Insite Arms fixing poorly built cooper arms rifles
- Thread starter cz0921
- Start date
The thing is with this thread, it wouldn't even exist if someone simply took the keyboard away from the OP. It would be the right thing to do. As the story continues to unfold, I'm sure we'll learn alot more. Some postings will be germane to the situation and some will not. There will continue to be the snide remarks and criticisms because that is the way these forums work.
- Location
- Lloydminster, Alberta
On that note, cooper centerfire rifles have 12 rounds fired though them . First target is not usually not great, second is better and the one you see with rifle is the third or the fourth(three rds each). That is what Mike from cooper told me last time cooper was up for a visit.
Clay ...that is my point ...with 12 rounds fired how did the clambering issues identified by the OP make it passed someone who knows what he is doing in the proof room?
With the rifle now modified , there will never be a clear picture as to what the real issues were.
With the rifle now modified , there will never be a clear picture as to what the real issues were.
- Location
- Lloydminster, Alberta
Agreed, hard to know at this point. We do know it worked well for the 12 rounds that cooper used to test fire rifle.
It would depend on the loads that were used to test the rifle. The cases may have been on the small side compared to the factory loads that the OP was using.
- Location
- Lloydminster, Alberta
Yes, Cooper uses a standard handload , not loaded for the individual rifle. So all we really know is that that load worked for 12 rounds with that load.
It would depend on the loads that were used to test the rifle. The cases may have been on the small side compared to the factory loads that the OP was using
Excellent point Stubblejumper....
If Cooper had Proofed it with VERY hot load one would expect a hard bolt lift so nothing would seem odd in the least. And the 12 or so rounds fired using their house load which is a very very light load it also could have gone unnoticed...
But if all things are proofed by one that knows what he is doing then I guess Cooper has never in all the years of operation had a warranty issue cause it was all caught before it left...case closed. We all good here then. I would think otherwise and assume they have had some and they have dealt with it like they should and carry on. Human hands at work make mistakes..it happens. Things get missed..for sure. But one has to learn to man up..admit it and take care of a customer and not in turn try to make him look dumb by saying its a scope issue... whether it was the guy at the counter or management. Think the OP was more put out more by the experience then a rifle that had issues that can be fixed.
Excellent point Stubblejumper....
If Cooper had Proofed it with VERY hot load one would expect a hard bolt lift so nothing would seem odd in the least. And the 12 or so rounds fired using their house load which is a very very light load it also could have gone unnoticed...
But if all things are proofed by one that knows what he is doing then I guess Cooper has never in all the years of operation had a warranty issue cause it was all caught before it left...case closed. We all good here then. I would think otherwise and assume they have had some and they have dealt with it like they should and carry on. Human hands at work make mistakes..it happens. Things get missed..for sure. But one has to learn to man up..admit it and take care of a customer and not in turn try to make him look dumb by saying its a scope issue... whether it was the guy at the counter or management. Think the OP was more put out more by the experience then a rifle that had issues that can be fixed.
sounds like a issue with regular sizing dies rather then small base sizing dies, bolt got sticky on the 3rd or 4th reload and blaming the chamber and barrel was the same price as the proper dies but wanted it fixed under warranty until he got called on it so he went and paid for a rebarrel and threw everyone else under the bus on the way to the range
I am one person that had a small accuracy issue with a Cooper rifle, but Clay worked with Cooper and they resolved the issue by replacing the barrel. There was no denial on anyone's part, they just resolved the issue.
I can guarantee that Cooper never fired at least one of my rifles, and I couldn't give a flying **** what their target says or how many times they claim it was shot. Anything past the mildest of handloads had extremely hard extraction , and so did the few factory loads I had around for it. It was a easy problem to fix, once we figured out what the problem was. Hell, once I figured out the problem it was noticeable on unfired ammo as well. If someone shot a proof load through it they would have been calling a welder. It got one go around with a hammer as it was.
Cooper Firearms
New member
- Location
- Bitterroot Valley, MT
After reading all of this, I feel that I should chime in.
First off, no rifle has EVER left here without being fired. EVER. Our chambers are minimum spec and will exhibit pressure signs before a rifle with a looser chamber will. Lots of people out there want to turn the 280 AI into a 7mm Rem Mag or push 140 grain bullets to 3000+ FPS in the 6.5x284, neither is a good idea. We also recommend full length resizing as neck sizing can lead to sticky extraction & hard chambering. Sizing dies that use collets are asking for grief too.
Second, even if the barrel threads were slightly undersize, this would have absolutely nothing to do with case head separation. I would go into the differences between class 1, 2, & 3 threads & how they relate to the gun industry, but I haven't the time or inclination.
