PeteFox wrote:jasmay wrote:170E2E69-4FD5-4EDE-940C-E1CDCE78844C.pngNo another national championship won using a tuner…
When will these people learn that’s not how it done…
Well done to Cal Waldner!!
The problem I see is that in the first quote you promote the value of more rigour and a larger sample size as a good thing, but choose to ignore exactly that when the findings don't suit.
The framing of the second quote is a schoolboy debating ploy. It belittles the achievement of the shooter.
I don't think anyone here has said that events can't be won if a tuner is used. If the majority of shooters are using these things then might not winning with a tuner come by default? not because of the tuner.
Does anyone here have any evidence that the value of these things doesn't disappear in the 'noise' of a large test?
Is a powder load that sits right in the 'node', still good on a day when the temp/humidity is different? or is powder load v's muzzle velocity simply linear and nodes the consequence of small sample sizes?
Will a large sample size drown out a perceived powder node?
These are the questions that this topic sought to answer. but... a whole lot of energy has been devoted to soothing bruised egos, misunderstandings, manufactured umbrage and deliberate shit stirring.
Meanwhile, we don't have an answer.
Pete
It keeps getting pointed out that the smug attitudes are what has been attacked, not the data. You HAVE to be choosing to ignore this fact at this point. Probably because it's your attitude that is contributing to the stink and you don't want to take ownership.
Everything you talk about has been covered and addressed and ignored and the standard throw away is "that's not a statistical" etc etc because that negates any argument or discussion and that's all Bryan has taught you to parrot.
Bryan may be right, he may be wrong, i'm not going to burn at the stake anyone in here's belief either way.
Again.
Here's 7 x 10 shot strings over 5 different days at various points in the barrel life.
There's 2 x 10 shot strings where we plotted the impact convergence
We used a skip test on GRT
Then a confirmation of 5 rounds over the chrono to make sure i'm at the MV I needed/wanted to be.
All tests managed to coalesce at 39.3gr over an entire year until the throat eroded and i had to adjust. That was at 550 rounds. I know this because I check my barrel health with 10 shot tests.
Here's another where I artificially simulated temp variation in the bullets by loading up and down in the node. Again, the SD's are higher because i can't tune for jump as they are AR10 Magazines and I'm limited to Mag length.
I have log data that shows this occurring with temp variation from season to season - i do this for all my guns because i want to know, and so i have checked it.
I'm open to there being variables that affect how this works and that maybe it doesn't, but this has not been my experience, and considering the calibre, experience, and skill and accomplishment of some of the people in here, the smug attitude that they receive for disagreeing with you offends me.
That's why you're being ripped on.
This is why the forum has devolved such as it has.
Between you and Dingo, nothing will sate you. Unless i fire 1 round for every star in the sky, you'll just say ThAz A ThtaSTistiSly InSiGniFicAnT Deeeeeeeeeerp
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.