rimfire Tuner / Harrell

[Williwaw]

First, quickly, I think my method for tuning has a lot in common with Orkan's and to be thorough and even slightly conclusive I think I shoot almost as much as he indicates.

Second, for Jadams , I do not subscribe to nor have ever seen the point of the Purdy derived tune for exactly the reason you and the engineering fraternity established ... it tunes to a node. And if the wave first rises the odd numbered zero crossings are down slopes which is the exact opposite of what I'm looking for to utilize positive compensation.

It seems that no matter the forum these tuner threads become contentious. Too bad because I'm quite convinced the vast majority of us have a lot to learn and many of the alleged experts too.

 

[Badshot308]

It took you that many rounds to tune? Lmfao holy shit that's way to many. If it took that long you've got other issues in your gun. Ie. Bedding, ignition ,or some other problem. Tuning isn't hard and doesn't take thousands of rounds to do it. I've tuned both of my guns within one box of ammo for both guns. Lol wow thousands of rounds

It took you that many rounds to tune? Lmfao holy shit that's way to many. If it took that long you've got other issues in your gun. Ie. Bedding, ignition ,or some other problem. Tuning isn't hard and doesn't take thousands of rounds to do it. I've tuned both of my guns within one box of ammo for both guns. Lol wow thousands of rounds

So tell us all, step by step, your method for tuning a rifle.

 

[Schütze]

So tell us all, step by step, your method for tuning a rifle.

It becomes really obvious that he isn’t here to help or share useful information. He seems to take pleasure in bashing and talking down to anyone.
Sadly another candidate for my ignore list.

 

[Fuckmikebush]

Am I supposed to hold yalls hands while doing this? I never claimed to be any expert but you guys are making tuning out to be some black magic and it's a hard as rocket surgery. It's simple put tuner on gun, shoot groups till they start touching then start fine tuning from there. There are established tunes for some barrel lengths and they aren't Purdy method or positive compensation. I've said this before if you can't find a tune that's in 140 to 200 range something else is going on with the gun. It doesn't take thousands of rounds and hours of shooting. First thing you have to establish is good shooting ammo don't try and tune with just some random bs ammo won't work. Secondly start the tuner @100 and go from there. Shoot 3 shot groups if they aren't in the same hole move the tuner out 5 to 10 clicks. Once they start touching each other fine tune by 1 to 3 clicks. Once they converge into a single bullet hole you've found the tune. Move the tuner to either side of the tune found to see if it has any adverse affects. Once the tune is good you shouldn't have to retune again. What else do you want. Hell send me your guns and ammo and I'll tune the damn thing for you.

 

[grauhanen]

Williwaw makes a good observation that with tuners many shooters have a lot to learn. They don't work so simply that all that's required is to attach, shoot groups at ten or twenty settings, and pick the setting that produced the best results.

While there are several tuner settings that will offer improved performance, finding the best one can often be a time and ammo-consuming task. It also requires good, consistent ammo, without which it's impossible to tell whether good and not-so-good looking results are the product of the ammo or the tuner.

Positive compensation doesn't soley explain how tuners work. PC is supposed to put faster and slower bullets in the same POI. When tuner users expect to use the same tuner setting that shoots good at 50 to produce good results at 100 it can't only be the result of positive compensation.

 

[Fuckmikebush]

You're wrong tuning is that simple. No it doesn't take ungodly amounts of time or ammo to tune. Lmao if you can't find a tune easy you ha e other issues in the GUN! Ignition is a huge problem and if it's not sorted out you will chase you tail forever trying to tune. Bedding is another source for issues when tuning. If one thing isn't correct you'll waste thousands of rounds and hours and hours shooting trying to tune. Now how to identify a problem area that's where it gets tricky. Tuning is easy stop making it out to be something it's not.

 

[orkan]

You're wrong tuning is that simple. No it doesn't take ungodly amounts of time or ammo to tune. Lmao if you can't find a tune easy you ha e other issues in the GUN! Ignition is a huge problem and if it's not sorted out you will chase you tail forever trying to tune. Bedding is another source for issues when tuning. If one thing isn't correct you'll waste thousands of rounds and hours and hours shooting trying to tune. Now how to identify a problem area that's where it gets tricky. Tuning is easy stop making it out to be something it's not.

What's your real name? I'd like to go look up your accomplishments.

They must be vast. It will probably take me a while to read through all of them.

 

[chiroz]

Am I wrong in thinking that I observe a tuner be effective at many different settings. It looks to me like the "tune" starts repeating itself. Could this explain why so many different methods seem to have merit? It seems like we think we are shooting at a target with only one bullseye, but there really are equal 20 bullseyes.

 

[Williwaw]

Am I wrong in thinking that I observe a tuner be effective at many different settings. It looks to me like the "tune" starts repeating itself. Could this explain why so many different methods seem to have merit? It seems like we think we are shooting at a target with only one bullseye, but there really are equal 20 bullseyes.

I would not say that you are wrong, IMO many settings will appear to be effective and I believe that many people do not expend enough rounds in excellent conditions to sort out the flukes from the betters from the best. IMO there may be several 'best' positions that I would never be able to tell apart and I don't need to because the slight differences don't add up in the game I shoot.

Rarely have I seen the effect of good PC quantified .... I put it at .1 inches or a little more. That is based on my observation of 40 shot composite groups shot in ideal outdoor conditions.

 

[Williwaw]

Positive compensation doesn't soley explain how tuners work. PC is supposed to put faster and slower bullets in the same POI. When tuner users expect to use the same tuner setting that shoots good at 50 to produce good results at 100 it can't only be the result of positive compensation.

I agree, I believe the added inertia smooths out the barrel oscillation waveform. This is documented elsewhere by others.

In regards to tuning at 50 and shooting at 100 I say we get partial PC. I believe it was Kolbe who showed that the barrel he was working with was not sufficiently fast/flexible to achieve PC at 100 yards. By fast I refer to rate of muzzle rise not muzzle velocity.

Edit/Addition: I think it is misleading to say PC puts faster and slower rounds in the same hole. I feel it is more correct to say PC reduces vertical spread due to velocity variations. In optimal cases it could eliminate vertical spread due to velocity variations. I am being very careful not to say it eliminates vertical spread because I believe one should expect vertical and horizontal spread to be approximately equal when wind is not a factor, the ammo is tight, and the tune is good.

 

[littlepod]

I found this picture to really convince me about tuning - and how I am going to do the Hopewell method.

 

[orkan]

Hmm... I think I might know who turboshooter is... and if so, I just spent 5 minutes looking over his ARA scores for the past few years. Seems like he really struggled prior to 2019... even in small shoots with just a few people. Looks like he's done better recently in a small group... but at the bigger shoots it looks like he's getting walloped pretty good. That's unfortunate to see. I was hoping it was going to be nothing but first place finishes. Especially considering most of your matches have fewer than 10 competitors in attendance. I'm sure that can be tough on a guy, getting beat by the same dudes match after match.

65th out of 78 shooters last season is probably pretty tough to deal with also. I can understand why you're upset. If you ever need some help with the mental aspects of being a competitor, I'd be happy to help you out. I hope you have better luck this year turboshooter. Coming in toward the bottom of the pack again in your recent shoot is probably a difficult way to start... but hang in there. You're bound to have an easier time later after you get warmed up.

Though given what has been recorded of your performances, I'd say you probably are due to give folks here a bit of latitude when it comes to tuning rimfires. In general, I think you could probably evaluate your general attitude and mindset. Does it really make you happy belittling folks here? Probably not. I think if you're honest about it, you can probably be a lot happier. Keep in mind, if I'm the guy giving you advice about this... you really should listen, because years ago people would be telling me this same thing constantly. I'd have been happier if I'd have listened sooner. Just a thought for you to consider.

 

[Fuckmikebush]

Awww poor dumbass orkan. You have no clue what it takes to win at any level of br shooting. If you don't have killer ammo you won't win in any group. Oh by way the group I shoot with since you know everything has some of the best shooters around. One of our shooters owns the indoor record for 6 card match. So don't try to make it like I shoot against scrubs. You truly have zero clue orkan and can run your mouth all you want. I show up and shoot what do you do YouTube boy? Besides run your mouth about shit you have no clue about. I won the South Carolina overall in 2020 and club so tell me how bad I am again. Dumbass winning ain't got crap to do with tuning lmfao

 

[orkan]

Awww poor dumbass orkan. You have no clue what it takes to win at any level of br shooting. If you don't have killer ammo you won't win in any group. Oh by way the group I shoot with since you know everything has some of the best shooters around. One of our shooters owns the indoor record for 6 card match. So don't try to make it like I shoot against scrubs. You truly have zero clue orkan and can run your mouth all you want. I show up and shoot what do you do YouTube boy? Besides run your mouth about shit you have no clue about. I won the South Carolina overall in 2020 and club so tell me how bad I am again. Dumbass winning ain't got crap to do with tuning lmfao

I feel sorry for you.

I'll be praying for anyone that has to deal with you in person. I can imagine why BR is dying... with so many welcoming people like you representing the discipline.

 

[Jadams]

Orkan, take it easy on Turboshooter! Remember that one in seven people have a mental illness. He's likely a smart guy that's just very opinionated and not so good with social skills.

 

[grauhanen]

Williwaw makes a good observation that with tuners many shooters have a lot to learn. They don't work so simply that all that's required is to attach, shoot groups at ten or twenty settings, and pick the setting that produced the best results.

You're wrong tuning is that simple.

One of us is probably wrong.

A very experienced and respected BR shooter who posts on many forums and does extensive testing in his own testing tunnel offered this observation a few years ago about how difficult it can be to tune a rimfire rifle:

"I've never found it as easy to tune a RF rifle as most would suggest it is. Fact is, I've yet to test a rifle in my ballistic tunnel that was truly tuned even when someone brings a rifle and is convinced it's tuned."

50 at 200

Landy, do tuners need to be adjusted to fit distance? Only folks I know that use 'em shoot 50 yards. They set 'em and forget 'em. If you subscribe to positive barrel compensation, the answer is yes. It's not a lot different than ladder testing in CF at specified distances to find where changes...

www.rimfirecentral.com

 

[Williwaw]

One of us is probably wrong.

Amen.


I read the post you linked. I don't shoot match ammo with SDs in the range suggested. The writer is operating in a realm several levels above mine and that compels me to say I feel there is a point in tuning my SKRM at fifty yards. This is not to say I can makes crap ammo shoot like premium match grade but I can improve my results. Generally I can shape a 40 shot composite group to where the vertical dispersion equals or approaches the horizontal.

