EC tuner brake

Takashi

Sergeant of the Hide
PX Member
Minuteman
Nov 9, 2011
187
76
Good shooting! Groups look good. How much tuning did you do with the Ed brake tuner?
I went into intervals of 2 (of 10) and shot 5 3 shot groups, picked the best and went back to it and confirmed. I understand 100% that my sample size is a little on the small side and I could probably find more gains, but this barrel is getting close to 1k rounds.

The EC tuner brake didn’t work for me on a 6cm mtu (or comp contour, but similar) running 6cm hornady factory ammo. The weight is likely too small. But I am a sample size of one. Hopefully others have very good experiences.

Also, the ATS has been changed to a tapered model that is much harder to catch on things. I merely pointed out that the straight edges would be easy to catch. I’m sure he made some videos showing it not catching. But now it’s a better shape than it was and everyone is happy.

My experience was different, with a 24" proof competition contour. Also sample size of 1.
 

George F

Private
Minuteman
Aug 4, 2018
6
1
Anybody tried the EC tuner brake?

I am interested in it and would like to hear some reviews.

Thanks!
I use Mark Fox's tunners. They are made by PT&G. Once you get your SD low, the tuner will set the barrel harmonics to the load. Can maintain <0.5 MOA vertical dispersion out to 1300 yds on any of the rifles I use it on. Have 3 from 7mm to .375 caliber.
Anybody tried the EC tuner brake?

I am interested in it and would like to hear some reviews.

Thanks!
 

Quickoz

Sergeant
PX Member
Minuteman
Feb 14, 2010
217
4
30
Two Rocks, Western Australia
I've been reading this with interest as I use tuners on some of my other rifles, none of the ones being mentioned. I don't believe a tuner/brake can effect ES/SD as it doesn't have anything to do with the ignition of the loaded round and doesn't contact the bullet once it leaves the barrel. It effects barrel harmonics, the speed of the barrel vibrations and the angle the barrel is at when the bullet exits the muzzle.

For the people saying the Cortina brake wont work as well due to the tuner part being lighter, look at the location of the weight compared to the TMB. Its at the very front of the tuner/brake so a movement there with weight will have MORE of an effect then weight that is flush or behind the muzzle. Its simple physics really.
 
Last edited:

Dthomas3523

Hall Monitor
Staff member
Moderator
Supporter
PX Member
Commercial Supporter
PX Member
Minuteman
  • Jan 31, 2018
    10,098
    13,842
    South Texas
    I've been reading this with interest as I use tuners on some of my other rifles, none of the ones being mentioned. I don't believe a tuner/brake can effect ES/SD as it doesn't have anything to do with the ignition of the loaded round and doesn't contact the bullet once it leaves the barrel. It effects barrel harmonics, the speed of the barrel vibrations and the angle the barrel is at when the bullet exits the muzzle.

    For the people saying the Cortina brake wont work as well due to the tuner part being lighter, look at the location of the weight compared to the TMB. Its at the very front of the tuner/brake so a movement there with weight will have MORE of an effect then weight that is flush or behind the muzzle. Its simple physics really.

    Your “simple physics” argument doesn’t hold up unless you can show the math or results.

    I own this tuner brake as well as other tuners and it doesn’t work as well. Not saying it doesn’t work at all. But the effects are nowhere near as dramatic/noticeable.
     

    brianf

    Private
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 8, 2010
    3,300
    3,515
    43
    NY
    It’s just math

    a certain strength barrel vibrates (material, bore diameter etc) at a particular frequency

    that needs a certain amount of weight to be effective

    shinny long barrel light tuner

    Short truck axel barrel needs a heavy tuner

    it’s going to be dependent on those variable (to really simplify it)
     

    Dthomas3523

    Hall Monitor
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Commercial Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 31, 2018
    10,098
    13,842
    South Texas
    @Dthomas3523 are you saying the tuner on this brake is less optimal than the ATS brake...which I'm currently running with a Sidewinder Magnum?

    I need to run it more to give a definitive answer.

    But it is less effective than my regular EC tuners which are about the same weight as the ATS.

    Again, my personal and limited experience so far.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BLKWLFK9

    Quickoz

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 14, 2010
    217
    4
    30
    Two Rocks, Western Australia
    Your “simple physics” argument doesn’t hold up unless you can show the math or results.

    I own this tuner brake as well as other tuners and it doesn’t work as well. Not saying it doesn’t work at all. But the effects are nowhere near as dramatic/noticeable.
    I will agree that because of the weight, it will take alot of adjustment to make a noticable difference. But given the market its aimed at, Its one of the better designs from what Ive seen. Would I use this on a F-Class or BR rig, probably not. I like much more weight in my tuners for that purpose. But for a PRS/Varmint rig, I'd prefer the adjustment portion of the tuner to overhang the muzzle and not be flush or behind. But thats just me and fits with my understanding of barrel vibrations and harmonics.

    Plus I like the clean look of this design. Others look bulky and out of place. Not that any of that matters to performance.
     

    Quickoz

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 14, 2010
    217
    4
    30
    Two Rocks, Western Australia
    I think you’re talking yourself into thinking it’s the optimal design because of your feelings towards it.

    This is the optimal design for a barrel tuner, weight at the end of the barrel without going past it. But it’s not practical for tactical use. So compromises have to be made. As to which compromises you’re happy to live with in order to make it practical for tactical use, that’s your money.

    View attachment 7528097

    The tmb was originally designed to work with thick, heavy carbon barrels because they seemed to be the least affected by a barrel tuner and what was found was making a really effective tuner translated over well to the thick contour m24/mtu/straight barrels that are used in prs.

    A small elongated weight past the muzzle is going to have much less affect on the harmonics and the effect it does have originates past the muzzle, so youre tuning from past the muzzle. This also makes it harder to tune, we want the effect to be at the muzzle so it’s easier to tune, we want to tune from the muzzle. A compact heavy weight right at the muzzle like the above design is much more effective at changing the harmonics dramatically where they are needed and is the same location of the weight on the tmb. It was put there for a reason. It locks in place for a reason.

    As for the weight being right on the end and not locking in place. Well we have locking turrets on scopes for a reason. Things can move and for some applications and peoples preferences not moving is important.
    From what I saw of the EC Tuner Brake, its got locking grub screws to lock it into place. So it does lock when tighterned from what I can tell. But the whole tuner brake will act as a tuner. Not just the tuner itself. Any addition of a mass weight to the muzzle of a rifle will act to dampern vibrations.

    The tuners that I play with normally have a muzzle overhang. And experience has shown me that they can be tuned in very quick indeed. I've seen barrels with 35rds on them from new go on to win Queens level events. So I dont know how they are harder to tune.

    Tuners are a Dark Art. No one knows whose or what design is best. And quantifying it is damn hard. There isnt an established procedure to test or prove anything with them. It all comes down to peoples interpretation of the science.

    I never said the EC Tuner Brake is perfect, but seems to me that its the best compremise to meet the requirements of Varmint, PRS, etc. If I didnt want a brake incorporated with the tuner I would just make my own like I normally do. But trying to machine the ports for the brake on manual gear isnt easy. But again, this is just my opinion and interpretation of the science.
     
    Last edited:

    Quickoz

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 14, 2010
    217
    4
    30
    Two Rocks, Western Australia
    From what I’ve seen the set screws just hold it in place just like the ec tuner.

    The weight of the device will dampen vibrations to an extent but the length of the device determines how effective it will be at that. Sure anything on the end of a barrel changes harmonics to an extent but effectively damping harmonics is a totally different thing. Plus youre adding a small weight that actually moves to tune the vibrations to the end of a long device and it’s just not optimal.
    For ar10 style barrels I’m sure it works fine like in his video but long m24/mtu/straight barrels it might be annoying to tune with/might not affect the barrel enough with its limited adjustment range.

    From what I can see the design seems to stem from manufacturing cost and simplicity, which is fine there’s plenty of room in the market place for all types of designs and price points but it doesn’t seem to be how you would design something to make it optimal for modern bolt guns. Like the original proven/effective ec tuner.
    As I said above, if I was happy with just a tuner, then I wouldnt make it like that. But adding the brake adds more complication and work. And your also trying to limit the added weight to make it practical for field use. I understand the limitations of the requirements. We can debate all day long about the merits of either and which is better until we are blue in the face. We will never know who is right and wrong really. Only way thats determined is by wins on the board at the end of the day.

    The other thing the EC Tuner Brake has over yours is price, its $100USD cheaper. Thats alot of money in these times. Espesically for us Aussies where its an even bigger difference due to the exchange rate.
     

    Quickoz

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 14, 2010
    217
    4
    30
    Two Rocks, Western Australia
    I would say weight is a concern because I highly doubt that anyone would want one of the F-Class tuners favored by the Aussie F-Open Rifle Team on their rifle.

    All I'm saying is that what your direction is, isn't the ONLY one. I don't much care if you think I'm wrong. Tuners are a dark art and is something that is still being explored by a lot of people.

    And this thread is about the EC Tuner Brake, you have hijacked it and turned it into your own. I understand your trying to sell a product, but saying this product is wrong when your trying to sell your own doesn't lend as much weight to your arguments. Its biased info.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Sniperwannabee

    Ledzep

    Chancellor
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 9, 2009
    3,065
    2,414
    NE
    I don't care if you use factory ammo. What I'd really like to see is 20 rounds with one and 20 rounds 'tuned', ammo the same between. I understand 40 rounds is a lot to ask for, though. IDC if the ammo is factory, tuned for the tuner, or otherwise. I just want to see a real, defined, repeatable, difference caused by the tuner.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    2aBaCa

    Humans are amusing
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 27, 2019
    3,409
    3,580
    Behind enemy lines Northern Commiefornia
    No. I mean if 3 shots to tune it in works as has been shown on various posts/videos then I'd like to see 10 shots of 'tuned' vs. 10 shots without the tuner.

    Im with you. Even EC does it. They tune and find a good 3 shot group and the evaluation ends. Nobody ever does follow up groups to show how consistent it is from that point on.

    I would like to see a string of groups without the device and a string of groups after tuning.
     

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    Since tuners are becoming mainstream and 2021 will be the year of the tuner has anyone done the math.

    We know the length and stiffness of the barrel /contour and it’s material.

    We know the weight and distance the tuner moves per setting/rotation.

    Has anyone actually sat down on a spreadsheet and figured out the weight/distance formulas.

    After that’s figured out there is no more debate over if a particular tuner works or not on “your” rifle.

    X-weight has to move y-distance for this barrel length/contour.

    I would think after that, tuners can properly be sized for the correct/particular barrel specs.

    These are not one size fits all accessories.
    I thought I would add my thoughts around how the tuners might work. I am replying to this comment only because it's kind of where the that part of the discussion kicked off.

    Firstly I will say that I am not an expert on barrel dynamics or internal ballistics, but I have spent a significant amount of time working in fields that are concerned with the behavior of metal components and structures responding to high speed loading events (what happens in a gun).

    The most basic effect taking place as soon as you ignite the powder in the case, is that the sharp rise pressure in the chamber causes elastic (hopefully not plastic) stress waves to begin traveling through the barrel and action. The speed of sound in steel is roughly 5150 meters/sec, it's actually around 5000m/s in most metals and stiff composites. I used GRT to tell me that a 120grain projectile from a 6.5 Creedmoor will take about 1.35 milliseconds to exit a 24 inch barrel (all subject to load etc.) In this time, information could have gone from the chamber to the muzzle and back almost 6 times. But this is more of the micro behavior, the macro behavior is the result of all that stress information pinging back and forth along the barrel and action/stock. Especially for long thin structures light skyscrapers and rifle barrels there are a number of what are called "mode shapes" that the structure can take when oscillating. Mathematically there are actually an infinite number of mode shapes, but in reality the energy associated with those higher modes is probably irrelevant for most circumstances. Check out this video to get a basic ideal of what I am talking about
    . The difference between the video and a rifle barrel is that the rifle barrel is much stiffer, it doesn't have discretely lumped masses, and oscillations are not being induced in a dominating 2D orientation of the loading (among other things). But the principal is the same. Depending on the loading, the stiffness and the mass distribution of the system certain modes will carry more energy than other modes and the behavior of those modes will be dominating the displacements of the barrel in 3D. One thing the video doesn't show, but that would certainly be possible to demonstrate in the setup, is how changing the mass at one point can affect which mode shape dominates as well as what the displacements are. I think that is basically what the tuner is doing, it is probably manipulating which mode shape is dominant if it lumps more mass on the end of the barrel than would have otherwise been there, but more importantly, by moving the mass you are changing the mode shape. Changing it to a condition that is more favorable/repeatable for consistent bullet release from the barrel crown.

    An additional aspect to consider is that part of it is timing, as I said the stress information is moving around your barrel/action/stock system at 5150m/s, so the ideal conditions at the muzzle of the barrel are surely changing with time. Moving the mass or changing the load or changing the seating depth or changing the neck tension could slightly change when the bullet leaves the barrel, relative to the conditions at the muzzle, and whether they are favorable or not.

    Could we calculate/model all of this with any degree of accuracy to predict exactly what the barrel was doing for a given action/load/bullet/etc combination, so we could know right where to set the tuner before the shot? No, (absolutely not, not even with a super computer and the current state of the art numerical tools, at least not IMO)

    Could we calculate how much mass you would have to move forwards or backwards, by how much, relative to the end of the barrel to be able to change the vibrational behavior (mode shapes) of the barrel? Yes, (or at least I think you could). Running some finite element models, making some assumptions, and playing around with adding mass to the end of the barrel and moving its position could probably start to give you an idea.
     

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    yea...my ATS is the new tapered one....I like it better...wasn't worried so much about knocking it off it's setting pulling off/out of a barricade...just snagging it and maybe having me put my muzzle in an unsafe direction when I'm in a hurry.
    Do you feel like there is still enough meat on your threads for your muzzle break after installing the ATS? If you were getting a new barrel made up would you ask for a slightly longer threaded section?
     

    brianf

    Private
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 8, 2010
    3,300
    3,515
    43
    NY
    I thought I would add my thoughts around how the tuners might work. I am replying to this comment only because it's kind of where the that part of the discussion kicked off.

    Firstly I will say that I am not an expert on barrel dynamics or internal ballistics, but I have spent a significant amount of time working in fields that are concerned with the behavior of metal components and structures responding to high speed loading events (what happens in a gun).

    The most basic effect taking place as soon as you ignite the powder in the case, is that the sharp rise pressure in the chamber causes elastic (hopefully not plastic) stress waves to begin traveling through the barrel and action. The speed of sound in steel is roughly 5150 meters/sec, it's actually around 5000m/s in most metals and stiff composites. I used GRT to tell me that a 120grain projectile from a 6.5 Creedmoor will take about 1.35 milliseconds to exit a 24 inch barrel (all subject to load etc.) In this time, information could have gone from the chamber to the muzzle and back almost 6 times. But this is more of the micro behavior, the macro behavior is the result of all that stress information pinging back and forth along the barrel and action/stock. Especially for long thin structures light skyscrapers and rifle barrels there are a number of what are called "mode shapes" that the structure can take when oscillating. Mathematically there are actually an infinite number of mode shapes, but in reality the energy associated with those higher modes is probably irrelevant for most circumstances. Check out this video to get a basic ideal of what I am talking about
    . The difference between the video and a rifle barrel is that the rifle barrel is much stiffer, it doesn't have discretely lumped masses, and oscillations are not being induced in a dominating 2D orientation of the loading (among other things). But the principal is the same. Depending on the loading, the stiffness and the mass distribution of the system certain modes will carry more energy than other modes and the behavior of those modes will be dominating the displacements of the barrel in 3D. One thing the video doesn't show, but that would certainly be possible to demonstrate in the setup, is how changing the mass at one point can affect which mode shape dominates as well as what the displacements are. I think that is basically what the tuner is doing, it is probably manipulating which mode shape is dominant if it lumps more mass on the end of the barrel than would have otherwise been there, but more importantly, by moving the mass you are changing the mode shape. Changing it to a condition that is more favorable/repeatable for consistent bullet release from the barrel crown.

