What do you think tuners are supposed to do? If you’ve used a tuner, how have you used it?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Tuners
- Thread starter Sniper King 2020
- Start date
I recently got the EC tuner brake. I used it as instructed by EC. I was able to reduce my best group without muzzle device of ~0.6 to ~0.3 using and tuning the EC tuner brake.
I still need to do more testing with more groups and rounds in various conditions
I still need to do more testing with more groups and rounds in various conditions
Erik had Bryan on his Believe the Target YouTube recently and they did not have enough time to talk about his tuner study. They said will do a second talk about the tuner.
I have two ec tuners and they work for me.
I have two ec tuners and they work for me.
I bought a cheap Harrell's AR15 tuner. ($100-ish)
I don't pretend to understand the math, and the Purdy method might as well be written in a foreign language. Plenty of people will also tell you that a tuner doesn't do anything on a barrel shorter than 24, or that it's a Dumbo's Feather/placebo.
I decided to try one anyway and I used the old trial and error method. It took about a brick to get it dialed in to my satisfaction.
When I got my tuner, I spent a weekend shooting 10 shot groups at various settings. With SK Std +, I see a fairly significant effect on my 25 and 50 yard groups with my B14R--and the changes are consistent and repeatable.
I started at 0 and went in 1/2 revolution increments through 4 full revolutions. When I found a setting where the groups tightened up, I did it again with finer adjustments. I had a decent result at 2 full revolutions, but I'd see a flier or 2 that impacted 1/4" outside the group. I adjusted to 2.25 revolutions and it shoots bugholes--no fliers at all. Multiple 10-shot groups to confirm my findings.
I am a believer. Tuners absolutely work on barrels shorter than 24". And I still don't understand the math or measurements.
And I'm also looking forward to the testing--I 'think' I know what my example of 1 has shown me, but I'm 100% open to learning more!
I don't pretend to understand the math, and the Purdy method might as well be written in a foreign language. Plenty of people will also tell you that a tuner doesn't do anything on a barrel shorter than 24, or that it's a Dumbo's Feather/placebo.
I decided to try one anyway and I used the old trial and error method. It took about a brick to get it dialed in to my satisfaction.
When I got my tuner, I spent a weekend shooting 10 shot groups at various settings. With SK Std +, I see a fairly significant effect on my 25 and 50 yard groups with my B14R--and the changes are consistent and repeatable.
I started at 0 and went in 1/2 revolution increments through 4 full revolutions. When I found a setting where the groups tightened up, I did it again with finer adjustments. I had a decent result at 2 full revolutions, but I'd see a flier or 2 that impacted 1/4" outside the group. I adjusted to 2.25 revolutions and it shoots bugholes--no fliers at all. Multiple 10-shot groups to confirm my findings.
I am a believer. Tuners absolutely work on barrels shorter than 24". And I still don't understand the math or measurements.
And I'm also looking forward to the testing--I 'think' I know what my example of 1 has shown me, but I'm 100% open to learning more!
I have a ATS model on my 243 22" Ruger. It definitely works. Easy to see the groups open and close as you go thru settings. It did help my rifle .75 moa to .477 moa on Avg. I only worked with one load for hunting 80gr Accubond with 6.5 staball.
i think some of the issues with the testing is the use of accurate cartridges
taking a 6br or 6ppc that has a history of record breaking groups and then shooting a tighter group after adjustment, but still isnt record breaking doesnt show that much. it show a rifle capable of making a few tight groups as the test will not be for the life of the barrel etc
the use of a 45-70 (just for a name) and going from 1.5 to .2 will start us farther down the road
if something can polish a turd then its undisputed
taking a 6br or 6ppc that has a history of record breaking groups and then shooting a tighter group after adjustment, but still isnt record breaking doesnt show that much. it show a rifle capable of making a few tight groups as the test will not be for the life of the barrel etc
the use of a 45-70 (just for a name) and going from 1.5 to .2 will start us farther down the road
if something can polish a turd then its undisputed
However one of the main arguments of tuner advocates is that you can't make bad ammo or a bad barrel shoot better with a tuner, so apparently even by the tuners standards you can't polish a turd
Since I don’t have the time to send my rifle to the Lapua test center and really can’t afford to buy ammo at a case at time I decided to put a tuner on my RimX in hopes of tightening up groups with lots that might not shoot as good as others. Since you can’t hardly find Center X in stock that often and with the price increase I switched to SKLRM.
RimX
Shilen Ratchet @ 24”
EC tuner
PDC chassis
Gen II Razor
SKLRM
This was the results of my tuner test shot a few weeks ago. A tuner is not going to do anything for ES but it will help tighten up groups.
RimX
Shilen Ratchet @ 24”
EC tuner
PDC chassis
Gen II Razor
SKLRM
This was the results of my tuner test shot a few weeks ago. A tuner is not going to do anything for ES but it will help tighten up groups.
Have you shot this again in similar atmospheric conditions and produced repeatable results?
I always look forward to seeing testing on tuners.
I'm a self-professed tuner skeptic. I own a couple of tuner brakes, and did my own test with my most precise rifle, my 6BRA. Shot a bunch of 5 shot groups, and I'm not convinced that they can shrink groups.
None of the data presented to date in defence of tuners is very compelling either. It's usually a very small sample size (a few 2 or 3-shot groups), or completely anecdotal ("look at all the BR shooters using them" - a la the Erik Cortina defense).
Tuners remind me of the Satterlee Method of reloading that was hot a few years ago. Everyone is looking for the quick fix or the magic bullet, and as reloaders we have very little quality data to work off of, so we buy into these quick fixes.
For those that don't remember, the Satterlee Method was a method of reloading where you load up a ladder of ~10 or so rounds of varying charge weights, shoot over a chronograph and find which sequential loads are closest together in velocity and you have magically found your "velocity node". This node allegedly will produce your lowest ES/SD.
For years, people bought into the Satterlee Method, including some really good shooters here. I bought into it for a bit as well, until I decided to load up two identical ladders each time. I quickly found that there is no "velocity node". And frankly, I was a bit stunned that very few other people were checking this for themselves.
Velocity and ES/SD is very tangible and easy to check, yet very few were actually gathering enough data to even confirm and corroborate these "nodes". I tell this story because it illustrates how little data reloaders and shooters actually use to make definitive conclusions, and are quick to jump on any product or method that promises results in a quick and easy fashion.
In my opinion, tuners are no different. The myth of tuners has been able to outlast the Satterlee Method because the results are less tangible. Did my group size shrink or open up because of a variance in bullet seating depth? Primer depth? Was it a less than optimal flash hole? Was it my fundamentals? Did the wind slightly pick up? Was it a change in environmental? Inconsistencies in brass uniformity?
No quick test will definitely prove if tuners work or not. There's just so many variables, most of which are impossible to isolate to a degree of precision in which only a change in tuner setting will be sole isolated effect on the output of precision.
All that said, I'm looking forward to your testing. I remain very skeptical about tuners, until a compelling data set comes out that shows they work. All the data to date that's in support of tuners is very uncompelling and low quality.
I'm a self-professed tuner skeptic. I own a couple of tuner brakes, and did my own test with my most precise rifle, my 6BRA. Shot a bunch of 5 shot groups, and I'm not convinced that they can shrink groups.
None of the data presented to date in defence of tuners is very compelling either. It's usually a very small sample size (a few 2 or 3-shot groups), or completely anecdotal ("look at all the BR shooters using them" - a la the Erik Cortina defense).
Tuners remind me of the Satterlee Method of reloading that was hot a few years ago. Everyone is looking for the quick fix or the magic bullet, and as reloaders we have very little quality data to work off of, so we buy into these quick fixes.
For those that don't remember, the Satterlee Method was a method of reloading where you load up a ladder of ~10 or so rounds of varying charge weights, shoot over a chronograph and find which sequential loads are closest together in velocity and you have magically found your "velocity node". This node allegedly will produce your lowest ES/SD.
For years, people bought into the Satterlee Method, including some really good shooters here. I bought into it for a bit as well, until I decided to load up two identical ladders each time. I quickly found that there is no "velocity node". And frankly, I was a bit stunned that very few other people were checking this for themselves.
Velocity and ES/SD is very tangible and easy to check, yet very few were actually gathering enough data to even confirm and corroborate these "nodes". I tell this story because it illustrates how little data reloaders and shooters actually use to make definitive conclusions, and are quick to jump on any product or method that promises results in a quick and easy fashion.
In my opinion, tuners are no different. The myth of tuners has been able to outlast the Satterlee Method because the results are less tangible. Did my group size shrink or open up because of a variance in bullet seating depth? Primer depth? Was it a less than optimal flash hole? Was it my fundamentals? Did the wind slightly pick up? Was it a change in environmental? Inconsistencies in brass uniformity?
No quick test will definitely prove if tuners work or not. There's just so many variables, most of which are impossible to isolate to a degree of precision in which only a change in tuner setting will be sole isolated effect on the output of precision.
All that said, I'm looking forward to your testing. I remain very skeptical about tuners, until a compelling data set comes out that shows they work. All the data to date that's in support of tuners is very uncompelling and low quality.
Well said. Lots of cultish fads out there with no compelling data to back it up. I look forward to collecting plenty of data on tuners in the months to come and see what story that data tells…good, bad, ugly, etc. The data will be what the date will be.
Thanks all for the responses so far. I posted this exact same post on accurateshooter forum and the responses I received on snipershide were far more useful that the myriad of empty responses I got from accurateshooter. Appreciate it.
I have used the ATS tuner with 6.5 Creedmoor factory ammo and it worked very well. I used two shot groups to tune it in and you can see the shots come together between the adjustments. The number one orange dot in the 537 lot is not from that lot so disregard. You can see from dot 2 to 7 you can see them come together to the best that lot will do. Lot 715 only took one adjustment. I used this ammo that I tuned in NC at about sea level to go to a match in WV at Peacemaker and the day before the match we got to shoot out to 900 on their range and I shot out at 900 with the same tuner setting in a different temp and elevation and the spotter said my three shots at 900 were almost touching. Take with it what you want. I have tested them and they work for me.
Some people will never be satisfied until they get more data points than it took to get a man on the moon, which they probably don't believe either. LOL They will burn up barrels trying to prove or disprove and never be happy. Up to the shooter if they want to use one or not. Personally I don't care if they believe it or not as I use what works for me and don't have to prove anything to anyone. Prepare to get beat up by both sides if you do a test. LOL
5 shot group using a 6th bullet hole as an aiming point.
Some people will never be satisfied until they get more data points than it took to get a man on the moon, which they probably don't believe either. LOL They will burn up barrels trying to prove or disprove and never be happy. Up to the shooter if they want to use one or not. Personally I don't care if they believe it or not as I use what works for me and don't have to prove anything to anyone. Prepare to get beat up by both sides if you do a test. LOL
5 shot group using a 6th bullet hole as an aiming point.
For rimfire tuning is about bullet exit timing. time the bullet's exit correctly and it will shoot in various conditions and distances.
Lee
Could you explain the numbers at each group. I am trying to understand the ones such as 22+1 is this setting 22 + 1 increment?
Lee
Do you mind sharing a link to the thread on accurateshooter? I would like to read that.
Wish I could but it was deleted because a few of the posters got into a needless pissing match. There wasn’t even an answer to my question so it was all pretty much worthless anyway. Only good thing is Mike Ezell gave me his phone number to call and so I called him and he explained his approach.
That's why I couldn't find it.
I've seen some pretty interesting threads on accurateshooter in regards to tuners. Once tuners started to become popular in the disciplines that people on SH generally shoot (PRS typey stuff), I wanted to see what the disciplines that have been using tuners for decades were saying about them.
It didn't seem like there was much consensus on how they are used and how they work. I even saw a heated argument develop between a world record setting BR shooter and a tuner manufacturer, on how his tuner should be used. The only consensus I really saw is that tuners are not used to make mediocre or bad ammo shoot better - you have to develop a load first - which flies in the face of what the PRS tuner manufacturers are telling us.
I don't shoot F-Class or BR, I'm not going to tell those people what works and what doesn't for their discipline. It seems like whatever effects they have is pretty marginal, though in those disciplines marginal can be the difference between 1st and 10th place. To me, for PRS and adjacent disciplines, they don't make any sense. I'm very skeptical of the claim that they can make bad to mediocre ammo shoot better (and the BR and F-class crowds would agree with me here), you don't need BR precision to win a PRS match, and I think it's a bad idea to hang an objective on the end of your barrel that's got a moving weight that's designed to change your POI. The downsides outweigh any potential gains (if there even is any).
Anyways, good luck with the testing. Looking forward to hearing about your results. I find tuners very interesting, and the more information and testing on them, the better.
Having more accurate ammo doesn’t make any sense? Lol You can not believe it but have you tried one with multiple lots of factory ammo?
I need to try one with factory ammo. I haven't done that yet with my tuners, only my 6BRA with reloads. From that testing, I found a tuner made no difference in precision.
At some point I'll try it with factory ammo. As I said in my other post, this would be in direct contradiction to what those in disciplines that have used tuners for decades say what tuners can do. Since I haven't tested it for myself, I'll maintain an open mind. Just stating what other disciplines with more tuner experience are claiming what can and can't be done with tuners.
If the difference in precision is marginal, then yes, having a device that is designed to change POI on the end of your barrel doesn't make sense. If the difference is greater than marginal, then there's an argument for them.
The difference is greater than marginal with the factory ammo I have tested. I have no problem being in contradiction as I know what they will do from my own testing.
I'm going to refrain from making any definitive conclusions on it myself until I test it.
At some point I'll test it, I have a 6.5 Creedmoor hunting barrel and a bunch of factory ammo I can use to test it. I already know that barrel doesn't like the Prime ammo I have sitting around, so that will be a "prime" candidate for a test
If you do test it, just please do more than 2 shot groups....I'm going to refrain from making any definitive conclusions on it myself until I test it.
At some point I'll test it, I have a 6.5 Creedmoor hunting barrel and a bunch of factory ammo I can use to test it. I already know that barrel doesn't like the Prime ammo I have sitting around, so that will be a "prime" candidate for a test
Those are not two shot groups. It's tuning. You shoot groups after tuning to test that the tune is correct. As you can see you can watch the shots come together with adjustments of the tuner. You can shoot more while doing it but it's a waste of ammo.
I'm going to refrain from making any definitive conclusions on it myself until I test it.
At some point I'll test it, I have a 6.5 Creedmoor hunting barrel and a bunch of factory ammo I can use to test it. I already know that barrel doesn't like the Prime ammo I have sitting around, so that will be a "prime" candidate for a test
Seems like you have come to your conclusions in your post they don't work just from reading some others experiences. You should try it before you continue to bash it.
I'm not bashing it.Seems like you have come to your conclusions in your post they don't work just from reading some others experiences. You should try it before you continue to bash it.
Just sharing my experiences and stating how other disciplines are using it.
Using tuners to make factory ammo more precise is a very new thing.
Thanks. I’m finding the same variation on what people say a tuner should do and how it’s used. I did find some consistency in the idea that a good load has to be developed first. I’m getting variation on what is important in the sine wave test (some say group shape, group size, and/or POI). Seems like all are important but some emphasize one over others. It’s been interesting speaking to a lot of people on this topic. I appreciate all of the responses to this post. Thanks all!
Not in rimfire.
Maybe most didn't use it for centerfire but they were missing out and didn't shoot factory ammo anyways so they were handloading tuned ammo and then saying tuners don't do anything. Well no shit if you already tuned the handloaded ammo to your rifle. LOL
For center fire, one way to use a tuner is to develop a great consistent load with the tuner on and in the position closest to the action. Then find a “tune window” where the sine wave flattens (based on POI) on at least three hashes. Place the tuner in the middle of that window. When the tune falls, turn the tuner one hash to get back into tune. This is the method I have used with a few different tuners. I have had to turn the tuner in matches to get the tune back. Anybody heard of this method? Tried it? Other methods?Not in rimfire.
Similar threads
