Look closer at Vaughn's work where he determines the barrel harmonics based on the target from shooting a charge weight ladder; the frequencies he reports range from around 6-10,000 cycles per second! I have used his procedure to analyze targets from charge weight ladders I have shot and find the same. Many shooters rely on the Audette charge weight ladder as a primary method of tuning. These frequencies are very special!
Without a tuner, the barrel frequency of resonance is fixed, what changes is the amplitude based on the load and of course accuracy is partly based on where the crown is in its axis of movement at the moment the slug parts contact. Obviously the other parts of the “load information” you mention have to do the most with reducing the velocity deviation shot to shot.
How exactly does Brian Litz benefit financially from showing that tuners don’t work?
If someone could prove to him that they do work he could then manufacture his own version. Whether there is proof that they do or they don't the test and debate produce publish conversations that people pay to read. Either way he still makes money. Not that difficult
Hype sells books , you can not see that? And why would you think he proved anything . From what I hear it was more speculative than anything . I have much larger samples than 1400 Rds and I could prove they work as well as many many other shooters . So why can he not prove it ? Because he will not listen to the shooters that do know and that is ok by me .
Where can I find this info?
In my files, they are not public. I could put some together though but is primarily reserved for the military use only.
No biggie! I was trying to lighten the mood a little bit.
There is always more to learn in my case about statistics but I have demonstrated the concept and highly detailed explanations on here and many others have as well, ladders , computer simulations and has been done for years this way . The problem is here it seems to be a statistic contest to see who can discount each other’s data that is presented Instead of trying the same techniques that have been used for years by scientists and shooters alike . Shooting a lot of shots with the same exit timing with small adjustments can contain a lot of noise in itself simply by the structure of the test .Not controlling variables like barrel temp and wind (no flags )and it means a lot so large statistics does not mean it was applied in a way that will show anything definitive especially when it has happened so many times already .. When a measurement is taken of a particular movement large statistics can cloud the movements by not controlling the variables properly which is more important by far. I have shot many ladder tests over the years that did not repeat , why ? Simply because the barrel temp changed the repeatability . So once the temp was repeated so did the patterns . If Bryan or anybody does not take that to heart then the test is void 100% just because of that one variable alone .What needs to be implemented is focus on variables more than statistics .
reading what you wrote i think that is what gets confusing to many good or bad..even my opinion has wavered on this thread alone
Can you explain what you mean by that?
You are not reading , it is always repeatable if the variables held tight . That is the main reason why it does not repeat .No one says 3shot groups are absolute , most shooters change powder more like .5 grains not .2 .variables !!!! Read before you start your rants !!!!
Better barrels produce better groups with adequate development. It's not so much about the quality of barrel because it is the Contour the size in relation to or diameter the bedding the Fire Control mechanism the cartridge and volume of powder that you're using the weight of the projectile Etc. Every barrel can benefit from a tuner in some form or fashion. A lot of it depends on what you're using the tuner for. Even your structured barrels was self proclaimed harmonically dead benefit from a tuner. Most quality barrels and builds don't have difficulty showing accuracy at 100 yards. And Tuners don't really shine at those distances in order to finally tune what you cannot do adequately with loads a tuner reveals improvements at 500 to 700 yards
Precision Rifle Gear - Adaptive Tuner - Kinetic Security Solutions
I am jumping into the Tuner World, which I think is an awesome direction, Grabbed a few to give them a try, for a guy like me who uses factory ammo, this should be a nice improvement. I know we have a bunch of other tuner threads, didn't see a dedicated Adaptive ones.www.snipershide.com
Lowlight pretty much sums up that good barrels aren't going to see a big improvement and I agree. Maybe someone can do a video that shows its repeatable over a number of rounds?
Really you don't understand what I'm getting at. I did not say that groups improve at distance. It's easier to adjust and see Improvement at 500 to 700 yd with a tuner versus 100 yd
Let me put it this way , my barrel will aim a slower Bullet(36fps ) higher at 100 yards which is tough to do , in which they will hit the same height down range , any velocity variance within that range will do the same . I can demonstrate it anytime .let’s stick to tuners for now to keep this thread on track .Range Report - How can a rifle shoot poorly at 100 but well at 1000?
Are you still Jaw Jacking ... Serious, you showed your ass, pretending to find ways to make a group smaller at distance, Laughable, Your choices on posting are gonna get really limited really quick if you keep it up, You're the new Jim Acosta of SH, spreading Fake News cause you got...
This thread says otherwise and I believe it was Bryan litz that shot at a clear board at 100 and rounds past that proved that a 1moa gun at 100 yards was the same at 300.
Can you post any links to your test that have been shown time and time again?
Positive compensation has never been convincingly shown for centerfire.
Want proof of what I'm saying it's really simple forget what distance you shot at before and what your group size was. Shoot two five shot groups at 700 yards let's say your average group size between both of those groups for example is 5 inches if you're still not happy confirm that with two more five shot groups again the results wasn't average of approximately 5 in now you're satisfied that it was not a fluke so now you adjust your tuner and close your groups to be tighter than the other four groups that you shot. This is why you tune at distance not 100 yards because the distance due to extrapolation shows what's your tuner actually does. Now if you cannot understand that then I'll explain it another way. Let's say you own a factory remington 700 Sendero in 308. You buy brand new Remington Corelock ammo 168 grain you get very familiar with the rifle and you've confirmed that you can shoot a consistent 15-in group at 500 yards. Do you not believe that if you try different brands of ammo different grain weights that you might be able to shoot a much tighter group at the same distance? This is what the word "tuner"means
Damn Foxtrot is a 6 hr drive but what the heck at least it may be warmer down there . I am game.
Tempting but I’m not sure this is how I want to spend my scarce vacation time…
I think that is a good thread . After reading through I think there is a slight misconception and is totally understandable . Bad seating depth causes 2 problems , increases velocity variance in which a tuner will correct for and sometimes causes random dispersion which a tuner will not correct , for that reason some may not see an improvement due to the random dispersion caused by seating depth with factory ammo . I could be wrong but with Frank it could be the reason because I know he is a good shooter..Precision Rifle Gear - Adaptive Tuner - Kinetic Security Solutions
I am jumping into the Tuner World, which I think is an awesome direction, Grabbed a few to give them a try, for a guy like me who uses factory ammo, this should be a nice improvement. I know we have a bunch of other tuner threads, didn't see a dedicated Adaptive ones.
Lowlight pretty much sums up that good barrels aren't going to see a big improvement and I agree. Maybe someone can do a video that shows its repeatable over a number of rounds?
Every one is ignoring you due to the fact that your a stupid ass. Its people like you that hinder the advancements of the shooting sports..
Dont waste yout time on people who dont have ears to hear. Dont waste your breath on stupid ass people. There are lots of people who want to learn and are intrested. Point of this post was and still is no book on tuners dont work. No published shitty test will change the fact that 100s of the best shooters in benchrest and f class will continue to use them.
I think the shooting sports are more hindered by those who bring insults instead of data to discussions.
What the fuck are “velocity platoes”? Is English your second langauge?Yes, when Bryan Litz in his new book modern-advancements-long-range-shooting volume 3 find out that tuners didnt work for him like everybody are aimnimg for, he made such a stir...
all snake oil of tuner sellers are raving about how his test is bullshit, how they can find a node with 2 shots, they are experts in reading 3 shot groups, they can find velocity platoes with one shot where Bryan cant find those platoes with 10 shots, and Bryan didnt find that with only 1° of turn your gun will become world champion...
all comunity is in delirium, because Bryan didnt see that tuners work. it is just the same if i say to some retarded chatolic that there is no god... anger everywhere!
but those retarded people cant read what corelation Bryan DID find: heavier object on the muzzle produce smaller groups!
so those snake oil producers, youtube 2 shot groups experts, velocity platoes gurus only need to hange something heavy on their barrel and they will shoot smaller groups!! no stupid turns of tuners, no retarder interpreting 2 shot POI, no nice rounded 3-shot groups. just something heavy at the end of the barrel!!!
have fun retards!
Sorry I missed that comment , but will answer it the best I can . Statistics being already done for accuracy . When testing a movement ,I must control certain variables in a differing fashion than most . I do not want the average of all of the differing movements with no regard for certain variables .I want to see the actual movement but will still shoot 5 shots per charge but not in succession to control barrel temperature and then see the change of the movement after adjustment of weight at the muzzle . These are critical variables that I have already determined that are effecting by many years of past testing . When something changes unexpectedly I will stop and find the variable before I continue . With that said , when I ran ladder patterns , the patterns changed , why ?barrel temp . Every ladder I test with the exact same barrel temp . When I shoot the ladder I am shooting 1 shot of each powder charge side by side with each shot logged in with the barrel temperature .Then the barrel is cooled completely to maintain the exact same temp throughout the next ladder . Once done I will overlay all 5 graphs for and average to gain confidence in my test with low round counts . The next variable is when I test for vertical components in shots , I never test in a tail wind or head wind . The next is wind in general , I will test with a wind flag every 20 yards in my scopes view to insure the validity of the testing as well at 100 yards or I shoot in a test tunnel . I also make sure the sand bag I am shooting on is settled perfectly before testing as well . Not going to trust a bipod or any variant there of . Absolute solidity and tracking is paramount . When I do not see these variables controlled in any way I will question the validity of any tuner test , even Bryan’s .
Throught this post mr marky mark it the only one that has been insulting any one go back and read.
exactly. and we must prevent that people wont learn from those who repeat old lies, like you.
I agree but to compare that to electrical formulas is a little different , wind is ever changing , heat and wear and friction is ever changing . Resistance and capacitance and the relationship are a constant if they were not it too would be argued, this is more like trying to calculate amps or ohms in a circuit with constantly changing volts(variables ). Marky Mark seems to want to wreck this thread and every other thread to satisfy his moral obligation he states . He is the main reason for the arguments and Badass guns is just tired of it and I don’t blame him , I am too . I suspect he was barrelstroker , everybody thinks we do not notice a change in screen name but the same writing style gives them away . If everybody had to use their real name there would be much less arguments.
I may be late in this conversation but Sir, this is the best argument I’ve read so far regarding tuners. Thank you…
