Something Happened
- Thread starter linekin
- Start date
[SUB]r[/SUB]
Appreciate the update.
As far as multiple lots to the bench, im not entirely sure your interpretation and or assumption about it is accurate. Frankly, in many instances, i think it boils down to the fact that often folks have a few lots that are pretty close.
More often, in too many examples, a top shooter will have a very good lot of ammo and as long as he has a good supply it is the go to ammo inall conditions for all serious matches and there continue to be just too many examples of that with zero tinkering.
The best guns shoot top ammo in a wide variety of conditions.
On a similar note, you had done a lot of R&D and development on tuners and tuning. Have you developed any hard data on real world results concerning the effort to date. I assure you I'm not trying to bait you etc. but always trying to learn and open my mind to ANYTHING that yields incremental improvements with my shooting.
Appreciate the update.
As far as multiple lots to the bench, im not entirely sure your interpretation and or assumption about it is accurate. Frankly, in many instances, i think it boils down to the fact that often folks have a few lots that are pretty close.
More often, in too many examples, a top shooter will have a very good lot of ammo and as long as he has a good supply it is the go to ammo inall conditions for all serious matches and there continue to be just too many examples of that with zero tinkering.
The best guns shoot top ammo in a wide variety of conditions.
On a similar note, you had done a lot of R&D and development on tuners and tuning. Have you developed any hard data on real world results concerning the effort to date. I assure you I'm not trying to bait you etc. but always trying to learn and open my mind to ANYTHING that yields incremental improvements with my shooting.
Last edited:
Pete, after reading this and post #10, I believe we've now found out why you have that familiar "confused" look.
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Well, if you were around me much
you wouldn't see me looked confused. There are enough examples of people who have used Mike's tuners who have reported the same thing he is saying. It's just a question of having an open mind Tim, something you seem to struggle with. I know tune in rifles works both ways, I have done it. I prefer to tune the rifle and find ammo that works with that tune. Similarly, I gave up on CF tuners because I didn't want to put in the time to learn how much to twist them. CF rifles are a different animal with tuners, from my experience.
There is little doubt that rifles go out of tune sometimes. That is to say, the air density changes enough so that the bullets aren't happy in it ; happens to all rifles, in tune or not. Plenty of data to back that up. Someone who is willing and can afford the ammo can sit for hours on end and compile the tuner settings necessary to be able to tune every time in every air density. If they were to do so and publish the data, they could get a lot of money for it; assuming the data was transferable, one rifle to the next but I fear that is not the case.
Pete
you wouldn't see me looked confused. There are enough examples of people who have used Mike's tuners who have reported the same thing he is saying. It's just a question of having an open mind Tim, something you seem to struggle with. I know tune in rifles works both ways, I have done it. I prefer to tune the rifle and find ammo that works with that tune. Similarly, I gave up on CF tuners because I didn't want to put in the time to learn how much to twist them. CF rifles are a different animal with tuners, from my experience.
There is little doubt that rifles go out of tune sometimes. That is to say, the air density changes enough so that the bullets aren't happy in it ; happens to all rifles, in tune or not. Plenty of data to back that up. Someone who is willing and can afford the ammo can sit for hours on end and compile the tuner settings necessary to be able to tune every time in every air density. If they were to do so and publish the data, they could get a lot of money for it; assuming the data was transferable, one rifle to the next but I fear that is not the case.
Pete
Last edited:
I have a question for the experienced tuner, tuners. Ok I beleive twisting the tuner can help if you know which way and how far. So has anyone tested enough to know, ballpark. How many clicks to go on a temp change or precip change. In other words I am shooting my well tuned rifle at 80 degrees. And then one day. Ot is 60 . Do I lengthen because of colder temps and if so how many clicks? 5 clicks and shoot a two or three shot group? Then another five clicks repeat? I could se doing this a couple times longer and shorter but seems anything more time consuming ,would run me out of time, if I were doing this at a match. So list your on the spot tuning regimen .
This thread has mostly moved to tuners & maybe rightfully so. I don't know. My other thought was speed of the ammo.
Some of you guys have been at this a long time. You're good lot of ammo works in all temps? Doesn't matter? You don't use another good lot that is slower/faster in different temps?
Maybe I think about this stuff to much.
Keith
Some of you guys have been at this a long time. You're good lot of ammo works in all temps? Doesn't matter? You don't use another good lot that is slower/faster in different temps?
Maybe I think about this stuff to much.
Keith
I think some are writing about all rifles and at least Tim is writing about winning rifles. There's a difference.
What Tim is saying is that there are rifles that shoot higher scores than other rifles across the board. What others are saying is that a tuner adjustment can make a rifle shoot higher scores. There's a difference.
A competitor can learn to shoot a good rifle but nobody can learn to shoot a rifle that's not really a good one. All I'm saying here is what Tim already said. The worst case is a rifle that falls just an itty bit short every time. It's a crapshoot indeed....but it's getting better. There are more and more good rifles every day! If you spend a season trying to make a rifle win...it's time to consider. The cost of attendance outweighs the cost of trading rifles.
