Why would the barrel be bedded?

Fox

Fox

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Location
Kemptville
I got my Remington 700 back from the gunsmith. My load was under 1 MOA on a bad day, the rifle is chambered in 222 Rem. I brought it to the range thinking that since he pulled it out of the stock that the zero may have changed a bit. Well, the load that was under 1 MOA now is 6MOA, WTF.

I do know that this rifle is bedded all the day down the stock, why would anyone do this over floating the barrel?

My thought now is to float the barrel, but how much should I leave bedded? Just the chamber? A few inches?

The receiver is a tight fit, that bedding is great, but now that the rifle that was shooting 5 shots under a dime at 100 yards is shooting 6in at the same range.

This is bugging the crap out of me.
 
My experience has been that Remington 700's shoot best with the action bedded (stress free) with clearance on the front, sides and bottom of the recoil lug and the barrel floating and a fresh crown.
 
I've run into this a couple of times. The wife's cousin had his rifle at a "smith" to have it bedded and double set triggers installed. Got it back, and it was bedded all the way, and the triggers were a safety hazard. I honestly don't know what the thought process was? I wound up sanding the bedding out so that a dollar bill will now slide nicely down to about 2 1/2" from the action. Wound up throwing out the triggers/bottom metal (Mauser action) and got him a new bottom metal and a Timney.
 
I know of a custom rifle builder from Texas - Charlie Sisk - he full length solid beds his barrel channels. I had an extremely accurate Remington 788 in 243 that I had bedded fully from rear tang to forearm tip - many 1/2" to 3/4" 3 and 5 shot groups with that factory barrel. I do not believe that "free float" sporter weight barrel necessarily generates top accuracy, but it is easier and cheaper to do than perfect full contact bedding. As well, I have found some sporter weight barrels that respond very nicely to some "up" pressure at the end of the forearm. From what you describe, your load no longer generates the harmonics your rifle now wants. Or the full length job has been botched. Or your barrel wants, and has lost, its factory tip up pressure. Based on what I have read, the 222 Remington had a reputation for much less than MOA, but that was probably in dedicated bench rest rifles - heavy barrel, etc. Quick thing to try is to lay a layer or two of cardboard shim at forearm tip (create up pressure) and see if the groups tighten up. Can also try a couple layers of cardboard under the front of receiver (front action screw) which will free float your barrel - again, can try it to see what it does to your groups.
 
I had 5 shots you could cover with a dime with a load back in the day (not my load, no data from it but the gun came with the ammo), this rifle can be damn accurate.

I guess I am trying to work out why taking it out of the stock and cleaning up the trigger would cause it to now be so different accuracy wise. The bedding was done a long time ago, the only thing done this time was cleaning up the trigger as I had an issue with the safety.
 
I mis-read your first post - I assumed that it had just been full length bedded. I don't think adjustments on the trigger can account for what you describe. Perhaps there is a big difference in the amount of torque applied to the actions screws, or a bit of stray "crap" that found its way between the metal and the bedding - check especially in the recoil lug recess. Something sure changed in the relationship between the stock and the barrelled action!!
 
I picked up a rifle on the EE and the previous owner had a brake installed and had a small area about an inch wide just past the recoil lug bedded. He said the gunsmith claimed the barrel harmonics needed the extra bedding. I don't know if that's true but that thing is a tack driver.
 
Potashminer said:
I mis-read your first post - I assumed that it had just been full length bedded. I don't think adjustments on the trigger can account for what you describe. Perhaps there is a big difference in the amount of torque applied to the actions screws, or a bit of stray "crap" that found its way between the metal and the bedding - check especially in the recoil lug recess. Something sure changed in the relationship between the stock and the barrelled action!!
Click to expand...

Same.

Try playing around with torque settings on the action screws.
 
maynard said:
After checking the bedding screws check the scope screws and maybe even swap out the scope.
Click to expand...

Will do, but weird that things would change just after that job.

I literally got the load developed a month before the gun went into the gunsmith and never took it hunting since getting the load developed, just had it malfunction trying to shoot a groundhog in my garden, ha ha.
 
I guess that is a thought - maybe the guy removed the scope when he disassembled the rifle - would be worth while to re-check all the attachments, if nothing comes from inspection of bedding surfaces.
 
Make sure the mag box is not binding and is moves slightly when assembled.
And play with the torque on the action screws x 4
 
There is as much BS surrounding bedding techniques as almost any aspect of rifle building. I have my own opinions but, like anyone who has had much experience with rifles, I have seen all sorts of exceptions so I don't make positive assertions. In my gun racks, I have two which are bedded full length, in wood. Both are black powder rifles. Two which are bedded with forend tip pressure (both two piece stocks) and twenty or so which are free floated all the way. My preference should be evident.
 
Leeper said:
There is as much BS surrounding bedding techniques as almost any aspect of rifle building. I have my own opinions but, like anyone who has had much experience with rifles, I have seen all sorts of exceptions so I don't make positive assertions. In my gun racks, I have two which are bedded full length, in wood. Both are black powder rifles. Two which are bedded with forend tip pressure (both two piece stocks) and twenty or so which are free floated all the way. My preference should be evident.
Click to expand...

Eloquently said Bill .I totally agree .
 
I guess the lesson in all this is ,,if you have a factory rifle that's shooting under MOA all day,,, leave it alone,,,
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom