What is a 'printed action' 'trued action'?
- Thread starter cath8r
- Start date
Jerry,
The use of the headspace guage to align the barel in the receiver and with the bolt face is meaningless. As I said before, a vee thread, providing there is clearance at the crest and the root of the thread, is self aligning. Envision a tapered hole and a cone which fits into it. The cone will center up in the hole and will tend to do so even more under a linear load. The vee thread works the same way.
Having measured a few Savage actions, it is my feeling that the good lug contact is possible mainly due to the loose fit of the bolt in the receiver and the fact that the alignment of the bolt is uninfluenced by pressure on the cocking piece by the sear. By way of education, just try and wiggle the bolt head in the bolt body and see how much play there is. Not much. Not enough to allow the bolt head to float sufficiently to make up for even .001 of error in the locking lug seats.
Please understand Jerry, I'm in no way trying to be argumentative but I do know quite a bit about rifle actions and how alignment is achieved or affected. I'm just trying to pass along some knowledge.
About the three shot group.
Mr Pollock, like many short range benchresters, is wedded to the 5 shot group as a measure of rifle precision. I'm sure all will agree the five shot group is more meaningful than the three shot. Of course, even the five shot group is pretty meaningless if the usual target is fifteen or twenty shots. With the five shot group it is necessary to hit a given spot four times while the three shot group requires that it only be done twice. In either case the first shot is a gimme and only serves to establish the (hoped for) group center.
I have fired a lot of sub 1 inch 10 shot groups at 300 meters with my "De-Frippulator"; yet, I often struggle to put all ten in a 2 inch circle at the same distance. In the context of the 300 meter "F" class match, a five shot group means nothing. I've shot a whole bunch of sub-3/4 inch five shot groups with the same rifle at the same distance but, like your 3 shot group, it only shows me the potential is there.
I am not trying to denigrate the accomplishments of the short range BR guys. The frustration level of trying to read conditions to within .1 moa is pretty intense. Add to this the necessity of counting EVERY shot and it goes up. In the mind of a competitive BR shooter, it also means nothing if the group is not fired in competition and with witnesses.
Now, if you fired that three shot group then showed yourself and the rifle capable of duplicating it at will, the rifle would be well on it's way to being a .2 or better rifle as you would be a .2 or better shooter. If you can't duplicate it at will, then you and the rifle only have .2 moa or better potential.
I think it was Bob Forslund who told me a three shot group is enough to show if a rifle is not accurate but not enough to show if it is. In other words, a big three shot group wouldn't be made any smaller by shooting two more shots but a small one was quite likely to made bigger! I would certainly not head to a match full of confidence based on the firing of one three shot group. I also would not be too confident on the basis of one five shot group.
I do have to say, that 3 shot group is pretty impressive even so. It IS a group. It's just not a group that means a lot without lots of duplication. Regards, Bill
The use of the headspace guage to align the barel in the receiver and with the bolt face is meaningless. As I said before, a vee thread, providing there is clearance at the crest and the root of the thread, is self aligning. Envision a tapered hole and a cone which fits into it. The cone will center up in the hole and will tend to do so even more under a linear load. The vee thread works the same way.
Having measured a few Savage actions, it is my feeling that the good lug contact is possible mainly due to the loose fit of the bolt in the receiver and the fact that the alignment of the bolt is uninfluenced by pressure on the cocking piece by the sear. By way of education, just try and wiggle the bolt head in the bolt body and see how much play there is. Not much. Not enough to allow the bolt head to float sufficiently to make up for even .001 of error in the locking lug seats.
Please understand Jerry, I'm in no way trying to be argumentative but I do know quite a bit about rifle actions and how alignment is achieved or affected. I'm just trying to pass along some knowledge.
About the three shot group.