    An additional aspect to consider is that part of it is timing, as I said the stress information is moving around your barrel/action/stock system at 5150m/s, so the ideal conditions at the muzzle of the barrel are surely changing with time. Moving the mass or changing the load or changing the seating depth or changing the neck tension could slightly change when the bullet leaves the barrel, relative to the conditions at the muzzle, and whether they are favorable or not.

    Could we calculate/model all of this with any degree of accuracy to predict exactly what the barrel was doing for a given action/load/bullet/etc combination, so we could know right where to set the tuner before the shot? No, (absolutely not, not even with a super computer and the current state of the art numerical tools, at least not IMO)

    Could we calculate how much mass you would have to move forwards or backwards, by how much, relative to the end of the barrel to be able to change the vibrational behavior (mode shapes) of the barrel? Yes, (or at least I think you could). Running some finite element models, making some assumptions, and playing around with adding mass to the end of the barrel and moving its position could probably start to give you an idea.
    Thanks for the explanation,

    upon the ignition or powder and pressure curve you bring up a great point of a pressure “donut “ starting at chamber and moving in both directions I presume.

    as a gut call do you think this relatively uniform “donut “ wave contributes or amplifies the other energy producing barrel yaw?

    if so I’m wondering if a dampening/absorbing material like rubber being wrapped around a barrel would reduce its effect etc.

    Thanks
     

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    Thanks for the explanation,

    upon the ignition or powder and pressure curve you bring up a great point of a pressure “donut “ starting at chamber and moving in both directions I presume.

    as a gut call do you think this relatively uniform “donut “ wave contributes or amplifies the other energy producing barrel yaw?

    if so I’m wondering if a dampening/absorbing material like rubber being wrapped around a barrel would reduce its effect etc.

    Thanks
    Yes, stress waves will propagate in both directions at soon at the material around the case is loaded. I would assume that initially whoop stress ("donut") will be the largest component of stress in the chamber and this info will start propagating immediately. As the bullet begins to move and some frictional resistance develops between the bullet and the lands, I assume that the axial loads start to climb (barrel wants pull out of action threads and bolt lugs are pushing against stops). While the bullet is moving that pressure behind it is stressing new parts of the barrel with whoop stress, but it's dropping at some point of course because, the volume is increasing. (There is pressure waves moving back and forth in the combustions gases between the back of the brass cartridge and the bullet base, the speed of sound in gases depends on temperature, pressure, and what the gas is)

    At some point if I ever have the time and resources (who am I kidding) I would love to fully model the entire process, not because I could use it calculate an exact value of some specific aspect of motion, but because it would create a great visual about all the complex processes taking place at once. It would help with qualitative understanding of what is going on.

    As far as a dampening material........if it was something relatively soft and light like rubber, I think the steel would just deflect it without dissipating much strain energy. It is was heavy it might help, but then so would a larger OD barrel to increase stiffness.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: brianf

    Ledzep

    Chancellor
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 9, 2009
    3,065
    2,414
    NE
    You could model each grain in the barrel steel as a mass, and each grain boundary as a spring for a 7394200394892302384 DOF system then change charge weight by 0.2gr at a time to tune the system in.

    :)

    ETA: Don't forget to model in the 4,000 psi peak pressure variance from shot to shot.

    Oh, I'm sorry... Is my skepticism for "tuning" showing?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    Regardless of how it all works, and as interesting as it might all be, "the proof is in the pudding" as they say.

    Here is what I would love to see from the folks that have a tuner (of any brand TBH):

    -What is the average of 3, 5 shots groups using your best hand loaded recipe in your rifle without the tuner?

    -Change the seating depth and presumably mess up your grouping capability
    -Use the tuner to "dial in" the barrel while using the non-ideal (but consistent) seat depth
    -What is the average of 3, 5 shots groups using the barrel turner with a non-ideal seating depth

    -When you have the barrel tuner on can you squeeze anymore out of your initial best load?
     

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    You could model each grain in the barrel steel as a mass, and each grain boundary as a spring for a 7394200394892302384 DOF system then change charge weight by 0.2gr at a time to tune the system in.

    :)

    ETA: Don't forget to model in the 4,000 psi peak pressure variance from shot to shot.

    Oh, I'm sorry... Is my skepticism for "tuning" showing?
    I agree, we can't predict it. But, if there is a macro behavior that is repeatable, and we can change it with the position of a mass on the end of a barrel, we should be able to show with testing whether it worth doing for our purpose or not.

    If I can just seat my bullets to a nominal depth, choose a speed I want to run, and then tune in my groups, I'd like that.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Ledzep

    Ledzep

    Chancellor
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jun 9, 2009
    3,065
    2,414
    NE
    Seems like your best bet for making it exhibit macro behavior is to give it macro physics.

    I'd give more credence to strapping a LARGE weight to the muzzle (actually making it emulate a single mass/spring system) than moving a few ounces a few thou at a time on a 7lb pipe.
     

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    Been thinking.....if you were using a largish muzzle break (apa fat bastard 7.2oz, ATS tuner 6.0oz), could you buy a pack of shim washers and achieve the same results buy just shifting your muzzle break forward with the shims? I know it would be less practical, but once set it would also be less intrusive. As far as I can figure all the different tuners really do is position mass forwards or backwards until the group shrinks. From what I can make out the turners are only shifting the mass by about 1-2mm. EC turner spec is 3 shot group every 1/12th a rotation, which on 24tpi is about 0.0033" of travel along the axis (I think). So buy a pack of .003" shim washers and go to town?
     

    mudpig

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 6, 2013
    348
    118
    49
    Tacoma, WA
    Been thinking.....if you were using a largish muzzle break (apa fat bastard 7.2oz, ATS tuner 6.0oz), could you buy a pack of shim washers and achieve the same results buy just shifting your muzzle break forward with the shims? I know it would be less practical, but once set it would also be less intrusive. As far as I can figure all the different tuners really do is position mass forwards or backwards until the group shrinks. From what I can make out the turners are only shifting the mass by about 1-2mm. EC turner spec is 3 shot group every 1/12th a rotation, which on 24tpi is about 0.0033" of travel along the axis (I think). So buy a pack of .003" shim washers and go to town?
    I've been doing similar to this with my suppressor. I've been shimming/timing my suppressor in Increments of .003 out to one full rotation (.042). The results have been very enlightening!!!!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    Smittiac

    Sergeant of the Hide
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 8, 2020
    209
    85
    CA
    So I'm right with you guys on figuring out how to do this without buying the thing(even though I bought the tuner already and am just "patiently" waiting) yes you can shim your brake etc. BUT can you just toss it on any rifle you dialed it in for, set it to the number and go shoot bugholes? Nah you would have to buy a thing(brake can w/e) for each rifle and "tune" each one. I'm getting it personally based on that fact only gotta get one lol.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    So I'm right with you guys on figuring out how to do this without buying the thing(even though I bought the tuner already and am just "patiently" waiting) yes you can shim your brake etc. BUT can you just toss it on any rifle you dialed it in for, set it to the number and go shoot bugholes? Nah you would have to buy a thing(brake can w/e) for each rifle and "tune" each one. I'm getting it personally based on that fact only gotta get one lol.
    That makes sense. Especially for rifles you aren't carrying a long way and don't worry about the weight.
     

