Well start your own thread instead of derailing this one as you have so many times in the past .
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Positive compensation and its explanations .
- Thread starter timintx
- Start date
That's not what I said, or at the least, not how I meant it. My issue arises when 'critique' is a simple dismissal because the test protocol is not ideal. If your opening stance is "the test isn't good enough" why would someone want to discuss it further with you? It's already making people defensive, and why would I argue if I'm not going to convince you? Maybe try a shit sandwich with your critique, you may get more constructive engagement.
Sorry Tim.
I'm truly not trying to be adversarial. I wanted to get insights from yourself, badassgunworks and cameljockey on the test in post #38. I thought that could've been informative and interesting.
If no one wants to discuss the tests, then I'll just move on. I would love it if others posted similar tests, and hopefully we can get to a point in the future where we can have open discussions about such testing.
I think there needs to be trust between the two groups. Like, the tuner-folk need to feel safe from mockery, and the testing-folks need to feel like the test is valid enough.
I suppose if both groups go into a test with an open mind, a friendly attitude, and a genuine curiosity vs. trying to be “right”, and with the realization they’re not going to make a perfect test right off the block of ever), it might work out. It’d be iterative, I suppose.
I wish I was an engineer lol dang. Not a good enough shooter and no science background. All I can do is watch.
I suppose if both groups go into a test with an open mind, a friendly attitude, and a genuine curiosity vs. trying to be “right”, and with the realization they’re not going to make a perfect test right off the block of ever), it might work out. It’d be iterative, I suppose.
I wish I was an engineer lol dang. Not a good enough shooter and no science background. All I can do is watch.
Wow I was away deer hunting and didn't receive any notifications so lots to post about.
Whomever this poster is he/she didn't read or understand what was written so clearly this will be time consuming.
I was responding to another posters comments and that poster most likely shoots factory ammo.
You also missed the picture of my test fixture which is used to remove as much of the human element as possible
Clearly your lack of following the posts shows us your not even trying to understand what is written or your not capable of following along.
I don't do the test in post 38 and frankly I gave you a test to run and you haven't done it. You claim life doesn't allow you to test just post comments and that is most likely why you haven't seen any change in your groups.
I can see changes every time I adjust the tuner and you have never seen any changes. That means something is way wrong.
I agree we are here to discuss tuners. The picture is the result of using a couple tuners 13 years ago so this is nothing new to me.
Keep it to questions and they will get answered.
Attachments
There's really no need to get combative.
No, I haven't been able to conduct your test yet. I never said that "life doesn't allow me to test" - every time I go to the range I'm generally testing something. Performing your test isn't a current priority for me, though at some point in the future I'll test tuners again. I do currently have other priorities that I'm putting above your test, that's just a fact.
And I never said there was no changes to the groups I shot - however I can't conclusively determine with my testing that a tuner is beneficial.
Nice trophys.
Out of curiosity, have you ever been beat by anyone not using a tuner?
When your developing a load the old rule of thumb is 1% on your powder charge.
If your shooting a small 6mm chambering 0.3 grain increments work well.
If your shooting 30-06 size cartridges 0.5 grain increments work well.
If your shooting 338 type cartridges 0.9 grain increments work well.
If your shooting 50BMG type cartridges 2.5 grain increments work well.
Vertical is the powder charge horizontal is the shooter/platform issues when using good bullets.
Tim
These guys are not as bad as the 2 years we spent explaining all this on benchrest central 20 years ago.
Let's wait 6 months are start a thread on tensioned barrels so we can see the same reaction.
LD
Are you talking about Eric stecker and Bryan litz?
Some of us remember when Eric married Walts daughter and immediately that made him a ballistics expert.
Bryan started to post about 20 years ago on benchrest central if my memory is any good and he seemed to learn alot from others posts.
5 years later he was winning matches in f-class and I have never heard of him shooting benchrest.
I did enjoy the video posted but as soon as patreon and donations come into play I'm out.
Same goes for guys making and selling tuners who openly admit they have no clue as to why or how they work but of course we sell them.
You can leade a horse to water comes to mind here.
I enjoy answering questions but you could take some of these guys 1 inch guns and develop an honest load and set a record and they still wouldn't have enough data for there statistics.
Whenever I see a reloading thread full of standard deviation and no extreme spread I know it's time to move on.
That was not load development, that was in reference to adjusting the tuner firing pairs of two different charge weights.
Nice trophys.
Out of curiosity, have you ever been beat by anyone not using a tuner?
Been beat by guys and gals using every configuration imaginable and even been beat by my own guns and my loads in different guns.
Does that help your statistics?
Has any national champion ever lost a match?
Has David tubb ever lost a match?
Has Bryan litz ever lost a match?
Has Tony boyer ever lost a match?
Lolroflmao
Out of curiosity, have you ever been beat by anyone not using a tuner?
Been beat by guys and gals using every configuration imaginable and even been beat by my own guns and my loads in different guns.
Does that help your statistics?
Has any national champion ever lost a match?
Has David tubb ever lost a match?
Has Bryan litz ever lost a match?
Has Tony boyer ever lost a match?
Lolroflmao
Nobody here is combative as this is not just old news but very old news for some of us.
Do the testing when you have time then look me up and we can see what the issue is.
Actually all you need to do is find a tuner that doesn't have clicks weighs 8-12 ounces for your typical 1000 yard taper barrel and mounts solidly on the muzzle and just go shooting.
I don't think winning a couple of trophies, with or without a tuner, means anything either way.
You are the one bringing it up as if it's data that can support your argument.
Actually it shows that with a tuner on the end of 2 guns I managed to win a match over everyone else.
If you read the posts here half are saying tuners don't work.
Can you imagine how good I would have done without tuners!!!!
But the tuner wasn't the only variable being tested that day(s) on those matches. Far from it. There were hundreds of variables on those days that went into those wins. To suggest the outcome was a direct result of the tuner is not a conclusion that can be supported by the data. Did the tuner assist in that win? Maybe. Maybe not. No way of really knowing with that level of evidence.
And that's the crux of the issue that some people have with some of the claims being made about tuners. Half the people here aren't saying that tuners don't work. I'm not even saying that. We are interested and want to see the data that supports these claims. People have stated their hypothesis', some models and papers, and there is one test that was posted here that we apparently can't talk about.
I think it would be really cool if tuners "worked" (and I think they must, in some fashion). But I also find it really odd how guarded people are about any such data, and how inevitably the defense always turns into "just trust us, we've been doing this for ~20 years". You're obviously a great and accomplished shooter, given your two trophies. And I'm sure Tim is an excellent shooter as well. But some of us will always be a bit skeptical in the absence of data - claims and conclusions are made all the time in the reloading and shooting world, that proper testing would show is false.
If your gun is shooting good and adding a tuner doesn't help it shoot better remove the tuner and keep doing what your doing.
In the upper levels of competition you will find few top shooters willing to walk you through all the steps necessary.
I say this with a great deal of respect for my competition. They are offering up free advise and guiding those willing to learn while putting up with those who refuse to test or just want to post.
It's also why most of them don't post.
In the upper levels of competition you will find few top shooters willing to walk you through all the steps necessary.
I say this with a great deal of respect for my competition. They are offering up free advise and guiding those willing to learn while putting up with those who refuse to test or just want to post.
It's also why most of them don't post.
I don't think a single person in this thread has said tuners don't work. Most if not all have said they are open to the idea but also point out there is little hard evidence proving they work.
Your posts are definitely coming off as "combative"
Again here we are, either believe me or test it yourself.
Personally I'd think someone who has gains to be made monetarily wouldn't be so secretive with the data that proves tuners work.
No a few trophies isn't proof, nor is saying "I had guns that didn't shoot, put on tuners now they do."
I honestly haven't seen anything explained by anyone, you just say they work trust us. The links @timintx explain the theory but don't have any proof that it actually influences group size. Personally I can see a tensioned barrel being able to affect groups and POI heavily.
The video posted by @Rio Precision Gunworks in post #134 actually provides some pretty good testing IMO. IIRC he had about a 50% reduction in average group size. I cant recall how many groups it was.
I do plan to try a tuner, It can't hurt. I'll do some testing when I get around to it and report back.
This thread was pretty interesting right up until post #24. It went off the rails at that point and here we are at post #172 and it has never gotten back on track. I'm sorry op but I'm going to have to un-watch this one.
Has anyone tried counter boring the muzzle back to where that node is so the tuner can still be on the end?
Also @cameljockey230 I'll follow your procedure when my barrel and action shows up. Can you calculate how heavy of tuner I'd need for 1.45" straight taper barrel with .375 bore. Also who's gonna make it for me?
Also @cameljockey230 I'll follow your procedure when my barrel and action shows up. Can you calculate how heavy of tuner I'd need for 1.45" straight taper barrel with .375 bore. Also who's gonna make it for me?
You haven't seen a single person saying they don't work?
This scares me.
You think I am combative how exactly? I tell you how they work and show you that I am the first person ever to win a longrange national title using 2 tuners?
What data are you after?
The video posted shows a guy asking for patreon money and donations to fund his shooting.
Send me buckets of cash and I will send you buckets of data.
His gun was shooting in the 1's now its shooting in the 3's do you understand what kind of change in percentage that is?
Your barrel will need a tuner around 3 pounds. I have a tuner on one of my heavyguns and it was made by Scott "Fudd" Hamilton at 51 ounces but I am using a 9 inch barrel block.