Mr Pollock, like many short range benchresters, is wedded to the 5 shot group as a measure of rifle precision. I'm sure all will agree the five shot group is more meaningful than the three shot. Of course, even the five shot group is pretty meaningless if the usual target is fifteen or twenty shots. With the five shot group it is necessary to hit a given spot four times while the three shot group requires that it only be done twice. In either case the first shot is a gimme and only serves to establish the (hoped for) group center.
I have fired a lot of sub 1 inch 10 shot groups at 300 meters with my "De-Frippulator"; yet, I often struggle to put all ten in a 2 inch circle at the same distance. In the context of the 300 meter "F" class match, a five shot group means nothing. I've shot a whole bunch of sub-3/4 inch five shot groups with the same rifle at the same distance but, like your 3 shot group, it only shows me the potential is there.
I am not trying to denigrate the accomplishments of the short range BR guys. The frustration level of trying to read conditions to within .1 moa is pretty intense. Add to this the necessity of counting EVERY shot and it goes up. In the mind of a competitive BR shooter, it also means nothing if the group is not fired in competition and with witnesses.
Now, if you fired that three shot group then showed yourself and the rifle capable of duplicating it at will, the rifle would be well on it's way to being a .2 or better rifle as you would be a .2 or better shooter. If you can't duplicate it at will, then you and the rifle only have .2 moa or better potential.
I think it was Bob Forslund who told me a three shot group is enough to show if a rifle is not accurate but not enough to show if it is. In other words, a big three shot group wouldn't be made any smaller by shooting two more shots but a small one was quite likely to made bigger! I would certainly not head to a match full of confidence based on the firing of one three shot group. I also would not be too confident on the basis of one five shot group.
I do have to say, that 3 shot group is pretty impressive even so. It IS a group. It's just not a group that means a lot without lots of duplication. Regards, Bill
Indeed we are married to the 5 shot group. Let's not stop there though, how about 10 shot, or how about 20x5 shot groups in a row. Now we are getting somewhere.....
Having done this for 15 years, and seen precious few measured groups in the zeros, shot by the top shooters in the world, shooting the top equipment in the world, it irks me when people casually reference shooting groups in the zeros "occasionally", as if it is a routine occurance. I assure you it isn't.
When it does happen, it is such a feat that you will see the other shooters go over and shake that guys hand. They know what it takes to put 5 or 10 shots through the same hole. It could take years of work, thousands of rounds loaded and fired, barrels worn out while staring over a set of wind flags to make it happen.
Or you could just rebarrel a Savage.
You obviously are new are new here, maybe you should peruse some of Jerry's other posts on this site. He has bragging rights without posting pics of 3 shot groups. You really should read a sample of his posts before spouting off that he is "posting a 3 shot group for bragging rights like everyone on the internet"
Richard
P.S. I have shot against Jerry and he is definitely up there with the "Best of Them" including Bill Leeper, Obtunded and countless others.
Last edited:
Rick,
You are suffering just a little bit from that distasteful Benchrest elitism that turns people away from the sport in droves. Ease up!
We all know that internet rifles shoot just a bit better than their real world counterparts but you have shot enough to know that, sometimes, non-BR rifles can indeed show some impressive performance. Not perhaps under BR match conditions, but impressive nonetheless.
Just to be clear though, you are right in that there is a big difference between what the casual shooter calls a "rifle that shoots in the .1's" and what a benchrest shooter calls a "rifle that shoots in the .1's". To the casual shooter, such a rifle is, all too often, a rifle which did so once and which, he is convinced, will do it again someday. To a competitive BR shooter, such a rifle is one with which he can, at any time and in front of witnesses say, "Hey, watch this." and fire five shots with a real expectation of shooting a group under .2".
So, those of you who have all of the 1/4 minute rifles, I'm assuming you mean that you can, under good conditions, with me watching, fire five into a quarter inch or less most of the time. If I say I have a 1/4 minute rifle, that's what I mean and, if Rick says he has a 1/4 minute rifle, that's what he means. If you really mean you have a rifle which has produced a 1/4 inch group once and you have a picture of the group, well, that's an "Internet 1/4 minute rifle" and it's just a bit different. Regards, Bill
You are suffering just a little bit from that distasteful Benchrest elitism that turns people away from the sport in droves. Ease up!