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    So I'm right with you guys on figuring out how to do this without buying the thing(even though I bought the tuner already and am just "patiently" waiting) yes you can shim your brake etc. BUT can you just toss it on any rifle you dialed it in for, set it to the number and go shoot bugholes? Nah you would have to buy a thing(brake can w/e) for each rifle and "tune" each one. I'm getting it personally based on that fact only gotta get one lol.
    Another way of looking at it, assuming you could achieve the same performance either way; shims are cheap, so you can just setup and leave each rifle with its own set.

    That being said, the process of dialing in would be way more time consuming with shims vs tuner.

    Both of those points apply to having different loads for each rifle as well.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: mudpig

    hlee

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jul 14, 2012
    4,655
    4,796
    42
    TX
    By the time you have completed reading this thread, you could have already ordered, received, and tested a barrel tuner of your choice. By the time you've run the calculations on whether or not it will work, you could have already worked enough hours to pay for your new toy.

    That reminds me. I need to load up some rounds for the testing of my new barrel tuner.
     

    kthomas

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 17, 2009
    3,188
    3,689
    33
    Tucson, AZ
    No. I mean if 3 shots to tune it in works as has been shown on various posts/videos then I'd like to see 10 shots of 'tuned' vs. 10 shots without the tuner.

    My skepticism towards tuners appears to be in line with yours.

    The only evidence that I've seen that allegedly purports that tuners work, is with sample sizes so small that it's statistically insignificant, and borders more as anecdotal evidence more then anything.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    kthomas

    Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 17, 2009
    3,188
    3,689
    33
    Tucson, AZ
    You gotta chew your own steak...

    I'm a broke student. If I actually had an income, I would try it myself at some point.

    Unfortunately I don't, though I find the current trend of tuners in our discipline fascinating. It seems that other disciplines that have had tuners for much longer (F-class, benchrest) are pretty mixed on them. Some like them, some don't. It's far from a consensus, and I think that in itself is telling. Even the worlds leading ballistician, Bryan Litz, isn't convinced they work.

    As an individual that watches these threads with interest, I've yet to see much compelling evidence to suggest they work. Now, that doesn't mean they don't work either, but they do bring in another potential failure point to the rifle. Are the downsides worth any performance gain? Arguably, I would say not if you reload. For those that shoot factory ammo, the argument for a tuner is more compelling.

    I have nothing against tuners, those who use tuners and those who make tuners. I think the trend is fascinating, and I'm curious if the popularity of tuners in our discipline increases, or if it becomes a fad that fades into obscurity.

    I'll continue to watch tuner threads with interest. I'm open minded on them, and curious to the real benefits and downsides. Perhaps we can convince @padom to do some larger scale tuner testing?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    What I would love to see from anyone with a tuner, ideally with 5no. 5 shot groups at each configuration (3no. 5 shot groups ok).


    Hand Load Comparisons: 60 - 100 rounds (plus tuning rounds and load development rounds)

    -Best hand load you can get for your rifle with the best techniques you have then (fire set of groups, no tuner)
    (best performance you can get without a tuner)

    -Pick a nominal seating depth from your development that you know gave much worse groups and tune it as best you can then (fire set of groups)
    (best performance you can get with tuner and nominal seating depth)

    -Take off tuner and use non-ideal seating depth then (fire set of groups, no tuner)
    (shows how bad it would really be over 5 groups without tuner)

    -Use your original "best" hand load recipe and the use the tuner to get tighter if possible then (fire set of groups)
    (can turner add anything to any already optimized hand load)


    Factory Comparisons: 30 - 50 rounds (plus tuning rounds) (repeat with more than one factory ammo for additional data)

    -Get some match ammo then (fire set of groups, no tuner)
    (base performance with that factory ammo)

    -Follow the tuning process with the factory ammo and the tuner, then (fire set of groups)
     
    Last edited:

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    What I would love to see from anyone with a tuner, ideally with 5no. 5 shot groups at each configuration (3no. 5 shot groups ok).


    Hand Load Comparisons: 60 - 100 rounds (plus tuning rounds and load development rounds)

    -Best hand load you can get for your rifle with the best techniques you have then (fire set of groups, no tuner)
    (best performance you can get without a tuner)

    -Pick a nominal seating depth from your development that you know gave much worse groups and tune it as best you can then (fire set of groups) (best performance you can get with tuner and nominal seating depth)

    -Take off tuner and use non-ideal seating depth then (fire set of groups, no tuner)
    (shows how bad it would really be over 5 groups without tuner)

    -Use your original "best" hand load recipe and the use the tuner to get tighter if possible then (fire set of groups)
    (can turner add anything to any already optimized hand load)


    Factory Comparisons: 30 - 50 rounds (plus tuning rounds) (repeat with more than one factory ammo for additional data)

    -Get some match ammo then (fire set of groups, no tuner)
    (base performance with that factory ammo)

    -Follow the tuning process with the factory ammo and the tuner, then (fire set of groups)
    If someone has the setup and the mind to do this I would contribute to the cost of the process (ammo). I am waiting for my rifle that is on order otherwise I would start some of this myself. I don't have the reloading or the shooting experience to do this test justice, if I am being honest;, but it would be useful info for people wanting to know what they could get with a tuner and factory vs hand loading.
     

    spife7980

    Luchador
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 10, 2017
    9,005
    7,392
    Central TX
    If someone has the setup and the mind to do this I would contribute to the cost of the process (ammo). I am waiting for my rifle that is on order otherwise I would start some of this myself. I don't have the reloading or the shooting experience to do this test justice, if I am being honest;, but it would be useful info for people wanting to know what they could get with a tuner and factory vs hand loading.
    Don’t discount yourself, time only allows me to breed bad habits. You might not think you’re a good shoot until you do the testing and find something that validates that you’re a good shooter.
    It’s tough to tell your actual proficiency until you find a good shooting rifle/load that allows you to gauge it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: BFuller

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    Don’t discount yourself, time only allows me to breed bad habits. You might not think you’re a good shoot until you do the testing and find something that validates that you’re a good shooter.
    It’s tough to tell your actual proficiency until you find a good shooting rifle/load that allows you to gauge it.
    Since moving back from a decade in the UK I haven't gotten set up for shooting and reloading yet. I have an action, pre-fit barrel, trigger, and chassis on order.

    I was gonna get reloading gear as well, but I am gonna wait till I actually have some components to bother buying the tools.

    You are probably right though, it would be best to just do this test myself when I have the gear.

    I guess I am kinda wanting to know how far I could get with factory and a turner if I waited to go down the reloading rabbit hole.
     
    Last edited:

    padom

    SuperMod
    Staff member
    Moderator
    PX Member
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Mar 13, 2013
    10,078
    4,869
    Southeastern, Pennsylvania
    If someone has the setup and the mind to do this I would contribute to the cost of the process (ammo). I am waiting for my rifle that is on order otherwise I would start some of this myself. I don't have the reloading or the shooting experience to do this test justice, if I am being honest;, but it would be useful info for people wanting to know what they could get with a tuner and factory vs hand loading.

    I may be interested in doing this testing as described above if someone contributed the ammo. I don't own or shoot factory ammo. Have to talk to a few companies about getting a tuner to test....next would be which caliber....preferably 308, 223rem or 6.5cm
     
    • Like
    Reactions: kthomas and BFuller

    BFuller

    Science Nerd
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 27, 2011
    45
    10
    Tracy, CA
    I may be interested in doing this testing as described above if someone contributed the ammo. I don't own or shoot factory ammo. Have to talk to a few companies about getting a tuner to test....next would be which caliber....preferably 308, 223rem or 6.5cm
    I don't think the caliber matters too much, as long as you know it already shoots well with your pet handload.
     

    Smittiac

    Sergeant of the Hide
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 8, 2020
    209
    85
    CA
    I may be interested in doing this testing as described above if someone contributed the ammo. I don't own or shoot factory ammo. Have to talk to a few companies about getting a tuner to test....next would be which caliber....preferably 308, 223rem or 6.5cm
    6.5cm would be the cheapest to shoot with similar ballistic characteristics to many other large calibers.

    Any updates on when the second batch is going to start shipping?
     
    Last edited: