B
BJS6
Guest
All this makes altering the load a few tenths to keep the tune and having no tuner to fuss with seems pretty appealing !!
T
tim in tx
Guest
jackie sir
email has been sent. tim in tx
email has been sent. tim in tx
Dave Short
New member
The development, The (brief) climax, and the wrap-up of this whole thing is amazing to me:
*An idea has been proposed that appeared so viable as to entice several individuals to give it a try, while others picked it and the man who proposed it apart to the core.
*It appears that all who tried were able to bring two different loads to the same vertical plane.............which is the very part of the theory that most of the detractors found most deserving of ridicule.
*Jackie stated that he was able to bring the two loads together vertically, but wasn't able to make the rifle shoot small........which, I believe, probably says the proportioning of the barrel and tuner are incorrect.
*Mr Calfee has been poked in the eye from every possible angle because Jackie was not able to make the whole thing work................even though (as near as I can tell) he only worked with it for less than one day!
Most guys will spend more time than that tinkering with the load in a new barrel that is duplicate #xxx of their favorite combination. If I didn't know any better, I'd think some of you are satisfied to be able to say "see, I told you all it wouldn't work".........based on ONE barrel length and contour, ONE tuner design, and................the better part of ONE whole day at the range.
I can't help but wonder; how many of the giant strides that have been made (or even the small ones) in our game were given this kind of chance to fly?
Okay, I'm ready...again...
-Dave-
*An idea has been proposed that appeared so viable as to entice several individuals to give it a try, while others picked it and the man who proposed it apart to the core.
*It appears that all who tried were able to bring two different loads to the same vertical plane.............which is the very part of the theory that most of the detractors found most deserving of ridicule.
*Jackie stated that he was able to bring the two loads together vertically, but wasn't able to make the rifle shoot small........which, I believe, probably says the proportioning of the barrel and tuner are incorrect.
*Mr Calfee has been poked in the eye from every possible angle because Jackie was not able to make the whole thing work................even though (as near as I can tell) he only worked with it for less than one day!
Most guys will spend more time than that tinkering with the load in a new barrel that is duplicate #xxx of their favorite combination. If I didn't know any better, I'd think some of you are satisfied to be able to say "see, I told you all it wouldn't work".........based on ONE barrel length and contour, ONE tuner design, and................the better part of ONE whole day at the range.
I can't help but wonder; how many of the giant strides that have been made (or even the small ones) in our game were given this kind of chance to fly?
Okay, I'm ready...again...
-Dave-
jackie schmidt
New member
Dave
If you notice, I am sending the entire package to Tim so he can continue with the project and give it the time it deserves. The simple fact is, I have run out of time. My shooting season starts this week end.
Please do not clump me into the crowd that is discounting everything so quickly. I tried to make it plain that there was obviously something wrong with my procedure. This is new to me. More range time is needed.
Since I checked the end of the barrel with my Deltronic Pins, I no longer think that is the problem.
My next step was to start over on another day. The yardage thing cropped up when Bill Calfee decided to grace us with another stupid riddle., I had no idea it was supposed to be anything other than 100. In reality, I have been trying to follow Lynn's lead and ideas, as he seemed to have the best interpretation of what Calfee was saying. Ask the other shooters who were at Tomball Sunday, I was adament about sticking with the instructions that Lynn had layed out. It didn't work.
Yes I devoted a week to building everything, and had trouble with the set-up at the range. But I am willing to let someone else continue with what I have made. I am sue Tim will do it justice I am sorry, my Region Competition has to come first.
So, once again, do not put me into the "I told you so crowd" so quickly. I don't operate that way........jackie
If you notice, I am sending the entire package to Tim so he can continue with the project and give it the time it deserves. The simple fact is, I have run out of time. My shooting season starts this week end.
Please do not clump me into the crowd that is discounting everything so quickly. I tried to make it plain that there was obviously something wrong with my procedure. This is new to me. More range time is needed.
Since I checked the end of the barrel with my Deltronic Pins, I no longer think that is the problem.
My next step was to start over on another day. The yardage thing cropped up when Bill Calfee decided to grace us with another stupid riddle., I had no idea it was supposed to be anything other than 100. In reality, I have been trying to follow Lynn's lead and ideas, as he seemed to have the best interpretation of what Calfee was saying. Ask the other shooters who were at Tomball Sunday, I was adament about sticking with the instructions that Lynn had layed out. It didn't work.
Yes I devoted a week to building everything, and had trouble with the set-up at the range. But I am willing to let someone else continue with what I have made. I am sue Tim will do it justice I am sorry, my Region Competition has to come first.
So, once again, do not put me into the "I told you so crowd" so quickly. I don't operate that way........jackie
Last edited:
R
Rich-Allen
Guest
Great post Dave.
B
BJS6
Guest
Dave,
I don't think anybody is saying "I told you so". Have a read back over the responses on this and other threads, people just want to know what on earth Bill is talking about, I didn't read anything about anybody saying anything like "I told you so".
Seems to me people are just a bit frustrated when Bill drops little bits of information, encourages testing and then drops back in and offers up a casual ........... oh yeah, 42 yards, you guys guess what I am talking about !!
Seems to me most guys want this stuff to work, people are offering up ideas on what might be worth trying in the test process, people like Jackie that has the equipment and skills are making items to test with and Bill, depite apparently living for improved accuracy, does his level best to keep everybody in the dark. Either that or he really doesn't know all he thinks or says he does about how to make this stuff work or why it works.
Bryce
I don't think anybody is saying "I told you so". Have a read back over the responses on this and other threads, people just want to know what on earth Bill is talking about, I didn't read anything about anybody saying anything like "I told you so".
Seems to me people are just a bit frustrated when Bill drops little bits of information, encourages testing and then drops back in and offers up a casual ........... oh yeah, 42 yards, you guys guess what I am talking about !!
Seems to me most guys want this stuff to work, people are offering up ideas on what might be worth trying in the test process, people like Jackie that has the equipment and skills are making items to test with and Bill, depite apparently living for improved accuracy, does his level best to keep everybody in the dark. Either that or he really doesn't know all he thinks or says he does about how to make this stuff work or why it works.
Bryce
Last edited by a moderator:
T
tim in tx
Guest
dave sir,
there is by no means a wrap up in any way,jackie spent a week dedicated to this project and i am sure it cost him a wad of money to do so .i have never seen him give up on anything he has tested,his test could not have been more complete and informative but as he says the club comes first and i agree whole heartedly as any dedicated shooter would.luckly my rifles are ready for this year so all i have to do is plink and play until may. i do beleive someone will figure this out soon ,it is just a matter of time.but it is time we put this theory to the test or rest .and if it really works is it viable with our particular shooting disipline or distance? ultamately we are just adding more varibles that can potentially hurt our aggs[something coming loose] but on the upside help cover up velocity variance.we will see. tim in tx
there is by no means a wrap up in any way,jackie spent a week dedicated to this project and i am sure it cost him a wad of money to do so .i have never seen him give up on anything he has tested,his test could not have been more complete and informative but as he says the club comes first and i agree whole heartedly as any dedicated shooter would.luckly my rifles are ready for this year so all i have to do is plink and play until may. i do beleive someone will figure this out soon ,it is just a matter of time.but it is time we put this theory to the test or rest .and if it really works is it viable with our particular shooting disipline or distance? ultamately we are just adding more varibles that can potentially hurt our aggs[something coming loose] but on the upside help cover up velocity variance.we will see. tim in tx
Whoa Guys
I was on the phone for 2 hours last night with Bill Calfee and we are almost there.
In my testing I was using the wide velocity shots to get plenty of vertical spread at 100 yards.I did this to see if the bullets would converge at 100 yards.Not saying I didn't trust Bill just saying you have to see them converge or you have problems.
On the other thread Lisa from Oregon posted she never got the two shots to converge.If your two shots don't converge your weight is too light or your tuners body is too short.The weight needs to be out in front of the muzzle.
If Jackie makes his tuners body longer it will take less weight to reach the same goal.
Once your two widely spaced shots will converge you have enough weight and enough tuner body length to proceed with the testing.
My testing as pointed out by Dusty was done at 100 yards then again at 600 yards.The 100 yard testing showed me I have enough weight and the tuners body was long enough to continue the tests.
At 600 yards my final tuner weight was less than the 100 yard load and I used my best load for the testing.I didn't use two widely spaced shots velocity wise.
All I am after is the removal of the vertical component.I don't have the time right now for testing at 1,000 yards but when I do I will post the three weights used to stop my muzzle at each distance.I am trying to get ready for the 600 yard nationals and that is why my testing is at THAT RANGE.
For the 100,200 and 300 yard shooters you need to make sure your shots will converge then tune for your best load in 0.5 ounce increments.
Lynn
I was on the phone for 2 hours last night with Bill Calfee and we are almost there.
In my testing I was using the wide velocity shots to get plenty of vertical spread at 100 yards.I did this to see if the bullets would converge at 100 yards.Not saying I didn't trust Bill just saying you have to see them converge or you have problems.
On the other thread Lisa from Oregon posted she never got the two shots to converge.If your two shots don't converge your weight is too light or your tuners body is too short.The weight needs to be out in front of the muzzle.
If Jackie makes his tuners body longer it will take less weight to reach the same goal.
Once your two widely spaced shots will converge you have enough weight and enough tuner body length to proceed with the testing.
My testing as pointed out by Dusty was done at 100 yards then again at 600 yards.The 100 yard testing showed me I have enough weight and the tuners body was long enough to continue the tests.
At 600 yards my final tuner weight was less than the 100 yard load and I used my best load for the testing.I didn't use two widely spaced shots velocity wise.
All I am after is the removal of the vertical component.I don't have the time right now for testing at 1,000 yards but when I do I will post the three weights used to stop my muzzle at each distance.I am trying to get ready for the 600 yard nationals and that is why my testing is at THAT RANGE.
For the 100,200 and 300 yard shooters you need to make sure your shots will converge then tune for your best load in 0.5 ounce increments.
Lynn
jackie schmidt
New member
Tim
I will be mailing the assembly tomorrow.
Good Luck.........jackie
I will be mailing the assembly tomorrow.
Good Luck.........jackie
Dave Short
New member
Jackie,
I'm certainly not lumping you in with the naysayers...you went to the trouble of making up all of the pieces and shooting the thing. I certainly understand the work involved, I've done it the better part of my life. I also understand that developmental stuff takes a back seat to the stuff that has to be ready to compete.....my "barrel attachment" development time will depend on how well a couple of new "conventional" barrels cooperate. The fact is, though, there are those who just want to discount Bill and this whole idea without any evidence. I don't think there are a whole lot more that he can tell, we just have to work through from the concept to the point where we have more and more proven information to work with. I don't think that Bill is toying with anyone, I just think that his style of presenting the baseline info can be read that way. These forums can be pretty unforgiving; while it provides a great means to share ideas, it also allows some individuals to say things that aren't respectful toward others or conducive to the progression of those ideas. Personally, I think that the simple fact that several people have shown that two different charges can be pulled in vertically is very significant in and of itself.
Jackie & Bryce..........Some time ago Bill did state in his post where he outlined his procedure for "stopping" a barrel that he goes through the process while shooting at 42 yards......FWIW.
-Dave-
I'm certainly not lumping you in with the naysayers...you went to the trouble of making up all of the pieces and shooting the thing. I certainly understand the work involved, I've done it the better part of my life. I also understand that developmental stuff takes a back seat to the stuff that has to be ready to compete.....my "barrel attachment" development time will depend on how well a couple of new "conventional" barrels cooperate. The fact is, though, there are those who just want to discount Bill and this whole idea without any evidence. I don't think there are a whole lot more that he can tell, we just have to work through from the concept to the point where we have more and more proven information to work with. I don't think that Bill is toying with anyone, I just think that his style of presenting the baseline info can be read that way. These forums can be pretty unforgiving; while it provides a great means to share ideas, it also allows some individuals to say things that aren't respectful toward others or conducive to the progression of those ideas. Personally, I think that the simple fact that several people have shown that two different charges can be pulled in vertically is very significant in and of itself.
Jackie & Bryce..........Some time ago Bill did state in his post where he outlined his procedure for "stopping" a barrel that he goes through the process while shooting at 42 yards......FWIW.
-Dave-
R
Rich-Allen
Guest
Mike, in all fairness, you, me or anyone else didn't paid for the engineering of the tuner. Your not going to get a engineering contract or the kind of company it takes to put together a new engineering from a forum.
I can see both sides, does it seem like Mr. Calfee is speaking in riddles sometimes?..... Yes. Sometimes people don't put their point across very well or they have another method to their thinking. I don't doubt that Mr. Calfee knows how his own device works and from a distance it looks as if maybe he just doesn't want to give it away.
Mr Calfee: "I would have thought my reasoning was pretty obvious.....so here's what I will do.......lets wait and see if some of the engineering folks or someone can come up with the logic of the test.......say by this time next week.... If not, (I'm sure someone will)".
That doesn't sound like a man that has something to hide but more that he wants someone to figure it out for themselves.
It looks as if this forum has a lot of people with engineering backgrounds, maybe it is a riddle and he's hoping enough information has been giving to figure out the answer.
When I was fifteen, my grandfather handed me a pocket knife and said, "I would like you to have this, do you have a dollar". I remember asking why he wanted a dollar for something he was giving me.. he told me that nothing in life was free, not even a present.
I never forgot that.
I say let's just see if anyone figures out the reasoning of the test, everyone argued the world was flat too.
Rich
T
tim in tx
Guest
jackie sir
thanks and apreciate the chance to make it work,i will get the test results to you as soon as i have it,i hope lew is not right. lew we are gonna find out once and for all with the caliber of people here and their input .it is just a matter of time. lynn i will give you a shout. tim in tx
thanks and apreciate the chance to make it work,i will get the test results to you as soon as i have it,i hope lew is not right. lew we are gonna find out once and for all with the caliber of people here and their input .it is just a matter of time. lynn i will give you a shout. tim in tx
Prediction.
When someone here develops a good, working centerfire tuner that is easy to use and setup, I predict that Mr. Calfee will be back on the scene, and will say something like - "I see that you finally figured out what I have known for so long".
Just a prediction, and it may very well be wrong, but it's a prediction nonetheless. So let it be written, so let it be done. (Yul Brynner). LOL.
SteveM.
When someone here develops a good, working centerfire tuner that is easy to use and setup, I predict that Mr. Calfee will be back on the scene, and will say something like - "I see that you finally figured out what I have known for so long".
Just a prediction, and it may very well be wrong, but it's a prediction nonetheless. So let it be written, so let it be done. (Yul Brynner). LOL.
SteveM.
M
Mike Marcelli
Guest
Rich:
I'm concerned that my responding to your post may give it validity that I somehow have to justify what I've written. I don't. I stand by every word you've quoted.
Rich, if you've competed in Centerfire BR matches (at least the short range matches I've been involved with) you know that mostly every competitor would go out of their way to help you beat them. The sport is unique in that respect. Information is pretty readily shared. Take for example the latest revelation: Bart's new BT's shoot like a house on fire. James Mock let the cat out of the bag on this forum and a month or so later those bullets DOMINATED the Cactus Classic. (Because of the jacket shortage, Bart didn't even have enough of these lovelies to shoot for himself, but went out of his way to see his customers had some). Information regarding what works, why it works, how it works, etc. is not suppressed.