I haven't seen a single person in this thread say they don't work. Maybe I skipped over it, maybe you can provide an example of what I missed?
I've heard tons of people elsewhere say they don't work just not here.
If you can't see how even this post comes off as antagonistic that scares ME.
As for data at this point I don't really care.
It's just you keep claiming you've got proof. I'd think it'd be beneficial to post it.
Criticizing the only actual test conducted that's been posted in this thread seems counter intuitive, regardless if he's asking for money.
Yes I quite clearly expressed it was a 50% reduction in group size...?
Either way this will be my last post regarding all the BS, if someone wants to get back on track of the subject matter I'm all for it.
Thank you for doing that, rifle is probably about a year away at this point but I will try and post some data when I get everything sorted and start playing with a tuner
Taylorbok
So you read the posts by kthomas and you think he is a believer. I won't ask you how you vote.
And if my posts are now antagonistic I would put me on your ignore list and not view my content. I don't want you to be scared anymore.
Please quote the proof I claimed to have other than I know what a good target looks like.
In the video his group size shrank by 50% is that what your saying? Or did it grow by 50%?
What would cause a group to do either of those things?
Does that happen to you? How often?
I calculated the weight for a 30-34 inch barrel without a block. I would do the same for anyone interested in trying a tuner for themselves.
Once your gun is set up and shooting you will see a long hallway with a huge bright light at the end. You will be happy and you will be shooting smaller groups.
When that happens don't thank Tim or myself just chalk it up to not giving up and doing the work.
So you read the posts by kthomas and you think he is a believer. I won't ask you how you vote.
And if my posts are now antagonistic I would put me on your ignore list and not view my content. I don't want you to be scared anymore.
Please quote the proof I claimed to have other than I know what a good target looks like.
In the video his group size shrank by 50% is that what your saying? Or did it grow by 50%?
What would cause a group to do either of those things?
Does that happen to you? How often?
I calculated the weight for a 30-34 inch barrel without a block. I would do the same for anyone interested in trying a tuner for themselves.
Once your gun is set up and shooting you will see a long hallway with a huge bright light at the end. You will be happy and you will be shooting smaller groups.
When that happens don't thank Tim or myself just chalk it up to not giving up and doing the work.
Last edited:
Very common in sporter-class rimfire benchrest back in the day
Exactly correct the sporter class rimfire rifles are not allowed to use a tuner.
At the .muzzle they have a bulbous section that looks like a tuner or muzzlebrake but it's part of the barrel.
The gunsmith backbores the rifle then shoots it and removes some metal on his lathe and retest the grouping.
This metal removal goes on until the rifle is competitive.
Essentially a stationary tuner.
At the .muzzle they have a bulbous section that looks like a tuner or muzzlebrake but it's part of the barrel.
The gunsmith backbores the rifle then shoots it and removes some metal on his lathe and retest the grouping.
This metal removal goes on until the rifle is competitive.
Essentially a stationary tuner.
Last edited:
I agree his testing method is definitely significantly different than how most use a tuner.
Question
Was he dropping his powder using a Culver type powder drop or was he weighing charges if you know?
On a good note he was using Lester Brunos daughters husband's bullets!!!
Last edited:
I don’t believe that . If you were looking to learn you would try what is in the video . You have asked questions that is answered in the video which tells me you have not even watched it. You have had a year to do a test you claimed you would . You even own a gun company and have posted zero data while claiming you have data. Instead you just scream proof is needed so everybody else can do the work for you . Your agenda is obvious.I am open to tuners, don't know why you keep casting me as some sort of an adversary
Can someone explain what data is needed?
Targets don't count.
National titles don't count.
So we all know what doesn't count please tell us what does count?
What is the data you want and how much data is required?
Targets don't count.
National titles don't count.
So we all know what doesn't count please tell us what does count?
What is the data you want and how much data is required?
Last edited:
You clearly have me mistaken for someone else, I don't own a gun company. I don't work in the firearms industry at all.
I'm not sure what test I promised to do, nor do I have an agenda. Whether tuners "work" or not makes no difference to me. Though I would love it if they did work - and I'm not convinced they don't.
I do think how tuners are being used in PRS is a bit like snake oil. I think there's something to it for BR/F-Class. And your method is intriguing.
And yes, I do think the level of evidence provided for the hypothesis' is a long ways off from proving said hypothesis'.
Timntx
Sometimes we would raise turkeys before the Thanksgiving holiday season.
Every once in a while one of those turkeys would watch it rain until they drowned. We put a roof on the hutch as we couldn't teach some of those birds anything
Sometimes we would raise turkeys before the Thanksgiving holiday season.
Every once in a while one of those turkeys would watch it rain until they drowned. We put a roof on the hutch as we couldn't teach some of those birds anything
Last edited:
It didn't at least during Spear Point and I asked you about it. This is Shane by the way.
