2,213,924
Members
79,448
Latest member
tornado-technologies
Back
Top