We all know that internet rifles shoot just a bit better than their real world counterparts but you have shot enough to know that, sometimes, non-BR rifles can indeed show some impressive performance. Not perhaps under BR match conditions, but impressive nonetheless.
Just to be clear though, you are right in that there is a big difference between what the casual shooter calls a "rifle that shoots in the .1's" and what a benchrest shooter calls a "rifle that shoots in the .1's". To the casual shooter, such a rifle is, all too often, a rifle which did so once and which, he is convinced, will do it again someday. To a competitive BR shooter, such a rifle is one with which he can, at any time and in front of witnesses say, "Hey, watch this." and fire five shots with a real expectation of shooting a group under .2".
So, those of you who have all of the 1/4 minute rifles, I'm assuming you mean that you can, under good conditions, with me watching, fire five into a quarter inch or less most of the time. If I say I have a 1/4 minute rifle, that's what I mean and, if Rick says he has a 1/4 minute rifle, that's what he means. If you really mean you have a rifle which has produced a 1/4 inch group once and you have a picture of the group, well, that's an "Internet 1/4 minute rifle" and it's just a bit different. Regards, Bill
Awesome job on the 2005 register
It might help if you had something to put toward the original post rather than calling people down who are actually trying to help someone else understand something that they had questions about.Cheers Bill, an attitude like that can certainly deter new shooters from coming out and learning something new. Some of us are currently looking at new ways to actually bring new people into the sport around here.
Last edited:
Benchrest does not attract people in droves. You know that. A real cheap shot Bill, when you know for years I have organized matches in BC and Alberta, loaned rifles and other equipment to help people get going in the sport, among countless other activities to promote BR. You have strange definition of elitism. I don't see any shooting sport attracting people in droves. But that is another topic.
Part of the problem is people have a very unrealistic expectation of what they and their rifles can do when they get in a match. I have seen it while organizing matches over the years and countless days at the range. It is not helpful to have people saying that a simple rebarrel will have you shooting 2's, 1's and zeros. The frustration for the new shooter is overwhelming and they decide that the sport is not for them. Raising unrealistic expectations does not help any of our sports.
BILL!!!!!!!!
Speaking of De-Frippulators, He shot an 8 and 4-9's in a row today!!!!!!!!!!!! ok, terible wind and only one flag.... and he won the winter league in spite of the day's score, but still!!!! how the mighty have fallen!
We were roaring in the butts yesterday!!!!
-you coming to the April shoot?
Speaking of De-Frippulators, He shot an 8 and 4-9's in a row today!!!!!!!!!!!! ok, terible wind and only one flag.... and he won the winter league in spite of the day's score, but still!!!! how the mighty have fallen!
We were roaring in the butts yesterday!!!!
-you coming to the April shoot?
That was a bit of a cheapshot Rick and I apologise. You know as well as I that the way to increase interest and attendance is to encourage people to come out. Benchresters have always had a tendency to come across as knowing it all and it's a tendency to be avoided.
Many people have started out shooting with a simple rebarrel and I think it's important for people to know that they still can. Will they win? Probably not. Will they learn what they have to do to win? Maybe, maybe not, but they have a chance.
When I shot my first BR match, I went out with a rifle I KNEW would shoot under 1/2 minute (this was back when 1/4 minute aggs were very rare indeed and a .4 agg wasn't embarrassing). Yet, I shot all day and only fired one group under 1/2 inch. An eye opener for me. Even more of an eye opener was seeing the Forslund brothers shoot groups of 1/4 inch seemingly at will. From this beginning, I eventually learned what was required to win now and then.