 

[Arkansan]

Well
I got my barrels and ProX,. tuner back from Jelrod and as usual, he does a great job. If you are someone who is convinced that harmonics and preset tuning are BS, this will be on no interest to you. I have a tuner from Joe Chacon, preset and it shoots great. When I looked at my ProX tuner and measured it using Purdy info, it looked too long. Then I went back to the SFP website and found they have specific instructions for tuning to the 9th harmonic. In fact, after remeasuring and using their info, I found that for my 24" Shilen, I need to set the micrometer to 0.192". The 4 bushings they have available are for barrels ranging from 18.424" to 26.624". The 1" bushing I am using is for 22.424" to 25.624". I used 24" minus .030 for the crown and the computations came up with 0.192" to set on the micrometer. Will that be the ideal setting? I won't know until I get out to shoot, but I expect they have some idea of what they are doing. I don;t follow or have info on how their tuners do in competition however, the tuner is almost identical to the Chacon tuner which has similar micrometer settings. and has a 1/2" bushing which is what I will use on my shorter barrel. Once I get my Harrel's back, I will be able to do a side by side test using the same ammo. I know that Joe's tuners are on a lot of guns, can they compete side by side with a Harrell's, I have no idea but at one point, one of his 1022 actions with a Douglas barrel and tuner held the Lapua test facility record.
I have always enjoyed trying to extract accuracy from my "toy" and I expect to get a lot of enjoyment with this project. Now if these Arkansas winds would just die down.
Before I start with the tuners, I am going to so some ammo testing to find some consistency.

 

[Arkansan]

Interesting: I checked the micrometer on the Chacon tuner on my 20" Kidd barrel. Using the SFP calculations, I came up with a setting of .177", Joe set it at .178".

 

[littlepod]

I haven't quite understood the 9th harmonic yet. My mental picture of tuning is that for given ammo - let's say a range of 1050-1090 fps, the 1050 fps will drop faster than the 1090 fps ammo, so if I can send the 1050 ammo at a higher angle, then I am positively compensating the 1050 ammo's faster drop with the increased angle to have the same POI on the target.

This is largely going to be also dependent on distance.

So if I want to tune for 100y, it's going to be more vertical dispersion at 50y. Tuning at X distance will always improve > X distance, that part I get, but if I want to tune out for further perfection, it could hurt < X distance.

So all of that makes sense if I'm tuning. What I don't get is how a 9th harmonic setting works for everything because it doesn't make sense to me as the bullet drop changes over distance and if I'm tuning for positive compensation, that's going to be different based on what distance I'm tuning for.

I'm planning on doing 100y and 200y benchrest and plan on having two different tune settings for it.

 

[Arkansan]

Each harmonic works, why odd ones, I don't know. I've noticed that when extensive Hopewell tests have been shown, there is a periodic repetition of good results which I would guess correspond with various harmonics. From what I have read by Tony Purdy, the 9th is easier to tune to. In his formula writeup he says if the tuner length doesn't work with the 9th, go to 7th, 5th.
I just reread Tony's post. Actually, he says he thinks the 9th is best for barrels from 22-25" and that you can go to the 3rd harmonic.

 

[littlesister]

I haven't quite understood the 9th harmonic yet. My mental picture of tuning is that for given ammo - let's say a range of 1050-1090 fps, the 1050 fps will drop faster than the 1090 fps ammo, so if I can send the 1050 ammo at a higher angle, then I am positively compensating the 1050 ammo's faster drop with the increased angle to have the same POI on the target.

This is largely going to be also dependent on distance.

So if I want to tune for 100y, it's going to be more vertical dispersion at 50y. Tuning at X distance will always improve > X distance, that part I get, but if I want to tune out for further perfection, it could hurt < X distance.

So all of that makes sense if I'm tuning. What I don't get is how a 9th harmonic setting works for everything because it doesn't make sense to me as the bullet drop changes over distance and if I'm tuning for positive compensation, that's going to be different based on what distance I'm tuning for.

I'm planning on doing 100y and 200y benchrest and plan on having two different tune settings for it.

I don't think some of you long range shooters really understand remfire tuners. They were basically developed and perfected by 50 yard benchrest shooters. At fifty yards match grade ammo shoots relatively flat. What little difference in speed from round to round doesn't equate to much vertical at 50 yds. AT 50 yds this small amount of vertical can be tuned out. Now here comes the long range shooters '"which by the way I'm one of them" shooting a round that was never intended to be accurate much past 50 yds. You get loads of vertical that a tuner can't eliminate. Tune at 50. that's the best you'll ever do. Another interesting thought is the Purdy tuning method makes no reference to range. He must believe as does Calfee that a tuned barrel is a tuned barrel.

 

[Arkansan]

My understanding is that the purpose of a tuner is not to tune out vertical but to tune out any dispersion,, vertical and horizontal, to "shrink" groups and make them "rounder", the same goal as when we work up loads for a long range centerfire.. The tuner cannot change the muzzle velocity variations. From reading posts on the Rimx thread there has been a lot of testing at longer distances and the results I have seen are totally ammo dependent with some doing consistently better than others. It is a long thread, but there is lot of good info there. Once velocity variations are reduced the I'm guessing the long range performance is due to some minor differences in the projectile which are not specified as they are in centerfire projectiles where we have BC data. The thread is on this forum, "Zermatt Rimx 22LR Review Bartlein, Benchmark, GM, Krieger, Lilja. The testing showed some surprising 100 yd results with the higher dollar ammo not necessarily performing best.

