Ahrens tuner weight method

D

Douglas

Guest
I ordered two sets and one extra adapter and 1/2 each; should be enough for three tuners. I got to thinking what's the best approach to fine tune? Start adding weights or start subtracting? I'm sure someone will come up with the answer before it's warm enough here to try them out. Thanks, Douglas
 
Fred, I figured if anyone had a plan, you did; maybe we'll call it the Big Macky Method! Do you think there's any significance to 42yds versus 50yds? I just wonder why Calfee uses 42yds as it seems he always does things with a purpose. Thanks, Douglas
 
Douglas,

I know Mr. Larry Brown of BR-50 fame use to argue that 42 yards was the absolute maximum distance for achieving optimum accuracy out of these little .22's. Whether that's true, or not, or whether that has anything to do with Mr. C using it, I have no idea.

Dave
 
Thanks Dave .... I didn't know why for sure ...

Douglas ... before we call it anything we better make sure it works :D Otherwise we'll be calling it %^$&*#$@$%^&

Fred
 
It's gotta work, I got just shy of 200 bucks invested into this not to mention the original weights no longer needed. Man-oh-man, Douglas
 
I'm sure the weights will work fine ..... I'm questioning the "Big Macky Method"

I still haven't tried Calffee's 2 Velocity / 1 Group Method. I'm hearing that it works ... but I'm from MO. .... actually Upstate NY but you'll still have to show me. :)

Fred
 
I'm gonna do it, and I'm gonna do it at 42yds. Don't you just love it when it finally all comes together? All this business about tuners, with these weights and with Calfee's system, what can go wrong? Mid-April, Douglas
 
Wilbur,
Please amend the new rules to this 42 yard distance.
All ranges could hold yards and meters matches.
And now I know why I had so many shots that just plugged out, I was outta range.
Thanks Wilbur I am really looking forward to the season now I finally got a handle on my problem.
 
bigmackey

You do know that ammo shooting at different velocities (one fast, one slow) will not shoot into a single hole unless the muzzle is moving. Right? If you are hoping your tuner is going to stop your muzzle you may have a problem. The only way for different speeds of ammo to shoot into a single hole would be for the muzzle to be moving up or stopped with the slow rounds and stopped or down with the fast rounds. If the muzzle is stopped with both rounds you are going to have some amount of vertical! It has to do with something called gravity. Now I ain't no gunsmith, and I don't know nothing, but that is the way it works. You can accept it now, or sometime in the future!!

Again if you are hoping this weight system is going to stop the muzzle for different speeds of ammo I see problems ahead with your tuner program. Not wishing any bad luck on you at all.
 
Keith,

I appreciate your reply but I'm not looking to get back into the "Stopped", "Not Stopped" debate again. All I can say is that I know what the barrel is doing and I know what needs to happen for two ammos with different velocities to shoot into the same group ... let's leave it at that.

I'm only hoping that it works .... cause if it does, we have removed the effects of individual cartidges shooting with a different velocity from the equation ... and that can only help tighten those groups.

Fred
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Roger's weights are simple to use with a short time and little ammo used to get one's rifle in tune. As far as the way one person will test compared to another's, It doesn't really matter. We often think we have a better way in our minds eye and for some it's understanding the process for the end result.

As far as testing at 42 yards, Don't know, and honestly don't care, but i do know what my rifles do at 50 yards and do care.

JMHO
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, gotta think about that, you're right Joe, why should we care what our rifles do at 42yds? Other than the fact that the professor does his testing at 42yds, is the only reason I'd do it. If he does it by circumstance (where he shoots, that's all he has) or by choice, that's the question. I suppose the only way to find out is do it at both distances and then we'd know. Unless of course Bill C. would care to enlighten us. Thanks, Douglas
 
Testing

Hello All,

Well I spent today testing. And trying different methods for tuning.

First I would like to address one thing. I can’t even begin to measure whether or not the muzzle is stopped, moving vertical or doing the tango out there as I tuning my rifles. I do have theories as to what might be happening but that all they are, are theories. No proof one way or the other. So I’m not even going to begin to get into that side of this. But I did try some stuff today and here’s what I did:

All testing was done on a 35 yard indoor range. (I have to stretch that building of mine) :eek:

I started with two different rifles. One a Hall with a benchmark 3 grove 16.5 twist, step taper tube. 1.125 for 4" then it drops to .925" for the rest of the barrel. It is also fluted. This rifle is a bolt in, into a TM Stockworks TBBR stock. Jewel and a Weaver 36x.

Other is using a ULA Model 20 SA .850" straight barrel is a 3 grove – 16.5 . This action has a 3/4" x 18 tpi thread for those who want to know how I got a .850" dia barrel in a ULA. This rifle is also a bolt in, into a TM Stockworks TBBR stock. Jewel and a Weaver 36x also.

