Since barrel tuners have become more in vogue the last while. Just wondering what kinds and results without fourty pagers of documented evidence required the average person has experienced. Your testing methods and ammo useage ETC. Picks of results are great but not required. No bar graphs or links to other sites or references of previous writings allowed. This is for the average DUDE and what theyve experienced. No bias on threaded muzzles or negatives towards threaded barrels or brakes or tuners allowed! So for those, You know who you are, Dont bother responding!
Results with barrel tuners and brakes
- Thread starter Longstud
- Start date
Well, I have posted groups on another thread, all with a tuner.
I have yet to really test the tuner or brake I have but the minimal testing I have done is positive for both. But samples are really small. Next week the weather is supposed to get better and I have a couple bricks of center x to test.
Enjoy.
I have yet to really test the tuner or brake I have but the minimal testing I have done is positive for both. But samples are really small. Next week the weather is supposed to get better and I have a couple bricks of center x to test.
Enjoy.
I've used both tuners and brakes, as well as whatever random objects I've had on hand to add weight to muzzles, and have found success with a few things in limited amounts.
To be brief ish, my most recent testing was with a Tuna Can. My goal was not accuracy related - i was looking to balance my rifle without losing much accuracy.
At 50y, my rifle consistently shoots in the .2s to .5s with most lots of SK ammo with a muzzle velocity around 1105FPS, without a tuner. Doesn't really matter what color the box is as long as it's of the faster variety.
Measuring increased accuracy at 50y by adjusting the tuner was a fools errand - nothing I tried made any repeatable improvements, but some settings made obvious worse groups.
At 100y, I was able to play with the tune and make some improvements. I thought 100 would be a sweet spot to test because group sizes would be big enough that improvements could be measured and trends seen, and wind in good conditions wouldn't make testing totally worthless. I was able to take pretty consistent groups between 3/4" - 1.25" (rifle without tuner) and tighten them up a bit better with the tuner, the largest right around an inch (and most frequent) but the smallest tightening up to maybe 5/8". It sounds great, but in reality the average was probably still within 0.1" of each other.
Then I took that tune and shot it at 50. My groups were averaging closer to 3/4", doubling what typical non tuner results looked like.
Same tune went out to 200y. Non tuner typical results of 3-4" vertical turned into 7-9" groups with the tuner. It was at that point (and that point was the night before a match) that the tuner left my rifle for good and I re-zeroed back to my no tune POI.
To summarize my results and thought process:
Any ammo can be tuned for better results at a single distance, but those better results will probably not out-perform just finding a better lot if possible. And depending on how accurate the rifle is, the increased accuracy may be minimal if even observable.
Tuning for one distance definitely does not guarantee success at others. If I was hell-bent on making an inaccurate rifle perform, I could probably find something that makes a moderate increase at some distance with minimal losses at others that may make sense to use.
In the end, I came to the realization that my rifle performs spectacularly without a tuner, and the tuner made it so much worse for the multi distance/multi conditions/multi ammo reality that I shoot, that it wasn't worth the perfect rifle balance the tuner gave to me. Shooting 3/4" groups at 100y vs 1.25" groups at 100y isn't going to gain me any points - but shooting 3/4" groups instead of 1/4" groups at 50y and 9" groups instead of 4" groups at 200y is very likely going to lose me some.
Same type of results were found on a second rifle of mine, as well as a friends who I loaned the can to before he removed it from his rifle.
It's not exhaustive testing, but it was enough for me to never put one on my rifle again. If I was shooting BR matched at set distances, it would make sense. For barricade benchrest, the time and money invested in finding the "perfect tune" would be much better spent practicing building solid positions and reading the environment.
YMMV. The tuner didn't meet my requirements, but it may act entirely differently for others.
To be brief ish, my most recent testing was with a Tuna Can. My goal was not accuracy related - i was looking to balance my rifle without losing much accuracy.
At 50y, my rifle consistently shoots in the .2s to .5s with most lots of SK ammo with a muzzle velocity around 1105FPS, without a tuner. Doesn't really matter what color the box is as long as it's of the faster variety.
Measuring increased accuracy at 50y by adjusting the tuner was a fools errand - nothing I tried made any repeatable improvements, but some settings made obvious worse groups.