Maybe things are different in Rimfire BR. I don't know. But some half assed Socratic method (which you imply Mr. Calfee is attempting to apply) doesn't fly on this forum. Its put up or shut up. Bill Calfee doesn't want to get that and flocks of people ("followers") want to make excuses for his refusal to put up or shut up. Nobody asked him to post a damn thing, but if he does CHOOSE to do so, at least he could post something complete and at least attempt to answer the legitimate scientific and engineering questions his posts generate -- even if that answer is "I don't know." That's why this board is here. Rather, he goes so far as to tell people who disagree with his theories (e.g., Varmint Al) that they are not welcome to post on "his" threads.
Do tuners work? Yes. Does the Calfee "muzzle device" work? I don't have a clue because know one can seem to pin him down on what his design or performance criteria are. You attribute his lack of candor (you called it "speaking in riddles") to a motivational imparative on Mr. Calfee's part, but it could be equally attributable to a more sinister motivation, that is, by never committing to any specific criteria, he can never be proven wrong. Only Mr. Calfee knows his true motivation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vibe
22 Epperson Cricket
I for one am not much interested in what happens at 42 yards, that's not where the target is, so bottom line is 42 yards is just not relevant. I am really hoping that it's not because that is where the apex of the flight is, since that is easily adjustable by changing scope height. Placing the bore farther below line of sight has that effect. I've made the apex for hunting rifles be at 60 yards before with high mount rings using Federal 900b, just to extend the range for which I did not have to hold over. Yet that's as close to "obvious" as I can struggle to manage.
Mike Marcelli
Mike I think you are getting a little bit off course here.The only thing we are trying to do is to rtemove the vertical from our groups.If you are anyone else is after more than that simply avoid thes threads.
In Jackies testing he took a load with 3 grains variance in powder charge and put them through the same hole didn't he? Did Bill Calfee or Lynn put a gun to his head? Or did he do it as he was interested in removing vertical from his groups? I can't read his mind and I can't tell him what to print but he said he removed 3/4 inch of vertical didn't he?
Does your tuner do that? You've been posting about it for long enough now why don't you share your results? Isn't it time YOU put up or shut up? You've been one of the top Calfee criticisers what are your results not just the trash you post here ALL OF THE TIME?
If a 6PPC goes out of tune how much vertical do you see? Would 3/4 inch of vertical removal be a good thing? If not do you think a tuner capable of Jackies 3/4 inch could also remove 0.250?
You sound like somebody who wants a turn-key tuner set up for your particular barrel given to you without doing a simple test to determine the correct weight.I hope I am reading everything about you very wrongly.I fear however that this is your normal behaviour and attitude towards other posters.
Lynn
Mike I think you are getting a little bit off course here.The only thing we are trying to do is to rtemove the vertical from our groups.If you are anyone else is after more than that simply avoid thes threads.
In Jackies testing he took a load with 3 grains variance in powder charge and put them through the same hole didn't he? Did Bill Calfee or Lynn put a gun to his head? Or did he do it as he was interested in removing vertical from his groups? I can't read his mind and I can't tell him what to print but he said he removed 3/4 inch of vertical didn't he?
Does your tuner do that? You've been posting about it for long enough now why don't you share your results? Isn't it time YOU put up or shut up? You've been one of the top Calfee criticisers what are your results not just the trash you post here ALL OF THE TIME?
If a 6PPC goes out of tune how much vertical do you see? Would 3/4 inch of vertical removal be a good thing? If not do you think a tuner capable of Jackies 3/4 inch could also remove 0.250?
You sound like somebody who wants a turn-key tuner set up for your particular barrel given to you without doing a simple test to determine the correct weight.I hope I am reading everything about you very wrongly.I fear however that this is your normal behaviour and attitude towards other posters.
Lynn