Barrel tuners I mean probably almost completely useless

[Twodogs]

Post nob116: Anchutz whilst not selling tuners make their barrels with an oversize bulbous “weight” at the muzzle - ever wonders why ,,,,it dampens the sine wave

(lump on muzzle end of barrel not to be confused with bloop tubes and other sight line extenders which can often look like weighty additions).

Whilst the weight may well dampen the sine wave It was my understanding that the reverse taper, or dog knot (lump on end of barrel) on a rimfire barrel was solely for button rifled barrels and it was done in order to have a choked muzzle where the bore would be slightly tighter near the muzzle end.

Also used by Walther and others.

 

[Utectok]

ERIC AND BRYAN GO AT IT

 

[Ronin]

ERIC AND BRYAN GO AT IT

Pity the subject of tuners isn’t actually covered in this discussion - though a good deal of information is

Cleaning

Velocity increase

Realistic average rifle performance

The accuracy of testing - low volume over high

I suspect that when the conversation arises over tuners - Brian Litz will say that the specific barrel (s) they tested did not respond to being tuned - which isn’t to say ALL do not respond to being tuned …..

 

[Mungo]

Pity the subject of tuners isn’t actually covered in this discussion - though a good deal of information is

Cleaning

Velocity increase

Realistic average rifle performance

The accuracy of testing - low volume over high

I suspect that when the conversation arises over tuners - Brian Litz will say that the specific barrel (s) they tested did not respond to being tuned - which isn’t to say ALL do not respond to being tuned …..

What are the main points they make?

 

[Utectok]

Pity the subject of tuners isn’t actually covered in this discussion - though a good deal of information is

Cleaning

Velocity increase

Realistic average rifle performance

The accuracy of testing - low volume over high

I suspect that when the conversation arises over tuners - Brian Litz will say that the specific barrel (s) they tested did not respond to being tuned - which isn’t to say ALL do not respond to being tuned …..

Yes a lot of interesting stuff I thought although they did avoid the elephant in the room lol.

 

[Utectok]

I think they did eventually acknowledge the tuner thing and said it will come with a special “Eric and him” on tuners up on Bryan’s podcast which sadly is a subscription one . I had no idea primers made such a difference shows what I know lol also the effect of atmospheric moisture on powder and loaded ammunition was quite alarming! Also the effect of annealing being limited and probably not decreasing SD was interested.

 

[Ronin]

What are the main points they make?

It’s worthwhile playing the piece and listening

Lots of knowledge drops within it that maybe relevant

Humidity effect on powder (pressure and velocity) is well known in the competitive “circuit”

There is a great deal of info imparted

Really good interview of Brian Litz but both give out info

 

[Bavarianbrit]

Sorting through my old ca. 1960 Guns & ammo mags there was an article by Col Townshend Whelen ref nodes. They took wire shirt hangers cut them 6 inches or so long then bent them into U shapes and hung them off the barrel, maybe from the photo there were 8-10 of them. He stated that on shooting the rifle the vibrations sizzled them along to sit at the node points.
I thought that's a cheap and interesting idea.

 

[Jayofdeath89]

The more I think about it the more I am beginning to think barrel tuners are completely (well nearly) useless.
To put this in context I’ve never used one but the way I’ve seen them used is with a series of 3-2 shot groups the an adjustment, which clearly means nothing. Also the adjustable thread moves the tuner almost nowhere…
I do think a barrel weight might help groups in some cases… that sort of makes sense to me but I’ve not seen any real good testing of tuners that proves anything. I believe Brian Litz did some testing and came to the same conclusion but I’ve not read his book?
What’s the SD massive think?

Barrel tuners work very very well and have many different uses
Eg 22lr you can’t change anything with them use a barrel tuner and you will see the groups shrink
I use them for benchrest so I can the best I can with hand loads then I will tweak it with the tuner can drop a .3 group to .2/.1
Also used if travelling and need to use factory ammo for a match you tweak the tuner to make it smaller
The common thing with tuners are you do a full turn and it will repeat what it’s already shot normally do 2 setting at a time I’ve seen group go from .3 to 1” then back down to .1

 

[RichardBest]

I recently bought a Limbsaver XRing barrel deresonator for about £15… after watching too much YouTube...