At 100y, I was able to play with the tune and make some improvements. I thought 100 would be a sweet spot to test because group sizes would be big enough that improvements could be measured and trends seen, and wind in good conditions wouldn't make testing totally worthless. I was able to take pretty consistent groups between 3/4" - 1.25" (rifle without tuner) and tighten them up a bit better with the tuner, the largest right around an inch (and most frequent) but the smallest tightening up to maybe 5/8". It sounds great, but in reality the average was probably still within 0.1" of each other.
Then I took that tune and shot it at 50. My groups were averaging closer to 3/4", doubling what typical non tuner results looked like.
Same tune went out to 200y. Non tuner typical results of 3-4" vertical turned into 7-9" groups with the tuner. It was at that point (and that point was the night before a match) that the tuner left my rifle for good and I re-zeroed back to my no tune POI.
To summarize my results and thought process:
Any ammo can be tuned for better results at a single distance, but those better results will probably not out-perform just finding a better lot if possible. And depending on how accurate the rifle is, the increased accuracy may be minimal if even observable.
Tuning for one distance definitely does not guarantee success at others. If I was hell-bent on making an inaccurate rifle perform, I could probably find something that makes a moderate increase at some distance with minimal losses at others that may make sense to use.
In the end, I came to the realization that my rifle performs spectacularly without a tuner, and the tuner made it so much worse for the multi distance/multi conditions/multi ammo reality that I shoot, that it wasn't worth the perfect rifle balance the tuner gave to me. Shooting 3/4" groups at 100y vs 1.25" groups at 100y isn't going to gain me any points - but shooting 3/4" groups instead of 1/4" groups at 50y and 9" groups instead of 4" groups at 200y is very likely going to lose me some.
Same type of results were found on a second rifle of mine, as well as a friends who I loaned the can to before he removed it from his rifle.
It's not exhaustive testing, but it was enough for me to never put one on my rifle again. If I was shooting BR matched at set distances, it would make sense. For barricade benchrest, the time and money invested in finding the "perfect tune" would be much better spent practicing building solid positions and reading the environment.
YMMV. The tuner didn't meet my requirements, but it may act entirely differently for others.
Last edited:
Thank you for posting your experience. Saves me from doing it myself.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Have tested bolt rifle with a sporter contour barrel and the results were really positive for me. Took a rifle that was good and made it really exciting. Also, allowed me to use a good quality ammo (centerX) that shot pretty crappy to very good. Results stayed positive as far as I would run this set up.
Just started testing a second rifle and first day out was also positive. I think this season we will have 4 to 6 of these rifles in testing.
Will be testing a 10/22 with a tuner as things warm up. First day out was also positive.
FYI, testing will be at 100 then confirmed out to 400.
Snowed on the weekend so my season is SLOW to start.
Stay tuned
Jerry
Just started testing a second rifle and first day out was also positive. I think this season we will have 4 to 6 of these rifles in testing.
Will be testing a 10/22 with a tuner as things warm up. First day out was also positive.
FYI, testing will be at 100 then confirmed out to 400.
Snowed on the weekend so my season is SLOW to start.
Stay tuned
Jerry
Testing the best available ammunition at 100 yards over wind flags without the tuner is my method.
Once a case of that ammo is purchased, testing with the tuner in place can start.
Once the setting is determined, no changes are made to go to 50 yards.
When this lot of ammo is done, the tuner will be cleaned and blown dry with air, only to start the process over again . . . LOL!
Three Harrell tuners have had a home here and now there is only one on my Remington 40XB.
Bad ammo has not been tested so I cannot comment. Rather than disrupt the current settings it won't happen.
One of theRimfire Central sites had a competition for CZ's.
I was high in the sporter class but when I submitted a picture of the set-up, I was moved to unlimited.
The score was sufficiently good that it stood up for first place.
Same ammo was tested without the tuner with poor results. The tuner was replaced but required resetting and similar results could not be duplicated.
But both are history now! That is why I will not be taking the tuner off my BR rimfire.
Once a case of that ammo is purchased, testing with the tuner in place can start.
Once the setting is determined, no changes are made to go to 50 yards.
When this lot of ammo is done, the tuner will be cleaned and blown dry with air, only to start the process over again . . . LOL!