I Started with the Hall. I was shooting 6 shot groups using 3 - 1045 & 3 - 1076 speed ammos. I started with the bare tuner and started shooting groups. I immediately got two groups just barley touching each other. So I started to add weight. I went up in 1/2 oz increments. I kept adding weight until the group formed into one little hole. I kept adding weight to see what would happen. It started to open up again. So I stopped there. I then started with the best group in my run and started turning the tuner. That’s when it happened. And now I remembered why I liked the 1045 and why I hated it at the same time. I have 3 round down range and bam! The round dropped right out at 6oclock 3 bullets holes away. UGH! I have one itty bitty little bug hole maybe an .032” CTC and that beast out there in the white. Ok so I said I can’t use this ammo for testing. So I finished up just shooting using the 1076. What I was doing as I turned the tuner was I would go one full turn back and shoot a group and then go one full turn and shoot a group. I then broke that down into 1/2 turns. I ended up back at 250 for that rifle. It's shooting nice little round groups. In the very low 1's

The ULA:
I then decided to try something a little different with this rifle. I would just shoot the 1076 in 3 shot groups and added 1 oz at a time until I ran all the combinations out to the full 20 1/2 oz the kit will make. I then looked back at all the groups and settled on the one that looked the best. I took a 1/2 oz off the best group weight and shot a 5 shot groups and then added a 1/2 oz over that weight. Not so good ,so I went back and took the 1/2 oz off the base weight for this group. Much better. So I started twisting the tuner back one full turn. Nope up a 1/2 turn much better past 250 a half turn nice another 1/2 turn open up a little so I then went back a half turn and it making nice little round holes like the hall. A little larger in the mid 1's but it the best this rifle ever shot.

Now I just have to wait for a descent day and take these rifles out and shoot some score with them to prove these methods are truly viable. From what I've heard from other people out there it's working very nicely. Interesting side note: the heavy barreled Hall Took less weight to tune then the lighter barrel ULA. I’m still trying to figure that one out.

Ok more later,

Roger
 
Roger,

Thanks for taking the time to do the testing and sharing your results with us. From what you have said here, and what Bill claims he is doing, it appears that for the first time we may truly have a universal method for tuning our rifles without shooting brick upon brick of ammo.

Dave
 
Tuner Testing

I would like to know if anyone has tried this new method with a mid-barrel tuner. I have a 40X that I shoot with a mid-barrel tuner and some weight on regular tuner. I am going to try to tune another rifle next week and would like to know about the mid-barrel or just use the Ahrens method. Thanks for any help. I will try to test both methods out and reply later. Mickey
 
Dave,
Glad to do it. I mean that’s what this board is supposed to be for, sharing information. I knew I was going to have to come up with a way to test these weights. I just had to try different approaches and see what worked. And they all worked. I wish I had a better lot to use for the slow speed stuff. That lot will shoot into one hole but you get the ones that leak out the bottom...... no good

--------------------------------------------

Mickey,
I haven't tried a mid barrel tuner in a long time. My rifle didn't like it at all. now I know other rifles love them. I'll have to get my hands on one again and try it out. Looking forward to seeing your results.

--------------------------------------------

And if where going to give this method a name it doesn’t belong to me. Bill's the one who got this ball rolling I just came up with a way to do it a little easier than using cap screws and washers. So this is really the Calfee method.

Best,

Roger
 
Roger.....I think your weight kit is a great idea. Now I would like to see someone make a one piece tuner to use them on. I think with a solid one piece tuner you could use just the weights to tune a rifle and get rid of some unwanted vibrations that the two piece adjustable tuners have. I know my hoehn tuner has a lot of play between the two pieces. I know the o-rings are there to take the play out but I think you still get a lot of unwanted vibrations when the rifle is fired.Last year Bill Calffe talked about trying to get somebody to manufacture one piece tuners but I have not heard anymore about it. Maybe someone will try this. I would think the one piece non adjustable tuners would also be cheaper to manufacture.
Tim
 
Hello Tim,

I designed a tuner like that probley 6 months ago. But never built it to try it out. The one problem I see with using a solid body tuner like that would be that you would have zero fine adjustment. As in my daughters rifle I did not end up at 250, but slightly beyond. I think that using the Harrel tuner is just fine. But as has been discussed before locking it down might prove to be better, then just letting it sit at the final possession. I'll have to try that out and get back to you.

Best,

Roger
 
Roger......I would think being able to change the the weight a half ounce at a time with your weight kit would be all the fine adjustment you would need. Turning the tuner out or in a little should be the same as adding or removing weight. Why could you not just add or remove weight with a one piece tuner and do the same thing? I think it would be interresting to so see if used on the same rifle,ammo and same day if a one piece and an adjustable tuner would require the same amount of weight to tune the rifle. For this test to be accurate both tuners would have to be the very same lenght and weight to start with. Then just add weight to each until the rifle is tuned with no turning of the adjustable tuner. Because of the vibrations in the adjustable tuner I would think it would require more weight than the one piece but who knows it may take less. I may be wrong but I still think a one piece tuner with no vibrations within itself is the way to go. I also agree with what Bill Calfee said in his post to you that the standard tuners may be too heavy for some barrels. We may need to start with a lighter base.
Thanks
Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top