Need Help With a Tuner

markharp said:
I don't think ppl should pay any attention to Richard's posts. He did not win every match he shot in last year. He came in second several times.
Click to expand...

Mark, good sense of humor. It's a shame Richard deleted his posts. His success last year pretty well proves he knows what he's talking about when it comes to using a tuner. I wouldn't worry about naysayers. More than likely they either don't compete or are finishing below Richard anyway. I know I certainly finished lower than him at most of the matches where we shot together last year. I've learned that on this board that if you don't do things the same as they do, then your way is wrong. Doing things differently doesn't mean that it's necessarily wrong, just different. Richard's method has worked for him and has shown up where it counts on the top of the leaderboard.
 
Mike, didn't he come in first or second in every match he shot last year other than one? The one he didn't he had an injured finger and accidentally fired a few shots.

I would think anyone that wants to make a serious tuner effort would want to hear just about everything he has to say. For those that don't know him,, he is intelligent, very pragmatic, and despite his humble demeanor,,,,, has unlimited resources.
 
Report from the tunnel.

Mornin' guys. After experimenting in the tunnel for days, I wish I had something new to report but all I can do is confirm what others have been saying for some time and that is, you must make SMALL adjustments to keep from missing in-tune positions. I and many others have been making WAY too big of adjustments. :eek:

While running the test lines, I tried two different dials, one graduated in .0015 increments and the other in .0010. I really could see no difference in results between the two but maybe someone else can.

All lines were started with the tuner screwed all the way to the end of the threads, toward the breach and then backed out enough to place the zero reference mark at 12 o'clock on the barrel. To aid in making accurate adjustments, I engraved a mark at 12 o'clock on the barrel. Invariably, with the tuner set at zero, the rifle was always completely out of tune with about two bullet holes of vertical and horizontal. The first adjustment of .001 usually produced a noticeable improvement in the group and usually the rifle came right in tune by the third or fourth adjustment. Continuing out .0010 at a time, the rifle was always completely out of tune by the 8th or 9th mark. (one quarter of a turn) From completely out of tune to in-tune and out again in eight or nine thousandths. :eek: Who would have ever believed it; huh? :eek: But it repeats time after time.

Of course, all this completely invalidates everything I've ever said about tuner adjustments! :eek: Sorry. We live and learn if we pay attention. :) I'm still learning. :rolleyes:

Gene Beggs
 
Of course, all this completely invalidates everything I've ever said about tuner adjustments! Sorry. We live and learn if we pay attention. I'm still learning.
Click to expand...

Gene

I don't agree that the findings invalidate everything. They show that the "in-tune" settings for your tuner were closer together than you originally found. They may even correlate with temperature changes in fewer degrees of change.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gene,
The nodes that you were seeing in the past were real, it is just that there were others between them. Thanks for sharing your continuing research.
Boyd
 
Here is a "fine" tuner adjustment. It is only moving 1.5 ounces of weight. It is 2.5 times finer than the .001 Harrells. This allows placing it in the center of a setting. This is for a RF and has never been tested on a CF.
AT 5.jpg
 
Gene Beggs

Gene...could you post a picture of your tuner,showing the dial scale.etc,etc. Just trying to get a clear picture in my mind. that is,what's left of it.

TIA

Glenn
 
Ah Gene! That's what I've been telling you for the last 6 years!!

Now to add one more part of the myth to break: The 'absolute' position of the tuner ring (zero-up, X turn(s) off the shoulder) is only useful with respect to that set of tuner rings and the individual barrel. Because
  • barrels can be different lengths,
  • the threading shoulder position can be slightly longer or shorter,
  • the barrel could have been indexed anywhere when it was threaded,
  • the tuner threads themselves can be indexed anywhere,
  • and the tuner 'zero' mark can be indexed anywhere...
the 'zero' mark is only a RELATIVE reference for a barrel/tuner combination.

What I came up with was a measuring method for recording my tuner settings on each barrel/action/tuner-set. In my shooting logs, I write down the tuner setting for each target shot as two numbers -- the first is the number of times the zero-ref-mark has passed top-dead-center of the barrel, turning out from the shoulder. The second is an offset from that position in thousandths of an inch as measured by appropriately scaled decals or engraved marks. A typical entry would look like 2T/+.003 (for "2 turns plus .003") or 3T/-.015 ( for 3 turns minus .015"). The first "turn" is not necessarily a full revolution -- it depends on where the zero-ref was when it locked up against the shoulder of the tuner threads.

This method gives an absolute setting that can be used to re-position the tuner on that barrel again. By noting the offsets for the first turn it can also be used to compare two different tuners on the same gun at the same position (I used this to test different sets of tuner rings). It can work for any thread pitch for comparing results for alternate tuners (my rail tuners are 32tpi, bag guns are 28tpi and 32tpi) on different guns. In short, it establishes a RELATIVE coordinate system in .001" increments that you can use for some spreadsheet analysis across barrels, actions, loads, tuners, etc. For spreadsheet work, I usually pick 1T/+.000 as an origin. Each barrel/tuner combination has a 1T/-.0xx limit that is the shoulder lock-up) It is a simple calculation using the (thread pitch * turns) plus offset for a total absolute movement that can be correlated to whatever other factors you care to jot down (temp/humidity/pressure altitude/etc) and analyze.

I've had a hundred conversation with shooters that start, "I have my tuner set at zero, and ...". The first thing I do is try to get it through their heads is that there is nothing magic about that 'zero' reference point. The key is find a spot where it is perfectly in tune, then make very small adjustments from there.

Rod
 
CubCouper said:
Ah Gene! That's what I've been telling you for the last 6 years!!

Now to add one more part of the myth to break: The 'absolute' position of the tuner ring (zero-up, X turn(s) off the shoulder) is only useful with respect to that set of tuner rings and the individual barrel. Because
  • barrels can be different lengths,
  • the threading shoulder position can be slightly longer or shorter,
  • the barrel could have been indexed anywhere when it was threaded,
  • the tuner threads themselves can be indexed anywhere,
  • and the tuner 'zero' mark can be indexed anywhere...
the 'zero' mark is only a RELATIVE reference for a barrel/tuner combination.

What I came up with was a measuring method for recording my tuner settings on each barrel/action/tuner-set. In my shooting logs, I write down the tuner setting for each target shot as two numbers -- the first is the number of times the zero-ref-mark has passed top-dead-center of the barrel, turning out from the shoulder. The second is an offset from that position in thousandths of an inch as measured by appropriately scaled decals or engraved marks. A typical entry would look like 2T/+.003 (for "2 turns plus .003") or 3T/-.015 ( for 3 turns minus .015"). The first "turn" is not necessarily a full revolution -- it depends on where the zero-ref was when it locked up against the shoulder of the tuner threads.

This method gives an absolute setting that can be used to re-position the tuner on that barrel again. By noting the offsets for the first turn it can also be used to compare two different tuners on the same gun at the same position (I used this to test different sets of tuner rings). It can work for any thread pitch for comparing results for alternate tuners (my rail tuners are 32tpi, bag guns are 28tpi and 32tpi) on different guns. In short, it establishes a RELATIVE coordinate system in .001" increments that you can use for some spreadsheet analysis across barrels, actions, loads, tuners, etc. For spreadsheet work, I usually pick 1T/+.000 as an origin. Each barrel/tuner combination has a 1T/-.0xx limit that is the shoulder lock-up) It is a simple calculation using the (thread pitch * turns) plus offset for a total absolute movement that can be correlated to whatever other factors you care to jot down (temp/humidity/pressure altitude/etc) and analyze.

I've had a hundred conversation with shooters that start, "I have my tuner set at zero, and ...". The first thing I do is try to get it through their heads is that there is nothing magic about that 'zero' reference point. The key is find a spot where it is perfectly in tune, then make very small adjustments from there.

Rod
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that..but why not just use a depth mic to to record where the tuner is on different barrels?
 
This thread is one of the good ones. Thanks to all of you for sharing. Question: for a given barrel stiffness, would you say that lighter tuners have to be moved farther to see a change on the target?

Going back to Varmint Al's work, I believe that he was able to come up with a computer model that seemed to correlate with an actual test, and that using the model he was able to achieve positive compensation (move the points of bullet exit to the left side of the muzzle rise curve) using three methods, going to a longer barrel (which can present a weight issue), adding weight to the muzzle, and by reducing mid barrel diameter. This leads me to my point, within the contour rule of short range benchrest, might there be better contours that those that are commonly used? We know that a weighted muzzle can help, and the tuner allowance gets around the contour rule issue but why not look at the entire barrel's shape? Perhaps there is more to be gained. Before someone jumps up and says that flags and tune are still the driving factors, yes I understand all of that, but what has been gained by the use of tuners has been in addition to what can be had by using the traditional variables. What I am proposing would fall into the same category, not to in any way replace, but to move the base line from which they work.
 
Boyd,
There are two parts to tuning: 1) getting perfect compensation so that bullets with different exit times hit the target at the same elevation, and 2) minimizing horizontal and vertical dispersion.

The first part arises from low frequency vibration that is affected by just about everything about the dynamic response of the rifle, including the center of gravity of the rifle, muzzle mass, rest positions, scope weight, stock stiffness, barrel stiffness, etc, etc.

The second arises from high frequency vibration at the muzzle and is probably most effectively controlled by moving a small mass a small distance at the muzzle, but a certain someone also tried moving a mass on the scope. Haven't tried the scope tuner myself, but it isn't a crazy idea. It's just that controlling muzzle vibration with a device on the muzzle is more direct.

Al's simulations only addressed the compensation part. Simulating the dispersion part may take a more accurate model with greater temporal resolution.

Oh, and about your question, it makes sense that lighter tuners should be moved farther. Maybe Jerry or Mike have done such tests.

Cheers,
Keith
 
Tuners, tuners and more tuners - -

A friend last winter used Calfee's method of determining the weight a tuner should be for his 30BR. He has a weight that is about 1lb and is able to tune the funky old barrel he had to work with to shoot tiny one.. He says adjustments are small to get in tune. In the beginning of the popularity of tuners with CF rifles, I was all over it but I grew weary of having to fiddle with them all the time so quit them and just take what the rifle will give me in tests, then go with that.

I do use tuners with my RF rifles but generally do not fiddle with them once I think the rifle is in tune and if the thing pukes shots, there is always the next match. Perhaps I have grown weary of shooting, in general. I am giving that some thought lately.

Pete
 
Pete Wass said:
A friend last winter used Calfee's method of determining the weight a tuner should be for his 30BR. He has a weight that is about 1lb and is able to tune the funky old barrel he had to work with to shoot tiny one.. He says adjustments are small to get in tune. In the beginning of the popularity of tuners with CF rifles, I was all over it but I grew weary of having to fiddle with them all the time so quit them and just take what the rifle will give me in tests, then go with that.

I do use tuners with my RF rifles but generally do not fiddle with them once I think the rifle is in tune and if the thing pukes shots, there is always the next match. Perhaps I have grown weary of shooting, in general. I am giving that some thought lately.

Pete
Click to expand...
Pete, I'm curious as to why you move the tuner on the gun that you can tune with ammo but leave it set on the gun that you can't load for.
 
Well, I'm just a slow learner

CubCouper said:
Ah Gene! That's what I've been telling you for the last 6 years!! Rod
Click to expand...


Hey Rod

Has it really been six years since you first discovered tuners out there in my tunnel?
You've come a long way since then. I'm impressed and proud of you man! :D

Yes, like most retards, I'm a slow learner but not completely without hope. :rolleyes:

It's encouraging to see you younger, well-educated, high-tech types continuing with tuner work. I'll be looking forward to your next article in the magazine.

Oh and by the way,,, if you guys should discover that tuners actually respond better to adjustments of .0001 instead of .001, please don't tell me about it! :confused: :p

Keep up the good work.

Later

Gene Beggs
 
Chism G said:
Gene...could you post a picture of your tuner,showing the dial scale.etc,etc. Just trying to get a clear picture in my mind. that is,what's left of it.

TIA

Glenn
Click to expand...


Glenn, I'm sorry but I don't know how to e-mail pictures but I'll do better than that if you'll send me your mailing address. My e-mail is, genebeggs@cableone.net.

BTW, Accurate Shooter.com did have some good pictures of my tuner.

Later,

Gene
 
Francis said it

mwezell said:
Pete, I'm curious as to why you move the tuner on the gun that you can tune with ammo but leave it set on the gun that you can't load for.
Click to expand...

Folks who pre-load must tweak their tuner sometimes, sometimes not was my experience. I had hoped and continue to hope that someone will develop a good system with a gauge and chart so that it is relative easy to keep a rifle in tune when pre-loaded and know for sure where to set the tuner. I tried loading at the range early in my shooting career and found that it was way too easy to make mistakes and that I had rather socialize than avoid folks to load. I always felt that considering we were never going to make any money shooting, I wanted to enjoy the ride. After achieving Shooter of the Year once, I never thought it worth doing the second time.

I think what I discovered in Iowa was altitude maters a lot with regard to tune. I ended up pulling my bullets, then finding a seating depth that made the rifle shoot with the load I had in the ammo. The tuner I was trying to use would not achieve the tune I needed. Since then, I loaded a bunch of ammo with TNT bullets one winter when I came to Florida for the winter. I was visiting Jon Newman in those days. I was able to tune in the TNT's to a tiny round hole in very few shots. Jon was in awe! He soon started working with tuners after that.

Some of my early barrels, two of which Francis got with the rifle I sold him were not very fussy about what one fed them. I shot a 249-23 with the Hart one day @ Orrington in the damp, with my usual pre-loaded load. Dropped the last shot, of course. 6X scope and all. Barrels like those don't come by very often. My first three barrels for the first two custom rifles I had built were that good so I thought all 30 barrels were that good. Never had any as good since.

Pete
 
Last edited:
Here is a pic of the Beggs tuner

Gene Beggs said:
Glenn, I'm sorry but I don't know how to e-mail pictures but I'll do better than that if you'll send me your mailing address. My e-mail is, genebeggs@cableone.net.

BTW, Accurate Shooter.com did have some good pictures of my tuner.

Later,

Gene
Click to expand...

I swear by this amazing device!

Rob Carnell
Sydney, Australia
 

Attachments

  • beggstuner.jpg
    beggstuner.jpg
    12 KB · Views: 221
I'll say it one more time, these super light tuners can most times "tune for the moment" but do not have he capacity to permanently tune a barrel into its optimum condition.


.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top