 

[littlesister]

My understanding is that the purpose of a tuner is not to tune out vertical but to tune out any dispersion,, vertical and horizontal, to "shrink" groups and make them "rounder", the same goal as when we work up loads for a long range centerfire.. The tuner cannot change the muzzle velocity variations. From reading posts on the Rimx thread there has been a lot of testing at longer distances and the results I have seen are totally ammo dependent with some doing consistently better than others. It is a long thread, but there is lot of good info there. Once velocity variations are reduced the I'm guessing the long range performance is due to some minor differences in the projectile which are not specified as they are in centerfire projectiles where we have BC data. The thread is on this forum, "Zermatt Rimx 22LR Review Bartlein, Benchmark, GM, Krieger, Lilja. The testing showed some surprising 100 yd results with the higher dollar ammo not necessarily performing best.

Never heard anyone say a remfire tuner tunes out both vertical and horizonal dispersion! Even the Hopewell tuning method says to look for the group with the least amount of vertical stringing. Off course if you are lucky enough to have a killer barrel and can ger the vertical tuned out the overall groups will tighten up also. Again this is 50 yd benchrest tunning. I'm not surprised that high dollar match grade ammo may not always perform at longer ranges. Eley could care less what happens to 10X past 50yds/meters.

 

[littlepod]

I don't know if you guys read this - http://www.varmintal.com/a22lr.htm but what do you think? Is that all bogus around the harmonics and the angle where the bullet is released based on velocity? Send the slower rounds higher to account for vertical drop differences?

 

[Williwaw]

I don't know if you guys read this - http://www.varmintal.com/a22lr.htm but what do you think? Is that all bogus around the harmonics and the angle where the bullet is released based on velocity? Send the slower rounds higher to account for vertical drop differences?

Not bogus in my books. The work of Al and G. Kolbe (and others) are the sound scientific basis of my understanding of 22lr tuning.

 

[Williwaw]

My understanding is that the purpose of a tuner is not to tune out vertical but to tune out any dispersion,, vertical and horizontal, to "shrink" groups and make them "rounder", the same goal as when we work up loads for a long range centerfire.. The tuner cannot change the muzzle velocity variations. From reading posts on the Rimx thread there has been a lot of testing at longer distances and the results I have seen are totally ammo dependent with some doing consistently better than others. It is a long thread, but there is lot of good info there. Once velocity variations are reduced the I'm guessing the long range performance is due to some minor differences in the projectile which are not specified as they are in centerfire projectiles where we have BC data. The thread is on this forum, "Zermatt Rimx 22LR Review Bartlein, Benchmark, GM, Krieger, Lilja. The testing showed some surprising 100 yd results with the higher dollar ammo not necessarily performing best.

Arkansan, I've seen your posts on this topic and I can see that you are really sinking your teeth into this topic. I'd like to kindly poke a bit at some of what you say here.

What is the shape of your typical 40 shot group shot without a tuner? You likely don't know because you don't shoot them. I use OnTarget to composite 8x5s and by and large with reasonable ammo(SKRM) shooting in good conditions outdoors mine are approximately vertical ovals. They have more vertical dispersion than horizontal dispersion. Why would that be? Given the velocity distribution of a typical box of SKRM I say it is because of that velocity variation.

The tuner cannot change the muzzle velocity variations ... you nailed that one I think. So until I am convinced of a better explanation I'm going with VarmintAl et al. and positive compensation.

I sincerely hope you find that useful. I would like to add that all of my testing is at 50 yards. And also that it takes a great many more rounds than the average guy has shot to make statistically sound judgements.

 

[littlesister]

. I don't know if you guys read this - http://www.varmintal.com/a22lr.htm but what do you think? Is that all bogus around the harmonics and the angle where the bullet is released based on velocity? Send the slower rounds higher to account for vertical drop differences?

Varmint Al may be correct in his barrel tunning theory. I really don't know and I surely don't care. I tune at 50yds sometimes less and never change my tune for 100 and 200 which are the ranges that I compete at. This is why! I can shoot consistent groups at 50. Consistent enough that I can tell when tuner settings are making changes to shot placement. I've tried tunning at 100. It just doesn't work for me. I just can't tell if it's the tuner making changes or is it me or outside conditions. If I had a 100yd indoor range but I don't. As too tunning a 22lr at 200yds outdoors. It's impossible!

 

[littlepod]

Varmint Al may be correct in his barrel tunning theory. I really don't know and I surely don't care. I tune at 50yds sometimes less and never change my tune for 100 and 200 which are the ranges that I compete at. This is why! I can shoot consistent groups at 50. Consistent enough that I can tell when tuner settings are making changes to shot placement. I've tried tunning at 100. It just doesn't work for me. I just can't tell if it's the tuner making changes or is it me or outside conditions. If I had a 100yd indoor range but I don't. As too tunning a 22lr at 200yds outdoors. It's impossible!

I was thinking the same thing... if there's no wind at all this weekend I might try a 100yd tune.

 

[RAVAGE88]

What's your real name? I'd like to go look up your accomplishments.

They must be vast. It will probably take me a while to read through all of them.

Greg,
If it's who I think it is (Sam Wells in NC….cowards find it warm and cozy in anonymity), his accomplishments are as bare as his profile and his behavior here is certainly no different than elsewhere. He's never shot a National level match and prefers to nestle into the weirdly warm weiner water of his local area. And you're correct, this guy represents the sole reason BR is dying. Can you imagine 20 or so guys like this, all smelling like hamsters, gathered in one place?

He and others like him have no idea what it means to give of themselves, to contribute positively to something bigger than themselves and be available to others at all costs. He has no idea what it means to overcome hardship after having learned from it and to do better. Instead, he revels in the wake of what's nasty, disruptive, and based on pure hate, arrogance and ego. One day, and it may be today, he'll wonder why things are so hard for him, why he's so miserable and why he looks around to find nothing or no one around him.

Keep doing what you're doing, Greg....

Sam Wells' Scores
View Profile
Season: 2023 2022 2021A 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012​

Watch this competitor​

Get notified any time new match results are uploaded for Sam Wells.
✓
You're watching this competitor
Stop watching this competitor

2022 Unlimited Indoor​

Date	Club	Place	Tgt 1	Tgt 2	Tgt 3	Tgt 4	Tgt 5	Tgt 6	Tgt 7	Tgt 8	Total	Agg.	Pts.	Agg. + Pts.
02/26/22 ​	Rocky River Barn INDOOR	13	2250-10X	1395-4X	2150-11X	2400-12X	2350-17X				10545-54X	2109.00-54X	25	2134.00-54X

2022 Unlimited Outdoor​

Date	Club	Place	Tgt 1	Tgt 2	Tgt 3	Tgt 4	Tgt 5	Tgt 6	Tgt 7	Tgt 8	Total	Agg.	Pts.	Agg. + Pts.
03/19/22 ​	Buccaneer Gun Club	1	1800-5X	2025-8X	1850-10X	1925-9X	2200-14X				9800-46X	1960.00-46X	25	1985.00-46X

profilescoreshofphotos

Profile​

Competitor ID	1877SW
First Name	Sam
Last Name	Wells
Sr. or Jr.	Senior
Date of Birth	01/18/1977

Season: 2023 2022 2021A 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

2022 Combined Ranking Eligibility​

Unlimited Tournaments	0		Must have at least 1
Unlimited Targets	5		Must have at least 20
Factory Tournaments	0		Must have at least 1
Factory Targets	0		Must have at least 20

MB

 

[Arkansan]

This is an enjoyable thread. I read the VarmintAl article and what struck me was that the lowest vertical dispersion, which could correlate with the "best" shooting barrel/combination was with the straight .8" and the Esten reverse taper, neither having tuners. The results with tuner added with different weights were all worse. My issue with the analysis is, the tuner appears to just address weight changes. When we tune, whichever method is preferred, we are adjusting length and in some cases adding weight. In any case, that Esten barrel is pretty awesome, 0.11" at 50 yds is nothing to sneeze at. It is also interesting that the .80" barrel outperformed the 1.0" barrel. Maybe it was somewhere else, but I didn't see if all barrels were the same 2 groove Benchmark. Looking at that report would make me not want to put on a Harrell's with just different weights. Tuning the tuner is probably a better way to go. When I asked Joe Chacon what length to go with my Shilen barrel, he said 24". Maybe next I'll try 24.75. I can always cut it back.

 

[Arkansan]

Williwaw
Unfortunately, it will be a while before I can provide some useful results. The only tuner/non tuner comparison I have so far is a Kidd barreled 10/22. Looking a dozens of 5 shot groups, I can't say whether or not the tuner has made a significant impact since most of the shooting was to sort out different ammo lots. Now that I have my Shilen ratchet screwed on, if the wind ever dies down, I will pick one lot and do non tuner, Harrell's and ProX comparisons. The Kidd barrel (lapped Walther) shot very well before I added the tuner, but I have not spent enough time with a single lot of ammo to make a call. Who knows, maybe when all is said and done, I'll just go with a straight 24.75" barrel. It seemed to do pretty well for Varmint Al and I just ordered another Shilen blank. I think I have a good chamber identified.
It's nice to be able to swap out barrels easily and go out in the yard and shoot.
I have a theory that if harmonics have a key role in this, which I believe they do, and adjusting to the correct setting/length works, then there should be a barrel length that corresponds negating the need for a tuner. Just a thought.
On a hunch, I did some calculations using the Purdy 9th harmonic formula. Using 22" the formula comes up with a 9th harmonic of 24.75".

 

[CBeck]

Greg,
If it's who I think it is (Sam Wells in NC….cowards find it warm and cozy in anonymity), his accomplishments are as bare as his profile and his behavior here is certainly no different than elsewhere. He's never shot a National level match and prefers to nestle into the weirdly warm weiner water of his local area. And you're correct, this guy represents the sole reason BR is dying. Can you imagine 20 or so guys like this, all smelling like hamsters, gathered in one place?

He and others like him have no idea what it means to give of themselves, to contribute positively to something bigger than themselves and be available to others at all costs. He has no idea what it means to overcome hardship after having learned from it and to do better. Instead, he revels in the wake of what's nasty, disruptive, and based on pure hate, arrogance and ego. One day, and it may be today, he'll wonder why things are so hard for him, why he's so miserable and why he looks around to find nothing or no one around him.

Keep doing what you're doing, Greg....

MB

You been away and come back with weirdly warm wiener water. I’ve truly missed you.

 

[flatland1]

I've worked through the Purdy Prescription with a Pro-X tuner on the Shilen R5 contour I did for my first V22S, which I finished at just under 25". Seems like I had a tough time finding a day with decent wind conditions when I had the time to shoot. Still in all, with the tuner set at or within .005 of the scrip, it shot better than it did at any other settings I tried. I was impressed enough to buy another Pro-X to put on a V22 repeater with a 21" Krieger, only on this rifle, I went both ways from the scrip setting with magazines loaded with alternating rounds of SK RM & LR Match, looking for a setting that would produce groups with minimal vertical of the mix. I didn't keep any records except for the notes I made on the resulting targets, but without finding those targets, about all I can say is that once I'd gotten pretty decent results, the results at 100 & 200yds were considerably better than what I'd gotten w/o the tuner. My methodology isn't the best, and the lack of the habit of making good notes and keeping them in order hasn't helped any either.

Since then, I've done a 3-groove Benchmark in R5 contour for the 1st V22S, and purchased another V22S action that I did another Shilen in R0 contour - chambering both these barrels with a Nevius reamer. Hopefully, I'll find the happy coincidence of having the time to shoot on a nice day before I get busy with spring planting, which I hope will let me get the round count up to the point where it's worthwhile to send or take them both out to Mesa to be lot tested. Until then, I'll keep track of this thread - I feel there's enough guys posting replies here who're really interested in sharing their experiences to make it worthwhile to check back regularly.

 

[littlesister]

Williwaw
Unfortunately, it will be a while before I can provide some useful results. The only tuner/non tuner comparison I have so far is a Kidd barreled 10/22. Looking a dozens of 5 shot groups, I can't say whether or not the tuner has made a significant impact since most of the shooting was to sort out different ammo lots. Now that I have my Shilen ratchet screwed on, if the wind ever dies down, I will pick one lot and do non tuner, Harrell's and ProX comparisons. The Kidd barrel (lapped Walther) shot very well before I added the tuner, but I have not spent enough time with a single lot of ammo to make a call. Who knows, maybe when all is said and done, I'll just go with a straight 24.75" barrel. It seemed to do pretty well for Varmint Al and I just ordered another Shilen blank. I think I have a good chamber identified.
It's nice to be able to swap out barrels easily and go out in the yard and shoot.
I have a theory that if harmonics have a key role in this, which I believe they do, and adjusting to the correct setting/length works, then there should be a barrel length that corresponds negating the need for a tuner. Just a thought.
On a hunch, I did some calculations using the Purdy 9th harmonic formula. Using 22" the formula comes up with a 9th harmonic of 24.75".

If you'll take a look at the development of sporter class barrels, you'll find that several remfire smiths figured out how to tune a barrel without using a tuner. I believe this was done to meet sporter class rules. " Necessity is the Mother of Invention"

 

[Arkansan]

Thanks for the info, That certainly makes sense since if harmonics and Purdy work and Purdy is based on computations on a "close end tube" which a barrel should qualify as, it is just a matter of determining length. I'm going to try and dig up some sporter class benchrest info and see what I can find out. I was fortunate to just "score" another Shilen ratchet barrel, much sooner than 7 or 8 month wait I was still looking at. Now I just need to determine what length to "start" with and what chamber I want to go with.
"

 

[littlepod]

No inside range or wind tunnel so I gotta use what I got which is just an outdoor public range. I decided to tune at 100y since I was trying to get ready for a 100y/200y f-class/bench comp, and if it works out why not leave it on for PRS/NRL22 too. I am using Midas+ ammo that was tested at the Lapua Test Center shooting .83" 10 shot group at 100m, and a .605" 10 shot group.

So maybe it wasn't worth the time or ammo to play with the tuner since it already is shooting well, nor do it during a windy day, but why not get out and shoot some. This was just shot in prone with a bipod and rear bag.

Started out with a control group which went really well with no tuner. Then did the Hopewell method of 2 shots at 0, 25, 50, 75, 100. and repeat for 100-200, etc. I settled with liking my 0-100 group the most, so then did 2 5 shot groups at 0, 25, 50, 75. It felt like either my 0 group or my 75 group was the most consistent, so I decided to go with 0.

Then I tested 0, 5, 10, 15, 20. And settled on somewhere between 10 and 15, so I went 11, 12, 13. I saw a killer 13, so I started doing 10 shot groups. I did 10 at 13 that I didn't like so I did another 10 shots at setting 11 which I liked.

I then went back and forth between setting 11 on the Tuner, and taking off the Tuner.

Left column was with the Tuner at 11 setting, and the 2nd column was no tuner. So between the two it's a wash for me.

I then went to 50yds to see how it compared and my 50yd groups were tighter with the tuner on, so I decided to leave it on.

My friend was there as well and went through the entire process. We have identical rigs -

Vudoo 360, Benchmark 22". His in a MDT, mine in an XLR. Both with ZCOs.

What's interesting is through his exact process of doing the same tuning, he ended up with 11 as well as his setting. Versus his control groups, the tuner definitely shrunk the groups down quite a bit. His barrel/ammo is a bit slower than mine though.

My Midas+ avg is 1072, with it going anywhere from 1050 to 1084. It feels like all the rounds in the 1053 to 1081 range group really well together, but but whenever I shot like a 1083/1084 it tended to jump up significantly more.

My friend was shooting Center-X with an avg velocity of 1046. So he was going from 1030 to 1061.

Ideally I'd put this in a 1 piece BR rig in a wind tunnel, but I have neither so it is what it is. Ended up shooting about 300 rounds in prone, zero fte's or ftf's so that's good.

 

[littlepod]

I was following http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?89286-PRX-Formula-General-info-Please thread, and about applying the Purdy formula to a Harrell's -

Acoustic Length = Barrel 21.9" / 8 * 9 = 24.6375. EC (.913 * .3) = .2739
Physical Length = Acoustic Length - EC = 24.364

Currently measuring my overall length to 24.375"

Not micrometer precise using a measuring tape but it's pretty darn close. I'll stick my rod through the muzzle and try to get a more accurate measurement next time.

 

[Williwaw]

Littlepod, are those 10 shot groups mentioned in your first paragraph center to center or outsides.

 

[littlepod]

Littlepod, are those 10 shot groups mentioned in your first paragraph center to center or outsides.

Center to Center

From the Lapua results - which are measured Edge to Edge, and I converted it to C to C (subtracting .221")

 

[Williwaw]

Center to Center

From the Lapua results -

View attachment 7836972

Thank you.

My interest is based on the fact that I am diligently trying to establish baseline expectations for various grades of ammo that I have available to me. This involves settling on methodology and criteria for comparison. Whenever someone like you shares their data from the Lapua Center I like to compare because the center possibly represents near ideal conditions.

So by comparison, I am currently shooting a case of SK RM, outdoors,50yds, temps -8 to 4 C, often little or no wind, Vudoo w/22 inch ACE barrel, and a pretty solid tune on the Harrell. Since Feb28 I have shot 35 8x5s that I generate 40 shot composite groups from.

My outside to outside average 21.2 mm, ranging from 17.3 to 25.4 mm.

Good luck in your upcoming competition.

 

[littlepod]

Thank you.

My interest is based on the fact that I am diligently trying to establish baseline expectations for various grades of ammo that I have available to me. This involves settling on methodology and criteria for comparison. Whenever someone like you shares their data from the Lapua Center I like to compare because the center possibly represents near ideal conditions.

So by comparison, I am currently shooting a case of SK RM, outdoors,50yds, temps -8 to 4 C, often little or no wind, Vudoo w/22 inch ACE barrel, and a pretty solid tune on the Harrell. Since Feb28 I have shot 35 8x5s that I generate 40 shot composite groups from.

My outside to outside average 21.2 mm, ranging from 17.3 to 25.4 mm.

Good luck in your upcoming competition.

Thanks!

Here's the info from my 50m test in the ideal Lapua conditions - these are Edge to Edge, so subtract the .221" from it.

My own personal 6x5's are usually around .25" to .275" c-c but those are 5 shot groups, not 10 shot groups.

 

[grauhanen]

As a general yardstick, in a good barrel a very good lot of ammo can produce ten shot groups at 50 that are no more, or less, than 12mm outside-to-outside (or .250ish" center-to-center) on a regular or consistent basis.

Ammo that regularly gives 13mm oto ten shot groups (.300ish" ctc) is a good lot. Anything over 15mm oto (about .370ish") is not.

 

[littlepod]

As a general yardstick, in a good barrel a very good lot of ammo can produce ten shot groups at 50 that are no more, or less, than 12mm outside-to-outside (or .250ish" center-to-center) on a regular or consistent basis.

Ammo that regularly gives 13mm oto ten shot groups (.300ish" ctc) is a good lot. Anything over 15mm oto (about .370ish") is not.

That's what Lapua said, that their best results they get are 12-13mm. Out of all my testing I only saw 2 results of 12 & 13, the majority of the tests are 15-18mm (outside to outside) for the 10 shot groups.

So either the ammo isn't very good, or Vudoo repeaters aren't that competitive. I've harvested a bunch of results from the past 2 years of testing at Lapua from different rifles, and so far my Vudoo repeater getting the 12mm and 13mm has been pretty good, which I guess is around average for people running custom Turbo / BR rigs. In the world of repeaters though, custom CZs, 10/22's, Vudoo's, and RimX's, the results have usually been around the 15-18mm 10 shot groups.

 

[Arkansan]

My 24” Shilen best tune was at setting 157 Via the Hopewell method. The Purdy solution had it at 153. I don’t have an opinion, only offering my results.

Jadams
What did you get as a final physical length? Also, now all I can do now is measure and compare tuners, too much wind to get out and test but, I have a theory., After parting with a great shooting benchrest specific rifle and looking at tuner designs, that the Harrell's tuner is not ideally suited to shorter barrels. I say that because, I think the inner tube is too close to the outer tube at lower settings unless a weight ring is added. When I set my Harrell's at 153, the inner ring is protruding slightly past the outer ring which I'm guessing could reduce the tuner's effect. Orkan has an excellent video shooting a 26" barrel with a Harrel's and light (1") weight ring which brings the outer shell out where I believe it needs to be. I won't know until I try them out, but from other postings I have seen, I think a ProX which has bushings designed for barrel lengths in increments from just over 15 to 27 plus inches may be better suited to shorter barrels. Anyone having thoughts on this "inner ring" theory please weigh in.

 

[Arkansan]

Littlepod
Looks like your 100 yd results with your 22S and Holeshot tuner were a lot better. Have you tried it on your repeater? What length barrel is the 22s?