The 6.5x284 has been standardized by CIP but is NOT recognized by SAAMI in the US, as such it is still a "wildcat" cartridge with no real dimensional standards to adhere to. As such, one company's head space gauge can differ from another company's. Also, in the absence of a gauge, if someone attempts to check head space by using an unfired case, this will give a false reading. In the case of the 6.5x284, the new unfired cases are about four thousandths of an inch short at the shoulder. This is so that the brass can be used in any rifle chambered in that caliber and it will fire form to whichever version the chamber is. Loaded rounds in unfired brass may not extract in an unfired state due to the shoulder of the case not contacting the shoulder of the chamber and thus not providing the necessary resistance for the extractor to snap over the rim of the case. This never happens after the cases have been fired. In any event, in that caliber, the headspace cannot accurately be determined by using an unfired case.
Since the OP never contacted us about the rifle, I can only speculate as to what the original problem was. I can say with absolute certainty that it was checked with headspace gauges at least twice while here at the factory. I can also say with certainty that it was fired several times with live rounds while here. I can also say with certainty that the 6.5x284 is a tricky cartridge to load & use due to the above mentioned reasons. There is factory ammunition available for it, but this can be problematic as well. In the US, no two company's chambers are exactly alike (unless they happen to get their reamers from the same source). Which chamber was the factory ammo made for? I don't know, the consumer doesn't know, & the ammo factory may not either! The same can be said for resizing dies! All of this adds up to a potential headache to be sure. The round also has short brass life. After a few loadings of full power loads, it becomes tired. This is merely a trade off for the performance of the round. If loads are hot, the brass has an even shorter life span. That being said, it's a popular round with a huge and loyal following. Most of them are advanced shooters and hand loaders who do not mind these "quirks". However, for a few folks, it can be a headache.
My suspicion (and that's all it is) is that the OP had a reloading issue caused by either tired brass, dies that didn't match the chamber, or excessive loads. He went to his dealer and for whatever reason had a bad experience there. I know the folks up there & while it's possible, it's unlikely. He then went to his personal gunsmith who very likely got an inaccurate headspace reading from gauges that differ from the ones we used or from an unfired case. He then proceeded to sell the OP a new barrel. While there is nothing wrong with this (it sounds like an honest mistake that would be easy to do), on a brand new rifle under warranty, I would have recommended he call the factory first. We have pretty damn good customer service, which the gunsmith well knows.
Why the thread dimensions were brought up is a mystery to me. They have absolutely nothing to do with the OP's issue, unless they were mentioned as ancillary evidence to show poor quality. They are in fact in spec for the class of thread that our prints call for, please see the beginning of this post.
I also feel that I should respond to the comments about the receiver being fit for only "light duty". The receiver is machined from 4140 Chrome Moly steel & is heat treated by Smith & Wesson for increased strength. It has been destruction tested in a lab & withstood HORRIFIC pressures. I have NEVER encountered a Model 52 action with locking lug set back. The Model 52 has been used to house 338 Lapua, Remington Ultra Magnums, 26/28 Nosler, 375 H&H, and 416 Remington just to name a few. It is hardly a weak action & is every bit as strong as any action that is machined from round stock & is likely stronger than some others.
I have to say that this entire thread presents the appearance of a "Cooper bashing festival", with a hint of "P River bashing" on the side. This is unfortunate and I have taken pains in the writing of this post to remain cool, collected, & professional.
At the end of the day, if the OP had an issue (real or imagined), he could have called us and it would have been resolved to his satisfaction. No questions asked.
I hope that any issues (real or imagined) with our rifles encountered in the future do not have to go the way this case did.
First off, no rifle has EVER left here without being fired. EVER. Our chambers are minimum spec and will exhibit pressure signs before a rifle with a looser chamber will. Lots of people out there want to turn the 280 AI into a 7mm Rem Mag or push 140 grain bullets to 3000+ FPS in the 6.5x284, neither is a good idea. We also recommend full length resizing as neck sizing can lead to sticky extraction & hard chambering. Sizing dies that use collets are asking for grief too.
Second, even if the barrel threads were slightly undersize, this would have absolutely nothing to do with case head separation. I would go into the differences between class 1, 2, & 3 threads & how they relate to the gun industry, but I haven't the time or inclination.
The 6.5x284 has been standardized by CIP but is NOT recognized by SAAMI in the US, as such it is still a "wildcat" cartridge with no real dimensional standards to adhere to. As such, one company's head space gauge can differ from another company's. Also, in the absence of a gauge, if someone attempts to check head space by using an unfired case, this will give a false reading. In the case of the 6.5x284, the new unfired cases are about four thousandths of an inch short at the shoulder. This is so that the brass can be used in any rifle chambered in that caliber and it will fire form to whichever version the chamber is. Loaded rounds in unfired brass may not extract in an unfired state due to the shoulder of the case not contacting the shoulder of the chamber and thus not providing the necessary resistance for the extractor to snap over the rim of the case. This never happens after the cases have been fired. In any event, in that caliber, the headspace cannot accurately be determined by using an unfired case.
Since the OP never contacted us about the rifle, I can only speculate as to what the original problem was. I can say with absolute certainty that it was checked with headspace gauges at least twice while here at the factory. I can also say with certainty that it was fired several times with live rounds while here. I can also say with certainty that the 6.5x284 is a tricky cartridge to load & use due to the above mentioned reasons. There is factory ammunition available for it, but this can be problematic as well. In the US, no two company's chambers are exactly alike (unless they happen to get their reamers from the same source). Which chamber was the factory ammo made for? I don't know, the consumer doesn't know, & the ammo factory may not either! The same can be said for resizing dies! All of this adds up to a potential headache to be sure. The round also has short brass life. After a few loadings of full power loads, it becomes tired. This is merely a trade off for the performance of the round. If loads are hot, the brass has an even shorter life span. That being said, it's a popular round with a huge and loyal following. Most of them are advanced shooters and hand loaders who do not mind these "quirks". However, for a few folks, it can be a headache.
My suspicion (and that's all it is) is that the OP had a reloading issue caused by either tired brass, dies that didn't match the chamber, or excessive loads. He went to his dealer and for whatever reason had a bad experience there. I know the folks up there & while it's possible, it's unlikely. He then went to his personal gunsmith who very likely got an inaccurate headspace reading from gauges that differ from the ones we used or from an unfired case. He then proceeded to sell the OP a new barrel. While there is nothing wrong with this (it sounds like an honest mistake that would be easy to do), on a brand new rifle under warranty, I would have recommended he call the factory first. We have pretty damn good customer service, which the gunsmith well knows.
Why the thread dimensions were brought up is a mystery to me. They have absolutely nothing to do with the OP's issue, unless they were mentioned as ancillary evidence to show poor quality. They are in fact in spec for the class of thread that our prints call for, please see the beginning of this post.
I also feel that I should respond to the comments about the receiver being fit for only "light duty". The receiver is machined from 4140 Chrome Moly steel & is heat treated by Smith & Wesson for increased strength. It has been destruction tested in a lab & withstood HORRIFIC pressures. I have NEVER encountered a Model 52 action with locking lug set back. The Model 52 has been used to house 338 Lapua, Remington Ultra Magnums, 26/28 Nosler, 375 H&H, and 416 Remington just to name a few. It is hardly a weak action & is every bit as strong as any action that is machined from round stock & is likely stronger than some others.
I have to say that this entire thread presents the appearance of a "Cooper bashing festival", with a hint of "P River bashing" on the side. This is unfortunate and I have taken pains in the writing of this post to remain cool, collected, & professional.
At the end of the day, if the OP had an issue (real or imagined), he could have called us and it would have been resolved to his satisfaction. No questions asked.
I hope that any issues (real or imagined) with our rifles encountered in the future do not have to go the way this case did.
Last edited:
well this thread gave alot of insite into the shill
hats off to cooper and prophet river, i think the constructive criticism on cgn will only help your bottom lines, coopers are such fine rifles perhaps perspective owners should be screened before being granted ownership
hats off to cooper and prophet river, i think the constructive criticism on cgn will only help your bottom lines, coopers are such fine rifles perhaps perspective owners should be screened before being granted ownership
What a thread..... I have had more than a few transactions with Clay & his crew at PR. Don't even go to my LGS anymore except for reloading supplies and occasional ammo runs! There is zero doubt in my mind that any concern of mine, in relation to any product's serviceability would not be immediately addressed.
P.S. Canada Post still manages to give great angst!!
Dirk
P.S. Canada Post still manages to give great angst!!
Dirk
I did speak with Harley a few days ago on this matter. I will address the points of his comment at this time. The big issue here as far as I can tell is case separation, of which has absolutely nothing to do with the barrel threads being .015 under max diameter. When this particular rifle was built we were running 7/8 diameter barrel threads. When we made the move to bring magnums into the 52 caliber lineup, we increased them to 1 inch. From what Harley told me, he was getting .860 as opposed to .875, which is .015 under max diameter, which is .0075 shorter per side, which in the big picture is nothing on tapered threads, and certainly nothing that would have absolutely anything to do with case separation, headspace, hard bolt uplift, accuracy, etc. As for the barrel that came on the rifle, I would have had no issue with using the same barrel to rechamber (if it even needed it), as the threads were not out of spec whatsoever. As for the action being light bodied and light duty, the 52 action is incredibly strong. We run calibers ranging from 6.5x284, through 416 Rem Mag. It's strong- we checked.
As covered in my previous post, we did increase the barrel thread diameter from 7/8 to 1 inch- not like that of a Remington, but more like a Winchester. Remington's are 1.062, whereas Winchester's, and Cooper, are 1.00 even. As for the issue of poor ejection, we did make a change to the spring and ejector. This was not due to initial poor ejection, but rather weak ejection as we moved into larger calibers in the 52. As for making changes, we are continuously evolving as a company, and that includes our product line.