Jerry has done a lot to demonstrate that one does not need to spend megabucks to shoot competitively in his discipline of choice, "F" class. While most BR shooters would argue that the same approach would not work at their venue, they might be surprised at how well it could.
I think that a simple rebarrel and restock on a Savage single shot action would yield a rifle which would agg in the low .3 range. This means it would shoot the occasional group in the .1's but the norm would be high.2's to mid .3's. On the right day, this could win! On any day, it could beat a whole bunch of guys with $6000 or more sitting on their bench. This is what people have to hear because it's the truth. Don't be intimidated because you can't afford to import a new BAT actioned rifle from some big name maker in the states.
I think some people might have unreasonably high expectations of their rifle's capability but so what? They will learn soon enough. The learning will be less likely to dissuade them from shooting than to have someone tell them they are wasting their time before they even try.
Now, my final statement (just so I can offend everyone) is this; If you have a fancy shooting rifle and can make it perform, you are just a pretender if you don't prove so in competition. Regards, Bill
Many people have started out shooting with a simple rebarrel and I think it's important for people to know that they still can. Will they win? Probably not. Will they learn what they have to do to win? Maybe, maybe not, but they have a chance.
When I shot my first BR match, I went out with a rifle I KNEW would shoot under 1/2 minute (this was back when 1/4 minute aggs were very rare indeed and a .4 agg wasn't embarrassing). Yet, I shot all day and only fired one group under 1/2 inch. An eye opener for me. Even more of an eye opener was seeing the Forslund brothers shoot groups of 1/4 inch seemingly at will. From this beginning, I eventually learned what was required to win now and then.
Jerry has done a lot to demonstrate that one does not need to spend megabucks to shoot competitively in his discipline of choice, "F" class. While most BR shooters would argue that the same approach would not work at their venue, they might be surprised at how well it could.
I think that a simple rebarrel and restock on a Savage single shot action would yield a rifle which would agg in the low .3 range. This means it would shoot the occasional group in the .1's but the norm would be high.2's to mid .3's. On the right day, this could win! On any day, it could beat a whole bunch of guys with $6000 or more sitting on their bench. This is what people have to hear because it's the truth. Don't be intimidated because you can't afford to import a new BAT actioned rifle from some big name maker in the states.
I think some people might have unreasonably high expectations of their rifle's capability but so what? They will learn soon enough. The learning will be less likely to dissuade them from shooting than to have someone tell them they are wasting their time before they even try.
Now, my final statement (just so I can offend everyone) is this; If you have a fancy shooting rifle and can make it perform, you are just a pretender if you don't prove so in competition. Regards, Bill
Thanks Bill.
Having been on the organizing side for years gives me a different perspective about our sport. What I have seen is that few shooters have the staying power to do what you , myself and virtually every other competitve shooter goes through when beginning competitive rifle shooting. To say those first few matches are tough on the ego would be an understatement. False equipment expectations do not help the situation, they make it worse when trying to keep and retain new shooters.
It is hard enough getting peole to give up a weekend to attend a rifle match, lets not make it worse for them by saying they can be shooting 2's, 1's, and zeros with a simple rebarrel. They will surely be dissapointed.
Yes it is a sore spot, so much so that I broke my vow not to get involved with Internet discussions of rifle performance!
Having been on the organizing side for years gives me a different perspective about our sport. What I have seen is that few shooters have the staying power to do what you , myself and virtually every other competitve shooter goes through when beginning competitive rifle shooting. To say those first few matches are tough on the ego would be an understatement. False equipment expectations do not help the situation, they make it worse when trying to keep and retain new shooters.
It is hard enough getting peole to give up a weekend to attend a rifle match, lets not make it worse for them by saying they can be shooting 2's, 1's, and zeros with a simple rebarrel. They will surely be dissapointed.
Yes it is a sore spot, so much so that I broke my vow not to get involved with Internet discussions of rifle performance!
Lets get it back on action truing...
Bill,
I recently bought some 700 action bushings and a "standard 700" piloted thread tap from Dave Kiff...
I have been setting the action up in the lathe and single point cutting the thread... and that is such a pain to do... at least for me..
If you aren't familiar with this thread tap, it works very much the same as single point cutting... at least it seems to... you install a tight bushing in the front of the bolt race and a tight bushing in the rear of the bolt race. (These are not tapered bushings) Then the pilot of the tap is inserted in these bushings and you tap the action by hand... you can feel the tap cutting the threads that are too close to the axis, on one side only... when the tap has been run to the bottom of the thread, you can see just where it cut and where it did not... it is not oversize as such and you can install a factory barrel if you wish... it appears to work very well and I like it as it still is the standard 700 size... I have another cutter on order that will use the same bushing and face the recoil lug recesses and the action face in the same set up... I know this is not new and others have been using this method for years... but I think it is as good in performance as single point cutting... and it cuts the labour time way down. I have corresponded with a fellow in the US who has done this and single point cutting for years and he finds it perfectly acceptable... I thought I would give it a try.. and so far I like it...
Any thoughts on this..? See you at Kamloops April 26/27.
Dennis
Bill,
I recently bought some 700 action bushings and a "standard 700" piloted thread tap from Dave Kiff...
I have been setting the action up in the lathe and single point cutting the thread... and that is such a pain to do... at least for me..
If you aren't familiar with this thread tap, it works very much the same as single point cutting... at least it seems to... you install a tight bushing in the front of the bolt race and a tight bushing in the rear of the bolt race. (These are not tapered bushings) Then the pilot of the tap is inserted in these bushings and you tap the action by hand... you can feel the tap cutting the threads that are too close to the axis, on one side only... when the tap has been run to the bottom of the thread, you can see just where it cut and where it did not... it is not oversize as such and you can install a factory barrel if you wish... it appears to work very well and I like it as it still is the standard 700 size... I have another cutter on order that will use the same bushing and face the recoil lug recesses and the action face in the same set up... I know this is not new and others have been using this method for years... but I think it is as good in performance as single point cutting... and it cuts the labour time way down. I have corresponded with a fellow in the US who has done this and single point cutting for years and he finds it perfectly acceptable... I thought I would give it a try.. and so far I like it...
Any thoughts on this..? See you at Kamloops April 26/27.
Dennis
I think you will have alot of fun on this site.
Enjoy...
Jerry
PS here is a group shot recently with my new pac nor barreled 223 at 200yds. Yep, untuned factory stevens 200 action. I think that qualifies as a group in the 0's. Math was off. Should have been 0.056" for a 0.028min group. Yes, it is only 3 rds but I was working up loads and only had 3rds of that load. Close enough.
If you are going to measure groups to the thousandths, the least you can do is do it correctly. Your math is wrong, but because you subtracted .224 from the edge to edge measurement instead of the size of the actual bullet holes. Big difference.
I do have some thoughts on this.
First, I think it is a viable system. I think the important thing is that the threads be parallel to the bore of the action. I believe a small amount of eccentricity does little harm ("small amount"= .010TIR or less). I think the piloted tap system can do a pretty good job of this.
I believe the piloted tap can be influenced by the user. In other words, a skill workman will achieve better results this way than will a klutz. This is, of course true of any method. If single pointing in the lathe, set up is everything. The inept individual will screw up the set up or he will screw up the use of the tap! Either way, the results will be substandard.
The close fitting bushing as employed by Dave Kiff is superior to the tapered bushing system. The tapered bushings are more likely to allow the operator to influence the cutter adversely.
"Back in the day", I used to make a piloted lap of cast iron and lap the locking lug seats with it. The cutter employed to recut the seats with the systems by Kiff or Manson would work at least as well and a lot faster. Bottom line? I think the systems can do a good job when used by a skilled gunsmith such as yourself. I don't know that I will switch over any time soon. I don't mind setting up to single point and have been fine tuning my methods along that line for a long time.