 

[littlepod]

Littlepod
Looks like your 100 yd results with your 22S and Holeshot tuner were a lot better. Have you tried it on your repeater? What length barrel is the 22s?

I think the one picture with the 22S in it is from another thread. I don't own a 22S but I posted a picture of a person who was doing testing with their Holeshot tuner in a wind tunnel, where they're getting like .35" groups at 100y, but that's also in a nice benchrest rig.

I don't have any wind tunnels avail to me so it's guess the best weather day and go. I'm also shooting from prone, bipod and bag with a 27x scope. A few diff factors, but I think my tune setting though is pretty good. I'll probably re-tune it at 50y and see if there's any difference.

If there's only 1 tune (9th harmonic) then 50 and 100 should be the same tune setting. I think the whole positive compensation thing has a max, I don't think you can just compensate an ES of 60. For me, my rifle seems to shoot really well at the 1045-1080 velocity, but once it goes above 1080 there's a pretty big deviation. Like 1045-1080 can stack together, and 1085 will have a 1/3" jump.

 

[6.5SH]

I agree with what you are saying and velocity. With SK Standard+ I've taken to trying to keep the ammo temp in the range I tuned at; around 90 degrees.

In colder months I've been using a USB chargeable hand warmer, in hotter a blue ice pack in a separate compartment under the ammo/mags.

All of this is inside a soft sided insulated lunch pack I got at wallyworld.

 

[Arkansan]

Littlepod
I think the reason you found your results with the Harrell's "a wash" is due to the design of the tuner. The benchrest rifle I had used a Hoen 4000+ tuner. The design had an outer chamber, just like a Harrell's with a 1" weight like Orkan used in his video. The inner being well behind the outer. The Holeshot is this design as are the PRX based tuners. The problem with the Harrell's I believe is, when set in the lower range, the inner ring is even with or protrudes past the outer which I believe negates the effect of the tuner design. Tony mentions that to use the EC correction for the outer ring, it needs to be at least 1/4" beyond the inner riing. The light Harrell's weight adds a 1" "bushing" to achieve what I believe is effective design. When i looked at Orkan's determination of 3.5553" behyond the muzzle, I believe he is tuning to the 7th harmonic. He is shooting a 26" barrel an Tony mentions that he finds the 9th is best in barrels 22-25". Just my thoughts with no scientific backing. I'd really appreciate anyone more knowledgeable and with maybe some experience with tuners to chime in and let me know if I'm way off base.
Oh well. I just saw a thread on the Ezell tuner. Apparently, he cuts his rimfire tuner inner tube to a barrel specific PRX and it looks like it protrudes past the outer shell. Looks like that blows holes in my theory. I guess the bottom line is, try some and see what works best for you which as soon as the weather starts to break I will try and spend less time typing and more time shooting.

 

[littlepod]

Littlepod
I think the reason you found your results with the Harrell's "a wash" is due to the design of the tuner. The benchrest rifle I had used a Hoen 4000+ tuner. The design had an outer chamber, just like a Harrell's with a 1" weight like Orkan used in his video. The inner being well behind the outer. The Holeshot is this design as are the PRX based tuners. The problem with the Harrell's I believe is, when set in the lower range, the inner ring is even with or protrudes past the outer which I believe negates the effect of the tuner design. Tony mentions that to use the EC correction for the outer ring, it needs to be at least 1/4" beyond the inner riing. The light Harrell's weight adds a 1" "bushing" to achieve what I believe is effective design. When i looked at Orkan's determination of 3.5553" behyond the muzzle, I believe he is tuning to the 7th harmonic. He is shooting a 26" barrel an Tony mentions that he finds the 9th is best in barrels 22-25". Just my thoughts with no scientific backing. I'd really appreciate anyone more knowledgeable and with maybe some experience with tuners to chime in and let me know if I'm way off base.
Oh well. I just saw a thread on the Ezell tuner. Apparently, he cuts his rimfire tuner inner tube to a barrel specific PRX and it looks like it protrudes past the outer shell. Looks like that blows holes in my theory. I guess the bottom line is, try some and see what works best for you which as soon as the weather starts to break I will try and spend less time typing and more time shooting.

The Ezell tuner was pretty interesting, but I was a little confused because his tuner talks about material that dampens and I was thinking that is making the vibrations flat which is like opposite of positive compensation.

Additionally there is still general harmonics at play which still confuses me too. I can take 4 different lots of Center-X, and chrono them through my rifle and they can have a consistent 7SD, yet one will definitely outshoot the other. My Midas+ has actually a pretty crappy SD.. it's SD is like 9, and it's ES is 35. Yet it shoots the tightest groups at the test center, and it consistently shoots well as well out of my rifle when I'd think that the Center-X that is shooting an SD of 7 with an ES of 26 should be putting together tighter groups.

Even though they say a 'tuned' rifle is a tuned rifle, where there is a harmonic setting that is setup perfectly with that barrel, individual ammos will react differently even if they all produce stellar SD/ES.

The Holeshot design is based off Harrell's. KSS basically said it's an exactly clone except that the Holeshot has a little easier to read markings, and a quick locking system. Since Harrell's hasn't changed their design in decades, Holeshot basically did a few minor enhancements and hopped on the market last year. They told me to just go with Holeshot if I'm going to do the Hopewell method of tuning.

The JNL, Pro-X, and I think the Ezell tuner are PRX based.