Three Harrell tuners have had a home here and now there is only one on my Remington 40XB.
Bad ammo has not been tested so I cannot comment. Rather than disrupt the current settings it won't happen.
One of theRimfire Central sites had a competition for CZ's.
I was high in the sporter class but when I submitted a picture of the set-up, I was moved to unlimited.
The score was sufficiently good that it stood up for first place.
Same ammo was tested without the tuner with poor results. The tuner was replaced but required resetting and similar results could not be duplicated.
But both are history now! That is why I will not be taking the tuner off my BR rimfire.
Last edited:
WELL according too the OVERLORD of this forum YOUR full of shXt. Great shooting bye the way. Quote "Do you actually own the rifle you speak of?. Anyone see the similarities of what I speak. The Great G has spoken Zzzzzzz
Pretty much duplicating the advantages that Ive experienced. But this coming from a ###ual deviant according too an old pervert, so doesnt really count I guess. HAHA. Wish you get to experience the X22 Series Jerry. Its so much fun and challenges every shooter in every facet of shooiting discipline. it is really the best of all worlds combined. So would not fit the closed minded old fair weather shooters for sure. Its not all off a fat old axx in fair weather. So definately not for the Overlord
I have never tried a tuner, but I shoot with guys who seem to like them who shoot very well. (both center fire and rim fire) Is it because of the tuner, or the premium rifle they put it on... who knows?
I do suspect that barrel weight is a factor in the efficacy of tuners.
As noted above the Tuna Can is heavy and for that reason alone I am drawn to it for my 22 to assist with balance, even if it has no accuracy benefit. As long as it does not negatively affect accuracy, I'm good with it for the balance improvement.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Unfortunately, I think I am busy the weekend that the X/22 match is on.... bummer as I have a nice rifle prepped.
Oh well, next time.
Jerry
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...-Anchutz-1710-Compeition-with-EC-Barrel-Tuner
Easy demonstration of the effect of a tuner - a weight you can precisely move. Can help alot.
You still need to run good ammo but at least, you have a fighting chance to tune the rifle to that ammo.... as opposed to testing various lots which may or may not work out.
Jerry
Easy demonstration of the effect of a tuner - a weight you can precisely move. Can help alot.
You still need to run good ammo but at least, you have a fighting chance to tune the rifle to that ammo.... as opposed to testing various lots which may or may not work out.
Jerry
There's a long thread about the Tuna Can here: https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/2139050-Tuna-can
Here's my results with the Tuna Comp centrefire tuner:
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...920-Tuna-Comp-Testing?p=18834986#post18834986
Here's my results with the Tuna Comp centrefire tuner:
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/for...920-Tuna-Comp-Testing?p=18834986#post18834986
Last edited:
Just curious @rlauney, what rifle did you try the Tuna Can on? Interested in what barrel length and profile specifically.
It was tried on multiple rifles, but was bought for and spent the most time testing on my V22 with a 22" Bartlein Kukri Profile. As I said earlier, this rifle has been so consistently accurate that any improvements would be minimal, if even recordable at best. The goal of the tuna can for me was to address balance issues with minimal decreases in accuracy, and it was unable to meet those requirements.
Limited testing on a friends Bergara B14r 18" showed similar results of being able to improve group size at a specific distance, but opening up groups at other distances. I did not do this testing, but I trust the shooter who did and his findings matched mine.
Testing on Christensen Arms Ranger 22, 20" Carbon Fiber - Can produced significant improvement in accuracy at 50y, produced slightly better improvement at 75/100y. That was the extent of the testing distance as it was a rifle built for ORPS. This was a situation where I was not interested in doing any lot testing, and just wanted to "make something work" on a new rifle. This testing did however showcase another quirk to the can. The link below shows the final testing on the Ranger. There were many other targets shot as I worked through the Can Settings, but these were the last few as I narrowed down a setting. All targets are 5 round groups shot at 50y (forgive the photo quality, it was taken through my spotting scope)
https://www.amazon.ca/photos/share/SPlO8M1mxJSnhbrEvwgmNChx1xVjt4A0GLnk2nkZSDe
Looking at the photo, groups 1-4 are where I'm making very minor adjustments (half stops between markings on the can) to dial in. I stopped at group 4 as the chosen setting being the best group, but reality is it could have just been 5 more consistent rounds. If I was to overlay groups 1-4, total group size was something I could live with. At this point, I tightened the set screw on the can down. I wasn't using my fat wrench, but I didn't put a whole lot of force into tightening it, assuming it was 5-10inlb.
Group 5 shows the result of tightening the set screw.
Group 6 shows the result of loosening the set screw - was it threaded back as far as it was during steps 1-4? Probably not.
Group 7 shows the result of tightening the set screw again, same sort of 5-10inlb pressure.
Group 8 shows set screw loose again, set screw in similar position as group 6.
My takeaway:
Groups 5 & 7 with the set screw tightened down are atrocious and will not meet my expectations.
Groups 6 & 8, while slightly larger group sizes than group 4, are still accurate enough for my needs on this rifle.
Admittedly, part of the problem here is my laziness. To do real testing, you would need to not only find the right setting on the tuna can, but also find the right torque setting on the set screw and make sure it is perfect every time. I had zero interest in wasting the amount of ammo it would take to do this, but, it could be done and potentially find the perfect combination of ammo, can setting, and set screw tension.
What concerns me most is the difference in PoI between groups 1-4, and groups 6 & 8. All of these groups had the set screw loose, though the set screw was likely backed off more in groups 1-4 than it was 6&8. Just simple difference in position of the set screw was enough to shift the PoI by a significant amount. Yes, through proper technique that could be controlled - but my line of thinking is if that the position of a set screw different by 1/16" or 1/8" causes that much shift - what will be the effect of carbon build up, minor bumps on props as transitions are made, or any other weird little variable that will likely occur during a match?
For my purposes, the tuna can doesn't make sense. For my match rifle, I have a hefty stockpile of ammo that shoots very well out of it and see no point in trying to squeeze additional 100ths of an inch of accuracy from one distance at cost of much larger groups at other distances as well as introducing a variable that is very sensitive and produces significant swings in accuracy.
For less accurate rifles, I think with some very structured testing and maintenance, you could produce some significant improvements at enough variable ranges for it to make sense. Ie: If your rifle shoots 1/2 MOA at 50y and sub 1 MOA at 100y, don't mess around with it; but if your rifle shoots 2 MOA at 50y and 3 MOA at 100y, and you don't feel like doing lot testing (or can't given budget or availability constraints) then these tuners will very likely help you improve your accuracy.
Again, YMMV. I'm no professional tester nor do I have the patience or interest in shooting thousands of rounds in controlled environments using pricey tools and equipment to measure every single variable in my process. I came to my own conclusions for my own purposes. While I would never use the Tuna Can on my Vudoo again, if I still had the Ranger I would have kept the Tuna Can on it and likely just removed the set screw entirely from the can so it could never shift.
Both I think, not to mention the optics (if any). And I'm sure only in bench rest shooting, unless you're another Annie Oakley.
The testing done by rlaunay shows there is some problem with the set screw.
What happens when the set screw is abandoned . . . will it retain the setting.
The Harrell tuner appears to have a small ball/bearing that sits in a detent.
Suppose the set screw was turned in to "just contact", then work it in to 1 - 10 inch pounds using the Fat Wrench, firing a five shot group at each setting until the groups open up.
While only one of my rifles currently wears a Harrell, it would be hard to convince me that they can't have positive effects when managed with a proper plan.
What happens when the set screw is abandoned . . . will it retain the setting.
The Harrell tuner appears to have a small ball/bearing that sits in a detent.
Suppose the set screw was turned in to "just contact", then work it in to 1 - 10 inch pounds using the Fat Wrench, firing a five shot group at each setting until the groups open up.
While only one of my rifles currently wears a Harrell, it would be hard to convince me that they can't have positive effects when managed with a proper plan.
The only reason I've got a photo of the target was because it surprised the hell out of me. I expected maybe a minor POI shift, but to totally reverse the gains of finding the right tune never crossed my mind.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Cool, I will have to test that. I didn't think that set screw would impinge on anything that dramatically. Wonder if that tensioned barrel is being tweaked somehow?
Warming up... snow melting... mud be gone!!!!
Jerry
Warming up... snow melting... mud be gone!!!!
Jerry