I put it on my 308 just behind the mod and fired 3 shot "groups", moving the ring back about an eighth of an inch between groups. The rifle shoots just under 1 inch at 100yds anyway. The first 3 groups were around an inch, then the next 3 progressively shrank to 0.5 inches. Then I ran out of ammo. But I thought that was good enough.

Maybe I was just settling into my shooting and it had nothing to do with the XRing?? Or maybe the rifle just likes to have a bit of soot in the barrel. Or maybe it was luck... But I've not adjusted it any more.

Richard

 

[John Gryphon]

Note that I haven't read every post, hence I don't know if this vid has been prev posted.

 

[Utectok]

I recently bought a Limbsaver XRing barrel deresonator for about £15… after watching too much YouTube...

I put it on my 308 just behind the mod and fired 3 shot "groups", moving the ring back about an eighth of an inch between groups. The rifle shoots just under 1 inch at 100yds anyway. The first 3 groups were around an inch, then the next 3 progressively shrank to 0.5 inches. Then I ran out of ammo. But I thought that was good enough.

Maybe I was just settling into my shooting and it had nothing to do with the XRing?? Or maybe the rifle just likes to have a bit of soot in the barrel. Or maybe it was luck... But I've not adjusted it any more.

Richard

Repeatable?

 

[Alan Maughan]

Barrel tuners work on all rifles, all barrel profiles, all calibers, with both factory ammo and home loads.

How do I know? - because Ive tested them extensively over a long time now, Ive seen the results far too many times to not be sure of my findings. I have no interest in kidding myself that something works when it doesnt, why would anyone want to waste their time doing that? I have even less interest in telling people they work if they dont so then wasting their precious time. I dont sell barrel tuners, I make the occasional one for a customer if they ask so I dont really think I have a vested interest in them. I really dont care if someone uses a tuner or not, its no skin off my nose.

The problem as I see it is people have opinions based on very little or no experience as the OP clearly tells us yet he doubts or even dismisses them, I struggle to understand that mindset.

If you know about tuners then you know, if you dont then either forget about them and move on or take the time to open your mind and your wallet, go test them and learn like I and countless others have. A tuner is a useful addition to any rifle that shoots either factory ammo or reloads and for any discipline from a stalking gun to a 1000yd benchrest rig.

Tuners need to be threaded to the barrel or attached in some secure way, they need a fine thread pitch and lots of adjustment increments to work with. They have to be able to repeat accurately to a successful position and stay there securely, something these rubber bungs cant do. You might stumble on a good place for the rubber bung but its not an easy option to keep it there or make equally small moments fore and aft for fine tuning with something like that, you need a thread and a locking mechanism to maintain accuracy and consistency of adjustment.

Bryan Litz might talk with authority about many things but tuners have clearly still got the better of him based on the way he tested them recently. He was offered help by a number of experienced tuner users/makers but instead he chose to forge ahead blindly, his testing criteria has been widely criticised as hopeless and his results reflected this naivety . Many of the worlds top benchrest shooters have been using tuners for years because they understand the benefits and know how to get the results they want, to suggest they are all wrong is just ridiculous. These anti-tuners remind me of the flat-earthers, blindly denying what has long since been proven.

Its not a competition, for instance tuners dont tune a barrel more accurately than other good well proven load development methods, thats not how it works.

A tuner enables the shooter to tune their barrel to a high state of tune, other types of load development do the same and a highly tuned barrel is a highly tuned barrel regardless of how you get there. Precision and repeatability are what makes a load good then to a lesser degree how tolerant that load is to changes in atmospheric conditions. The cat can be skinned more than one way and a tuner is a viable option if you understand how they work.

 

[Utectok]

Barrel tuners work on all rifles, all barrel profiles, all calibers, with both factory ammo and home loads.

How do I know? - because Ive tested them extensively over a long time now, I have saw the results with my own eyes far too many times to not be sure. I have no interest in kidding myself that something works when it doesnt, why would anyone want to waste their time doing that? I have even less interest in telling people they work if they dont so then wasting their time. I dont sell barrel tuners, I make the occasional one for a customer if they ask so I dont really think I have a vested interest in them. I really dont care if someone uses a tuner or not, its no skin off my nose.

The problem as I see it is people have opinions based on very little or no experience as the OP clearly tells us yet he bouts or even dismisses them, I struggle to understand that mindset.

If you know about tuners then you know, if you dont then either forget about them and move on or take the time to open your mind and your wallet, go test them and learn like I have. A tuner is a useful addition to any rifle shooting either factory ammo or reloads and for any discipline.

Tuners need to be threaded to the barrel or attached in some secure way, they need a fine thread pitch and lots of adjustment increments to work with. They have to be able to repeat accurately to a successful position and stay there securely, something these rubber bungs cant do. You might stumble on a good place for the rubber bung but its not an easy option to keep it there or make equally small moments fore and aft with something like that, you need a thread and a locking mechanism to maintain consistently.

Bryan Litz might talk with authority about many things but tuners have clearly still got the better of him based on the way he tested them recently. He was offered help by a number of experienced tuner users/makers but instead he chose to forge ahead blindly, his testing was hopeless and so his results reflected this. Many of the worlds top benchrest shooters have been using tuners for years because they understand the benefits and know how to get the results they want, to suggest they are all wrong is just ridiculous. These Anti-tuners remind me of the flat-earthers, blindly denying what has long since been proven.

Its not a competition, for instance tuners dont tune a barrel more accurately than other good well proven load development methods, thats not how it works.

A tuner enables the shooter to tune their barrel to a high state of tune, other types of load development do the same and a highly tuned barrel is a highly tuned barrel regardless of how you get there. Precision and repeatability are what makes a load good then to a lesser degree how tolerant that load is to changes in atmospheric conditions. The cat can be skinned more than one way.

Ok you have made yourself clear. Tbh I’m quite open minded on the matter but aside from that what exactly was wrong with Bryan’s methodology. If you are going to condemn it would be interesting to know you reasons?

 

[Alan Maughan]

what exactly was wrong with Bryan’s methodology. If you are going to condemn it would be interesting to know you reasons?

Im afraid it would take me longer to reply to that question than your original one and with respect I dont have that time spare.

In short he didnt test the tuners in a methodical way that is recognised by those who use them successfully. At times he was moving the tuner huge distances quite randomly, this would only generate the mediocre results he found.

If you want more info there is plenty out there if you follow this link.

You are being redirected...

 

[Ronin]

Interestingly, in preparation for the forthcoming steel plate competition season I was out yesterday with the rifle I use for such things testing a newly purchased tuner

I’ve made my own before and for clients but as I have precious little time away from work (I’m working now for instance ) - I bought a n EC Tuner Brake for ease

I started out using my normal match load (6XC - 115 DTac circa 3000 VO)

This printed well at proration zero on target (130 Yd )

I then tested a further five positions (one increment) of change on the setting) and noted quite striking dispersion pattern changes with each alteration of the setting on the tuner

Clearly saw that the first and second positions displayed better grouping and shot five and ten shot groups at each setting

The tightest five being .2 Moa at that (setting 1) distance - the worst ten shot group being .55 Moa (setting 0)

Whilst the overall shot count was not considered a large shot sample (sub 50 rounds) it was clear and evident the brake allowed fine tuning of an already proven load and allowed the change from mod to lighter brake to be harmonically ajusted to give repeatable accuracy on this rifle

 

[Utectok]

Im afraid it would take me longer to reply to that question than your original one and with respect I dont have that time spare.

In short he didnt test the tuners in a methodical way that is recognised by those who use them successfully. At times he was moving the tuner huge distances quite randomly, this would only generate the mediocre results he found.

If you want more info there is plenty out there if you follow this link.

You are being redirected...

Fair enough but his methods which I read about seemed different to what you described. They seemed methodical and followed manufacturer’s instructions. Anyway if you have something that works for you good luck to you.

 

[Alan Maughan]

Something I forgot to mention, a tuner wont turn a crap barrel into a match grade one and it wont turn crap factory ammo into match grade reloads.

What it will do is allow the shooter to optimise what they have providing the tuner is suited to the barrel and the user knows what they are doing. A while back I inherited literally thousands of rounds of this crap Russian .223 ammo, metal cased FMJ type stuff, plinking ammo really. In the gun it shot typically 2" groups at 100yds and I was able to tune it to consistently shoot 0.9" groups. Hardly benchrest quality but it make things a bit more useful. In match grade barrels shooting match grade components you can get match grade results.

The problem with tuners as I see it at present is there are quite a few on the market, all off them work in the sense they will change group shape and size but some of them are just too heavy and in combination with a relatively coarse thread pitch and overly large increment sizes they just skip nodes, especially if the user is cranking on them with quarter or half turn adjustments. People dont realise it doesnt take much in the same way a 0.003" change in seating depth does and a couple of 0.003" changes can transfer group sizes. If the tuner is right then a couple of increment changes can make a big difference. Ideally you want a tuner light enough so it takes quite a few incremental changes to see the nodes changing, that way you can fine tune more easily.

Eric Cortina seems to be leading the field in terms of making and marketing these tuners but he contradicts himself a bit in that he offers tuners of considerably different weights without any explanation as to why, in fact he offered very little in terms of helping users understand his products. This leaves some people floundering and then the 'these things dont work' starts to crop up. His original tuner for example is just too heavy for all but the stiffest barrel, try it on anything less and the results are mixed unless you split his increment sizes into four as each one makes too much difference.

I fitted an EC tuner for a customer once but only after he agreed to let me cut it in half, he was a little apprehensive but ultimately very happy with the results on target.



Ultimately I think success with tuners comes from understanding them and then using them in a thought out methodical manner, for the average guy at the range that can be difficult without comprehensive user instructions and Ive not really seen any of those if Im honest. Some will pick it up themselves but there will be lots of people left scratching their heads and putting the tuner back in the drawer. I spoke to a guy yesterday who didnt realise the impact of different batches of the same powder on his reloads, as an example when you have this level of confusion in the shooting world there are always going to be mixed results, tuners are no different.

 

[Utectok]

Something I forgot to mention, a tuner wont turn a crap barrel into a match grade one and it wont turn crap factory ammo into match grade reloads.

What it will do is allow the shooter to optimise what they have providing the tuner is suited to the barrel and the user knows what they are doing. A while back I inherited literally thousands of rounds of this crap Russian .223 ammo, metal cased FMJ type stuff, plinking ammo really. In the gun it shot typically 2" groups at 100yds and I was able to tune it to consistently shoot 0.9" groups. Hardly benchrest quality but it make things a bit more useful. In match grade barrels shooting match grade components you can get match grade results.

The problem with tuners as I see it at present is there are quite a few on the market, all off them work in the sense they will change group shape and size but some of them are just too heavy and in combination with a relatively coarse thread pitch and overly large increment sizes they just skip nodes, especially if the user is cranking on them with quarter or half turn adjustments. People dont realise it doesnt take much in the same way a 0.003" change in seating depth does and a couple of 0.003" changes can transfer group sizes. If the tuner is right then a couple of increment changes can make a big difference. Ideally you want a tuner light enough so it takes quite a few incremental changes to see the nodes changing, that way you can fine tune more easily.

Eric Cortina seems to be leading the field in terms of making and marketing these tuners but he contradicts himself a bit in that he offers tuners of considerably different weights without any explanation as to why, in fact he offered very little in terms of helping users understand his products. This leaves some people floundering and then the 'these things dont work' starts to crop up. His original tuner for example is just too heavy for all but the stiffest barrel, try it on anything less and the results are mixed unless you split his increment sizes into four as each one makes too much difference.

I fitted an EC tuner for a customer once but only after he agreed to let me cut it in half, he was a little apprehensive but ultimately very happy with the results on target.

View attachment 293160

Ultimately I think success with tuners comes from understanding them and then using them in a thought out methodical manner, for the average guy at the range that can be difficult without comprehensive user instructions and Ive not really seen any of those if Im honest. Some will pick it up themselves but there will be lots of people left scratching their heads and putting the tuner back in the drawer. I spoke to a guy yesterday who didnt realise the impact of different batches of the same powder on his reloads, as an example when you have this level of confusion in the shooting world there are always going to be mixed results, tuners are no different.

I have to agree that Eric doesn’t really explain the variables involved? It seems to me he would be doing himself a lot of favours if he had a few videos showing repeatable results.

 

[Alan Maughan]

I have to agree that Eric doesn’t really explain the variables involved? It seems to me he would be doing himself a lot of favours if he had a few videos showing repeatable results.

The subject is too complex with way too many variables, I expect he knows this and thats why he is avoiding it. If he can sell enough of his tuners without the need for this then why bother?