I'm planning on attending the April shoot. I will probably bring a couple extra rifles and ammunition as loaners if anyone new wants to try. I'm not sure if I will shoot "F" or TR yet.
I have a new 22-250 -8"twist built on a CIL 950T which seems to show some promise and I might shoot that.
Tell Tom I feel really bad for him. For that reason, I won't even bring my best rifle. If he wants, I can "coach" him the same way he does me. I'm sure that will help a lot. Regards, Bill.
First, I think it is a viable system. I think the important thing is that the threads be parallel to the bore of the action. I believe a small amount of eccentricity does little harm ("small amount"= .010TIR or less). I think the piloted tap system can do a pretty good job of this.
I believe the piloted tap can be influenced by the user. In other words, a skill workman will achieve better results this way than will a klutz. This is, of course true of any method. If single pointing in the lathe, set up is everything. The inept individual will screw up the set up or he will screw up the use of the tap! Either way, the results will be substandard.
The close fitting bushing as employed by Dave Kiff is superior to the tapered bushing system. The tapered bushings are more likely to allow the operator to influence the cutter adversely.
"Back in the day", I used to make a piloted lap of cast iron and lap the locking lug seats with it. The cutter employed to recut the seats with the systems by Kiff or Manson would work at least as well and a lot faster. Bottom line? I think the systems can do a good job when used by a skilled gunsmith such as yourself. I don't know that I will switch over any time soon. I don't mind setting up to single point and have been fine tuning my methods along that line for a long time.
I'm planning on attending the April shoot. I will probably bring a couple extra rifles and ammunition as loaners if anyone new wants to try. I'm not sure if I will shoot "F" or TR yet.
I have a new 22-250 -8"twist built on a CIL 950T which seems to show some promise and I might shoot that.
Tell Tom I feel really bad for him. For that reason, I won't even bring my best rifle. If he wants, I can "coach" him the same way he does me. I'm sure that will help a lot. Regards, Bill.
Group measurment.
Measuring from edge to edge and subtracting the bullet diameter is just fine as long as the bullet mark is .224 in diameter. Is usually is not but it will be close. The difference isn't likely to be more than .010 or so.
When re-measuring a BR group, it is common practice to first measure a single bullet hole to come up with the deduction figure. Hole size will vary with the type of paper (this is why BR matches must use official targets. Even so, there is some variation). Measuring devices which use a rcticle etched on plexi are sometimes a little generous in their allowance. They worked better when groups were bigger!
To quibble about thousandths is jsut that; quibbling. A .056 group at 200 is very nice even if only three shots. A .076 group would still be very nice even at half that distance.
How meaningless is a single three shot group? Pretty meaningless by itself but it can be a useful load developement tool. Some really impressive three shot groups I have fired include a .276 at 100 yds from a Lee Enfield. I backed that one up with one which measured 1.5" so the small group wasn't indicative of much. Regards, Bill.
Measuring from edge to edge and subtracting the bullet diameter is just fine as long as the bullet mark is .224 in diameter. Is usually is not but it will be close. The difference isn't likely to be more than .010 or so.
When re-measuring a BR group, it is common practice to first measure a single bullet hole to come up with the deduction figure. Hole size will vary with the type of paper (this is why BR matches must use official targets. Even so, there is some variation). Measuring devices which use a rcticle etched on plexi are sometimes a little generous in their allowance. They worked better when groups were bigger!
To quibble about thousandths is jsut that; quibbling. A .056 group at 200 is very nice even if only three shots. A .076 group would still be very nice even at half that distance.
How meaningless is a single three shot group? Pretty meaningless by itself but it can be a useful load developement tool. Some really impressive three shot groups I have fired include a .276 at 100 yds from a Lee Enfield. I backed that one up with one which measured 1.5" so the small group wasn't indicative of much. Regards, Bill.