I'll give an example - two rifles shoot an X...one rifle held on the 7 ring and the other held just outside the ten ring. Which rifle would you prefer - all else being equal?
What I TRIED to say here will never change....opinions may differ and that's perfectly OK with me. If everybody agreed I could....well...don't know what else...but something. Geez....first time I realized that I don't have anything else to do
What Tim is saying is that there are rifles that shoot higher scores than other rifles across the board. What others are saying is that a tuner adjustment can make a rifle shoot higher scores. There's a difference.
A competitor can learn to shoot a good rifle but nobody can learn to shoot a rifle that's not really a good one. All I'm saying here is what Tim already said. The worst case is a rifle that falls just an itty bit short every time. It's a crapshoot indeed....but it's getting better. There are more and more good rifles every day! If you spend a season trying to make a rifle win...it's time to consider. The cost of attendance outweighs the cost of trading rifles.
I'll give an example - two rifles shoot an X...one rifle held on the 7 ring and the other held just outside the ten ring. Which rifle would you prefer - all else being equal?
What I TRIED to say here will never change....opinions may differ and that's perfectly OK with me. If everybody agreed I could....well...don't know what else...but something. Geez....first time I realized that I don't have anything else to do
mwezell
Mike Ezell
I think some are writing about all rifles and at least Tim is writing about winning rifles. There's a difference.
What Tim is saying is that there are rifles that shoot higher scores than other rifles across the board. What others are saying is that a tuner adjustment can make a rifle shoot higher scores. There's a difference.
A competitor can learn to shoot a good rifle but nobody can learn to shoot a rifle that's not really a good one. All I'm saying here is what Tim already said. The worst case is a rifle that falls just an itty bit short every time. It's a crapshoot indeed....but it's getting better. There are more and more good rifles every day! If you spend a season trying to make a rifle win...it's time to consider. The cost of attendance outweighs the cost of trading rifles.
I'll give an example - two rifles shoot an X...one rifle held on the 7 ring and the other held just outside the ten ring. Which rifle would you prefer - all else being equal?
What I TRIED to say here will never change....opinions may differ and that's perfectly OK with me. If everybody agreed I could....well...don't know what else...but something. Geez....first time I realized that I don't have anything else to do
Something I've noticed in rf, vs. cf is that very often, excluding Harper anyway
, is that in rf, it seems that very good rifles and shooters wind up shooting very "average" much more often as compared to the same in cf. It seems more common to see a top tier rf shooter's name buried mid pack than a top tier cf shooter's. The cream rises to the top most of the time in both, but seldom do you see Tony or Gene's name mid pack. I won't call names, but its seems that in rf, it happens with a higher degree of regularity. I don't dismiss that as being a "bad day", but rather, something else at play in many if not most of those instances. Namely though, I believe its often tune related. I firmly believe that all guns go in and out of tune...some more than others, or maybe its that some ammo goes out more than others...but either way, top shooters don't have as many bad days in cf as in rf, IMHO. Yes, I believe that's very often tune related.I do have a fair amount of experience with good rifles and with tuners. I can't imagine myself having a bad day and not at least trying to fix matters with a couple of clicks of the tuner, yet many, particularly in rf, avoid using it as the tool that I see a tuner as being, that being a means to adjust for what we have no other control over in rf, except trying another lot of ammo. I've won several cards this way. My greatest weakness in rf is wind reading, not with tuning. That's evident to me by my best cards and finishing positions coming with and without tuner adjustment, while conditions were good. As conditions get worse, so does my shooting, but that's not tune related. That's most certainly shooter error. I really don't see what's hard to understand about my take on this. You have a tool on the end of that barrel, that some choose not to use. I don't understand that. Clearly, moving a tuner can make things worse. If that's so, why do some feel that they can't help, too...particularly when things are already going "not so well"?
Something I've noticed in rf, vs. cf is that very often, excluding Harper anyway
I do have a fair amount of experience with good rifles and with tuners. I can't imagine myself having a bad day and not at least trying to fix matters with a couple of clicks of the tuner, yet many, particularly in rf, avoid using it as the tool that I see a tuner as being, that being a means to adjust for what we have no other control over in rf, except trying another lot of ammo. I've won several cards this way. My greatest weakness in rf is wind reading, not with tuning. That's evident to me by my best cards and finishing positions coming with and without tuner adjustment, while conditions were good. As conditions get worse, so does my shooting, but that's not tune related. That's most certainly shooter error. I really don't see what's hard to understand about my take on this. You have a tool on the end of that barrel, that some choose not to use. I don't understand that. Clearly, moving a tuner can make things worse. If that's so, why do some feel that they can't help, too...particularly when things are already going "not so well"?
Mike , I believe the same as you. However the only time I touched the tuner at all this year was to try the 9th harmonic of the PRX. I quickly returned to the previous owners setting. He admittedly wasn't sure the rifle was tuned but thought it would be close.
I did try a couple weights with the same results . Off they came.
