Watch em all come out now.
"See, see, I told you he's a fuck'n troll.
"See, see, I told you he's a fuck'n troll.
- Thread starter eric1911
- Start date
- Status
I'd like a brake but it's really not practical for the type of shooting I do. We shoot out of a converted 4WD with the windscreen removed. The other guy in front would just get hammered every shot as he is right beside me. I'll prolly get around to buying a tuner one of these days though.
I don’t have the weights off hand but I’m sure that info is on they’re website. You can get the same results with a cheap limbsaver barrel harmonic dampener. I believe Amazon has them. You really don’t need 3 shots per setting if your confident in your shooting abilities and your tune may change a little but not very much as long as you’re load stays the same. If you’re barrel is free floated , the dampener will have to be out near the end which is beyond ugly but it will give the same results. Just slide 1/2 inch each group
So, not to disrupt a perfectly typical pissing contest, but with all the arguing about baby stats and Central Limit Theorem, I can only laugh.
Arguing adequate sample size without any measure of variance is a waste of time (if you can not express the variance for the firearm x ammo combination, you can not estimate the required sample size, regardless of alpha level or desired beta level). Baby statistics!
So let’s cut the BS and be honest, most of the results presented thus far have been simple comparisons. Nothing wrong there. Just limited with respect to inference. However, multiple raters claiming to have detected a difference with small sample sizes.... implies the effect size, if real, must be fairly large. Think about that carefully.... again baby statistical reasoning.
Rant complete. Back to the regularly scheduled pissing match
For that to apply, this debate would need an actual opposing side rooted in a sound argument to begin with.
In reality, its a few individuals who have fragile egos, continuously arguing with multiple people who have already shown results. If their argument was sound to begin with, they wouldnt need to keep trying to attack anyone who disagrees with them.
I haven't read through the whole thread so if this was already done someone feel free to tell me.
Here is the test I'd like to see:
1. Shoot 3 shot groups until I find both the "spread" setting and the "tight" setting.
2. Have a different shooter who doesn't know the 2 settings but is a known good shooter with solid fundamentals shoot a 10 shot group on the "spread" setting and another 10 shot group on the "tight" setting after the barrel is cooled. The shooter should be kept unaware of which setting the tuner is on during the test.
If both groups are the same size the tuner didn't do jack. If the tuner works it should be readily apparent by the 10 shot group on the "tight" setting being much smaller.
Has anyone done the test above or something similar?
Here is the test I'd like to see:
1. Shoot 3 shot groups until I find both the "spread" setting and the "tight" setting.
2. Have a different shooter who doesn't know the 2 settings but is a known good shooter with solid fundamentals shoot a 10 shot group on the "spread" setting and another 10 shot group on the "tight" setting after the barrel is cooled. The shooter should be kept unaware of which setting the tuner is on during the test.
If both groups are the same size the tuner didn't do jack. If the tuner works it should be readily apparent by the 10 shot group on the "tight" setting being much smaller.
Has anyone done the test above or something similar?
Im not sure if you missed what you personally wrote or not, but you want to have a discussion about what is statistically significant, after pretending that owning a product and first hand use of it is somehow unnecessary..?
Im still confused, what method of testing do you endorse, that doesnt actually involve owning or physically possessing the product to begin with? Since you tried to make that the foundation of your argument when you tried to discredit me (and were proven to be wrong). Inquiring minds what to know. Tell me how you plan to test this product, to disprove everyone else's experience, without actually possessing it?
I havent tried that kind of test with a second shooter, but certainly can. I did try multiple groups on the "tight" setting afterwards to verify it and rule out it being a "lucky grouping". Im willing to best most of us did that who purchased the product. Nobody sane would want 1 good group with zero repeatability. That would defeat the purpose of the product. I imagine that the majority of us who spend money on shooting arent doing so to share 1 "good group" online. That hasnt earned me any money yet. When it does, maybe the conversation would be different.
Bro - let me be clear - with terms you will understand. You're a troll, and a terrible one at that, and one who obviously understands very little about what they are talking about. Your posts are full of hilariously bad logical fallacies that you seemingly continue to say because they make you feel good. There's absolutely *zero* reason for us to continue discussing anything.
Hahaha, you accuse others of a fragile ego Haaaaa fucking Haaaaaa.
You must be a Troll, no one could be this stupid.
WTF????!!!!!
Tuners effect how a rifle shoots!!!!
Only you can judge if its worth it for "YOUR APPLICATION /USE"
A TUNER ADJUSTMENT IS CONSISTENT!!!! THINK OF IT AS A PERMANENT MODIFICATION TO BARREL HARMONICS AND MAYBE IT WILL MAKE MORE SENSE.
Tuners effect how a rifle shoots!!!!
Only you can judge if its worth it for "YOUR APPLICATION /USE"
A TUNER ADJUSTMENT IS CONSISTENT!!!! THINK OF IT AS A PERMANENT MODIFICATION TO BARREL HARMONICS AND MAYBE IT WILL MAKE MORE SENSE.
Absolutely no one has questioned whether they have an effect.
Read the last 3 pages & you'll see what's going on.
Don’t bother reading. Here is the readers digest version. There are people who use them and tested them and there are people who don’t have them but want an asinine amount of testing done by those that do have them to prove to them that they work. There you go. Saved you a lot of time.
These people are not here to make a decision on a purchase.
They are here for the sport of arguing. Nothing more.
They are here for the sport of arguing. Nothing more.
You don't know shit from clay or if your ass is bored or punched.
Go back to sleep.
I haven’t but I will be shooting 10 in the local 600 contests. They’re won’t be any till after hunting season as the 3 ranges that have them have to close they’re public range to have the contest. I do have a 500 meter range for load work that I need to finish 3 rifles that I can shoot 10 but I don’t know anyone that I can say for sure would satisfy as the second shooter. I’m in western Washington if someone who can represent and they’re word is good enough. Not easy shooting as all 3 are off the shelf rifles, 2 weatherby an 1 300 prc. I’d rather not shoot 10 though as I’m pretty short on large magnum primers, would 5 suffice?
The test I proposed above appears pretty simple and doesn't take much ammo.
There is no need for multiple shooters. It's your rifle. Either it shoots or it doesn't. I don't care what another person shoots my rifle like as long as I can shoot it.
The point is to have a blind test. I have absolutely witnessed the mental affects of a shooter who has a predisposed bias as to how they think a gun will shoot. For example, I have seen guys who if they are convinced the gun will shoot poorly spend less time in preparation for the shots etc... This part of the test is to help eliminate any of this kind of shooter based affect because of the shooter knowing the tuner setting. I suppose you could have someone else adjust the tuner to one of the two settings without you watching and you do the shooting and they select the second option again without you watching.
Seems like a cool test to me.
Seems like more work than is needed. You shoot it to find the tuned mark. Not multiple marks. It's tuned or it's not. Then you shoot to confirm. If it's not the setting then it won't hold whether mental or not. You can't mentally make .2 groups with something that won't shoot them. If you are doing this work to make your rifle shoot well you are not assuming it won't. You are doing the work.
Everyone acts like the tuner is doing something supernatural. It's not. It's just doing the same thing you do when working up a load by adjusting the harmonics in the barrel to close the group.
If you feel that that test is needed then buy a tuner and do it. I own two tuners and don't feel it's needed at all.
Happy for you. Maybe someone else will be interested in helping some of us out who are on the fence about tuners.
Possibly there is but if having two people shoot a rifle is what is keeping you on a fence then not sure what to tell you. Buy one and try it or don't but if you are in a situation where one might help then you will be glad you did. If not then sell it. Just like any piece of gear people are interested in.
I already posted a solution to the two shooters part of the test.
Still not needed. No blind taste tests are needed. Either it shoots or it doesn't. You tune it, get the setting then test the setting. Simple.
Not even the slightest curiosity on testing the "spread" setting vs the "tuned" setting? What if they shot the same size 10 shot group? Wouldn't that be interesting?
Nope.
I can tell you with 100% certainty that the 2 off the shelf weatherby rifles will shoot like crap without the tuner with these loads. But with the tuner they shoot extremely good. I think they would represent the extreme difference a tuner can make. Problem is finding someone everyone will believe that can shoot the high recoil on a inexpensive setup. And maybe if there is still some doubt the rifles can be shot at 1000. The problem with the prs guys is custom guns may not show or factory ammunition that is sub par
I pretty much agree with you on this. PRS guys are shooting guns and ammo that normally shoot 1/4 MOA or close to it without a tuner. 20 lb 6mm BR with a heavy varmint barrel shooting berger 105's is probably going to be hard to tell the difference between "tuned" and "out of tune".
You will see a difference with custom rifles as my posts above are all with a GAP 6.5 Creedmoor shooting factory ammo. Someone shooting something that they did a bunch of load work for won't need a tuner as they did the work the tuner does in load work up. But some PRS shooters shoot factory ammo also and the tuner will help. Been shooting the "PRS" sport for 18 years and have used both but now with the tuner it makes using the factory ammo easier.
Blind test results, good grief.
I put posts of products up occasionally, the Brass Goat worked as advertised I'm keeping it.
The 55g bulk bullets were a fail, oh wait only tested one powder on them so repeat test with my favorite 223 powder comming and will be noted that way.
I was actually offered discounts for a review but I'm not in a position to lie for a product I won't use or have my friends buy.
Plus I know I can get them to shoot better, just a feeling. The company will have to wait for a new lot of prepped brass.
I have little in this world but my self respect. And yes if results are close but not quite what I expect I often get a younger competent shooter to help confirm even my own personal loads.
Tests can be cheated, learned that in high school.
I put posts of products up occasionally, the Brass Goat worked as advertised I'm keeping it.
The 55g bulk bullets were a fail, oh wait only tested one powder on them so repeat test with my favorite 223 powder comming and will be noted that way.
I was actually offered discounts for a review but I'm not in a position to lie for a product I won't use or have my friends buy.
Plus I know I can get them to shoot better, just a feeling. The company will have to wait for a new lot of prepped brass.
I have little in this world but my self respect. And yes if results are close but not quite what I expect I often get a younger competent shooter to help confirm even my own personal loads.
Tests can be cheated, learned that in high school.
I read it thats why I posted it to simplify for the inept.
Howdy,
I appreciate the reply. When I read through all this it became apparent that the shooters using tuners believe they make a noticeable change. That says quite a bit, particularly when you look at some of the people weighing in on the discussion. I use, teach, and argue stats with people almost daily (Unfortunately). So I tried to offer a test that could utilize multiple 2 or 3 shot groups over a small range of tuner settings to estimate the size of the tuners effect on a particular rifle x load combination. Mean radius, group size, or extreme spread vs incremental setting was what came to mind last night (hypotheses test of slope using regression). Simple, should work with the typical tuning routine, and will provide an estimate of the effect and precision (SD and confidence interval).
Here is a link for conducting the test in Excel (those who do stats know this is just a T-test for slope via SLR):
Test regression slope | Real Statistics Using Excel
How to test the significance of the slope of the regression line, in particular to test whether it is zero. Example of Excel's regression data analysis tool.
www.real-statistics.com
And here is a paper on a free program for doing power analyses and estimation of sample size (including slope for fixed or random Y....being the topic keeps coming up on SH):
Hope this helps.
Then why do you keep coming back, after telling all of us you had no plans of responding?
tell me more about being a troll, arguing about a product you don’t own or have no experience with using either.
you and barelstroker make a fine couple. Who’s the she? I’m guessing it’s you based on the inability to admit you’re wrong, even after being confronted with evidence of being wrong.
Maybe you should go focus your energy on the Burris scope thread, where other men do most of the talking for you too?
Tuners work and will improve group sizes, the amount of improvement is solely based on the quality of the foundation it's installed on.
A rifle that shoots 2 MOA will tighten up, but will it became a .25 MOA rifle, likely not. A .5 MOA rifle will improve as well and could become a .25 MOA rifle.
There's a reason why tuners are very popular in accuracy required shooting sports such as F-Class or small bore. These folks won't waste their time installing something that doesn't tighten their groups. PRS folks are normally not chasing .25 MOA groups, most are satisfied with .5, but if you can get .25 MOA and a effective muzzle brake included why wouldn't you. You can still take advantage of a tuner if you like to run a suppressor, those tuners are available as well. Just my opinion.
A rifle that shoots 2 MOA will tighten up, but will it became a .25 MOA rifle, likely not. A .5 MOA rifle will improve as well and could become a .25 MOA rifle.
There's a reason why tuners are very popular in accuracy required shooting sports such as F-Class or small bore. These folks won't waste their time installing something that doesn't tighten their groups. PRS folks are normally not chasing .25 MOA groups, most are satisfied with .5, but if you can get .25 MOA and a effective muzzle brake included why wouldn't you. You can still take advantage of a tuner if you like to run a suppressor, those tuners are available as well. Just my opinion.
Last edited:
Bench rest shooters don't use tuners to "tighten up their groups". They use them to "keep them in the node" throughout a match as conditions change.
They do all of their load development before even touching their tuners, making their ammo as precise as possible for their rifle. The tuner does not shrink groups.
If you reload for PRS or similar, a tuner isn't going to make your gun shoot better. But it may help your gun shoot ammo that's not optimized to your rifle slightly better - like factory ammo.
Bench rest shooters load ammo on the firing line during the match and adjust their loads according to conditions. Something that other forms of shooting can't do.
A tuner adjust the harmonic of your barrel to synchronize the wave to the bullets release. It tunes so that the bullet is released in the same spot in the wave traveling down the barrel. Even your custom reloads are affected by the condition. (heat, Cold Humidity) There's no ammo that we can reload that works exactly the same in every condition. Of course some work better than others. Tuners help to mitigate that and yes keep you in the node.
You say it doesn't improved your grouped. If you're out of the node due to conditions and can screw in or out the tuner and get back in the node, you just did what you said the tuner doesn't do.
During load development you follow your normal process, once you gotten the best performing load, you then fine tune with the tuner and your set to go.
Rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it.
I don't disagree with any of your points.
But we need to keep in mind they "staying in the node" is something most in our shooting discipline don't need. The difference between being in a precision "node" and not is a pretty small difference - not a variable that we can necessarily see or need to control in our discipline.
If you want to set a BR world record, using your BR gun with SEB front rest, rear rudder, etc, then this may be important to you. But for those of us shooting off of bipod + rear bag, tripod, barricades, etc, being in or out of a precision "node" is hardly observable or consequential to our shooting.
And being in or out of a node will not be a difference of ~50% in group size.
^^^^ I can promise you this is the answer here guys, Its not that I'm a "believer" in some kind of voodoo like you guys that haven't used a tuner think... Its doing the exact same thing as seating depth test for groups. I have plenty of targets/data and group sizes on different rifles in different calibers shooting them with a tuner, regular brake, no brake and they work... Has nothing to do with me being a "Believer" in them. Buy one, skip all the seating depth testing, shoot it and tell me It didn't tighten up your groups...
So there are other uses for Erik's tuner brake.
Let's say an old guy fooled around and put together an accurate short range ar plinking load. That load also worked decent in some other families ar's.
So many rounds are cranked out given out and stashed everywhere.
Then one day the ar barrel that the load was developed in shells out on you. Oops
E C tuner brake solves all the bullshit. Each tuner will end up paying for itself in my case.
Check headspace for compatibility and crank out the ammo.
Let's say an old guy fooled around and put together an accurate short range ar plinking load. That load also worked decent in some other families ar's.
So many rounds are cranked out given out and stashed everywhere.
Then one day the ar barrel that the load was developed in shells out on you. Oops
E C tuner brake solves all the bullshit. Each tuner will end up paying for itself in my case.
Check headspace for compatibility and crank out the ammo.
Watch Erik's videos he has 2 I think really short, easy, and quick... I personally shoot a lot of Bergers which like loaded long so I loaded them as long as mag would allow which usually shoots best with Bergers anyway then went to the tuner.
Conventional thinking by a lot of PRS shooters is that .5 MOA is sufficient.
Wouldn't you prefer to have a .25 or .35 MOA rifle over a .5 MOA during a match? Or be able to get your rig back in the node, if you're in a different location and condition. Won't you rather have a larger margain of error to mitigate our screw up.
I can't think of any reasonable situation when I would prefer a less accurate rifle.
We should want more things helping us than hurting or that neither help or hurt. We want the odds in our favor even if it's minimal.
At the end of the day it's personal choice and we have to decide if it's worth it or not. I don't fault anyone who doesn't and I understand those who do.
Last edited:
I don't need a tuner to have a 0.25 moa rifle.
Feniks Technologies
Premium Ammunition and Loading Supplies
Supporter
Commercial Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Most people either don’t have or aren’t capable of sub .5 moa.
Especially with bipod and rear squeeze bag.
Everyone says “I shoot .25 when I do my part” or “all day everyday.” And that’s just not reality.
Most who claim it never seem to be able to produce it consistently and on demand.
Feniks Technologies
Premium Ammunition and Loading Supplies
Supporter
Commercial Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
If doing full work up:
-Leave tuner on “zero”
-Find powder charge (there’s plenty of conversations on different methods)
-Find seating depth
-adjust tuner
If prs or something not requiring all that work:
-tuner on zero
-load powder charge for speed i want
-seat bullets .020 or .030 off lands
-adjust tuner
- Status