During that brief stretch that the rifle shot decent, when the weather warmed & the humidity rose, I believe the rifle was as close to being in tune as I had seen. The ammo worked.
So I feel like there may have been a better tune in the cooler conditions. I just never tried.
I have received some messages from a couple shooters whom confirmed what has been said about not ever moving their tuners. They have much better equipment than I had too. I'm sure that has quite a lot to do with it.
For me its all for not though. I no longer have any of that ammo so I could never prove it to myself by adjusting the tuner. I plan on doing some of that this summer.
Keith
Something I've noticed in rf, vs. cf is that very often, excluding Harper anyway
I do have a fair amount of experience with good rifles and with tuners. I can't imagine myself having a bad day and not at least trying to fix matters with a couple of clicks of the tuner, yet many, particularly in rf, avoid using it as the tool that I see a tuner as being, that being a means to adjust for what we have no other control over in rf, except trying another lot of ammo. I've won several cards this way. My greatest weakness in rf is wind reading, not with tuning. That's evident to me by my best cards and finishing positions coming with and without tuner adjustment, while conditions were good. As conditions get worse, so does my shooting, but that's not tune related. That's most certainly shooter error. I really don't see what's hard to understand about my take on this. You have a tool on the end of that barrel, that some choose not to use. I don't understand that. Clearly, moving a tuner can make things worse. If that's so, why do some feel that they can't help, too...particularly when things are already going "not so well"?
That's well and good except you are overlooking an even more important couple of data points. The most important is that a lot of those mid pack performances tend to be amongst exceptional overall scores well down into the group.
You can also probably take anything shot ondoors and remove it from alot of valid data, there are far too many other issues at play indoors to read a lot into things.
What I'd love to see is some broad based review of top flight folks that play with settings. The closest anybody ever attempted was on Dan's site with a series of interviews about technique and as I recall not a single guy attmitted moving them.
Last edited:
I think some are writing about all rifles and at least Tim is writing about winning rifles. There's a difference.
What Tim is saying is that there are rifles that shoot higher scores than other rifles across the board. What others are saying is that a tuner adjustment can make a rifle shoot higher scores. There's a difference.
A competitor can learn to shoot a good rifle but nobody can learn to shoot a rifle that's not really a good one. All I'm saying here is what Tim already said. The worst case is a rifle that falls just an itty bit short every time. It's a crapshoot indeed....but it's getting better. There are more and more good rifles every day! If you spend a season trying to make a rifle win...it's time to consider. The cost of attendance outweighs the cost of trading rifles.
I'll give an example - two rifles shoot an X...one rifle held on the 7 ring and the other held just outside the ten ring. Which rifle would you prefer - all else being equal?
What I TRIED to say here will never change....opinions may differ and that's perfectly OK with me. If everybody agreed I could....well...don't know what else...but something. Geez....first time I realized that I don't have anything else to do
That articulates it very well.
There is maybe one additional issue worthy of consideration. We still do not definatively know what the best overall barrel represents as to configuration and interior dimension. Granted, we've come a lot closer and there's no question we are getting some great bbl's and the aberage ones are better than they ever have been, but thete is still a pantload of guesswork going on with everything about barrels including how each one should be chambered.
Is anybody of the opinion that lots of them should do everything all the time in all conditions. Except for the rare white buffalo that is what many are missing.
mwezell
Mike Ezell
Wow Tim! How do you know what I'm overlooking and what I'm considering in my statement? Are you psychic? If not, take my word for it...I'm way ahead of you.
As for what the top shooters are doing and/or using..I don't want to minimalize anything they do, but if all the rest of us do is follow the leaders, then we'll eventually all be using the same equipment, doing the same things they do...and still be behind them, waiting for them to find something new that works better, so that we can do that too...and still be following them. What does that gain anyone?
What I'm posting is backed by science, by results and by simple logic. But if you don't want to try my way, by all means, don't. As I said before, what I'm posting in this regard is for informational purposes....not to argue with you about. If you just want to pick a fight, do it elsewhere.
Well, i assumed it was not considered because there was no mention.
As far as science....that's great, however many can learn much from winning combinations because they are, in fact , winning combinations.
We have danced around one essential data point. Far too many winners are quite simply not going down that path, but still are laying down magnificent scores.
Understand.....I applaud guys like you for any/all testing in an attempt to improve the accuracy game, but there is still not much in the way of results data. Show us that's wrong down the line.
As far as going elsehere, try and remember, if you post a declarative statement on open forum, expect it to be questioned or verified. A healthy discussion acting as adults seems what these platforms should be about.
As far as science....that's great, however many can learn much from winning combinations because they are, in fact , winning combinations.
We have danced around one essential data point. Far too many winners are quite simply not going down that path, but still are laying down magnificent scores.
Understand.....I applaud guys like you for any/all testing in an attempt to improve the accuracy game, but there is still not much in the way of results data. Show us that's wrong down the line.
As far as going elsehere, try and remember, if you post a declarative statement on open forum, expect it to be questioned or verified. A healthy discussion acting as adults seems what these platforms should be about.
Last edited: