VERY strange BSA problem.

broadhead67 said:
Home loads or store bought ?
What does the spent brass look like ? Any psi signs , gas leakage ?
I had similar results once when shooting off a lead sled the rest for the fore stock was very tight and giving terrible groups from the pressure. Stood up with it - problem solved.
Click to expand...

Shooting on the same two sandbags as I use for everything else. Have never used a lead sled, and probably never will.

Ted
 
Why not? said:
Bought an old BSA Enfield sporter rifle in 270 Winchester a few weeks ago that has really got me stumped. It is not a home-grown effort, but a factory conversion by BSA. Have had a couple of these over the years, and they usually shoot quite well.

View attachment 267373

I knew it would be a heavy rifle, and my original plan was to rebarrel it to 9.3X62, but decided to shoot it first. The rifle literally shoots groups like a shotgun. Have taken it apart twice, checked bedding and everything seems tight. Scope rings and bases are tight.

Thought the scope must be gunny sack. Today, I went back to the range with a known-scope mounted to give it one more try. Here's the results at 25 yards!

View attachment 267376

In close to sixty years of shooting and handloading, I have not one time seen any rifle shoot this poorly. Twenty-five yards, and the two distinct 'groups' are about five inches apart.

The bore is not perfect, but appears close to that, and has sharp rifling. As well, a tight patch discovers no loose spots in the bore anywhere. The crown looks good, but would not cause such horrible results even if it were damaged.

So now I have a new project. Figure out what is going on, and learn something.

Before I start tearing this thing apart, am wondering where you would start?

Ted
Click to expand...

May see how it shoots with 30-06 ammo... are you sure it is a .270 bore?
 
For ####s n giggles, lay a piece of hard flexible plastic (credit card like) under the barrel in the stock about 3" from the end and reassemble, snug both the action screws tight, and see how it shoots.
 
Hitzy said:
For ####s n giggles, lay a piece of hard flexible plastic (credit card like) under the barrel in the stock about 3" from the end and reassemble, snug both the action screws tight, and see how it shoots.
Click to expand...

Yes, that will be one of the fixes that have worked for me in the past.

Also, had a buddy who used to "free float" some of his rifles by doing the opposite. He would cut a piece to fit, and put it under the receiver ring behind the recoil lug.

Thanks Hitzy.

Ted
 
SuperCub said:
I understand the "challenge" that has been set before you here, but why not just sent the rifle away and have it re-barreled?

The old saying ..... "Don't shoot the donor" is true in this one as well. :)

That would make a very nice 9.3. I could see that with a 21" bbl, bbl sights, bbl band front swivel, the forend cut shorter and a good pad on the other end topped with a 1.5-5 in weaver mounts.
Click to expand...

I already have the 1.5-4.5 scope for that project, but this rifle has got me in a box, and I'm going to get out! :dancingbanana:

Thanks Paul.

Ted
 
hoytcanon said:
This... The last time I saw terrible groups, the fella was shooting .243 out of a .260... maybe someone rebored?

Also, try the fired brass in another .270, and try FL sizing the fired brass and see how much pressure it takes to size it down... maybe the chamber/throat is buggered.
Click to expand...

I saw a similar situation once, a long time ago. The dead giveaway, however, was that the bullet holes on the paper were oval. None of that here.

Thanks Hoyt,

Ted
 
reomack said:
Bought an old Savage 110 in 338 Win and it shot poorly too. Not as Bad as what you are showing but BAD. It had been bedded and upon inspection the bedding looked really good but when I looked closely at the barrel channel,there were three very shiny spots from contact between the barrel and the stock. A little stock work later and the next time I shot it it was much better, about 1 1/2 inches VS about 8 inches at 100 yards. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Thanks reomack. I checked that the first time I took it out of the stock after getting back from the range.

Appreciate the suggestion.
Ted
 
SHELL SHUCKER said:
Ted,
Ye can always go with plan A if the 270 setup ends up being a pain. I rather like the 9.3 option on a hefty beasty like the P14/P17 action'd units. I can see your one fitted with a magnum contour, 22" tube on 'er. (Like the profile of a Rem 783 tube.)

I had a similar rifle to yours in .458 Win mag in the mid 80's that porked out at 11 lbs with scope. T'was an accurate bugger though & great for shooting from a hide.
Good luck with your project amigo. Neat rifle fer sure.:)

JJ
Click to expand...

Stand by..... I think I may have a clue or two.

Ted
 
Why not? said:
Well, it's definitely not a 30-06, but might possibly be a 7mm bore as several others have suggested. Going to swage a few fishing sinkers into the muzzle and find out.

Thanks Dennis. Will report back.

Ted
Click to expand...

Yes... if it were a 30-06 it wouldn't be grouping but you would see tumbling bullet holes... but if it is a 7mm bore I think the bullets may get enough spin but group badly.

Why not start with a fresh crown? That's the easiest first step.

Then see if the barrel is tight... and go from there.
 
That's a big spread. The two-group pattern would suggest a loose scope mount base or, possibly, a stock which is broken out behing the recoil lug and starting to split. If it was an over sized barrel, I would expect groups to be more random but , who knows? It will make good 9.3 and I'm sure you need another. ;)
 
My 300 ruger was like that when i got it. Found it would shoot one, the barrel whip to the opposite side, and back to the first side after the 2nd shot. Ended up bedding the foreend and now does 3/4" group.
 
The saga continues.....

Thoroughly checked the stock and bedding, tried three different scopes.

Three different loads, and three different bullets has made no difference, so decided to shim under the barrel near the end of the forestock to exert some upward pressure on the barrel. Two thicknesses of business card should be about right.... :cool:

Went to the range about 8:30 tonight. Lovely evening, almost no wind, and was there all alone. Here's the first two shots at 25 yards again.

View attachment 268343


130 gr Sierras ahead of 59 gr H4831.


Smiling, and congratulating myself on determining that it was a bedding issue..... :dancingbanana:

The next shot was almost two inches away. The fourth shot was back on the other side of the first two, and the fifth shot cut halfway into the fourth.

Never even took a picture, just left the target there, and came home. It has to be something in the scope setup for it to always be the same pattern of disparity with three different scopes.

I am missing something very simple.

Ted
 
Why not? said:
It has to be something in the scope setup for it to always be the same pattern of disparity with three different scopes.

I am missing something very simple.

Ted
Click to expand...

If it's happening with 3 different scopes, then I would say it's more likely to be a bedding/barrel issue. Have you tried letting the barrel get dead cold between shots?
 
9.3mauser said:
If it's happening with 3 different scopes, then I would say it's more likely to be a bedding/barrel issue. Have you tried letting the barrel get dead cold between shots?
Click to expand...

If it’s a barrel heating/metallurgy/unequal heating issue, then the bullet holes should walk along a line, then settle down into one spot after the first 2 or 3 shots, so I don’t think it’s that.

Op, could you post more pictures of the rifle and sight set up? Not that we could diagnose a bedding issue through a photo, but sometimes staring at something helps with the chin scratching. ;-)
 
Probably not real helpful, but I notice that barrel has a "boss" for the rear sight mount, like the pre-64 Winchesters. Does it have a stock screw up into that boss (again, like a pre-64 Winchester)? I have a number of those BSA conversions here, but all are or were 30-06, (none in .270), and the rear sights were installed with a simple dovetail into the barrel. These were former Model of 1917 Enfields, converted by BSA. As a 270, it should have serial number starting with "HA###x". Since there were no milsurp 270 barrels, I presume that BSA had to get them made somewhere.
It appears to have Weaver bases. From what I've read, the receiver was supposed to be ground for Parker Hale #3 and #4 bases (similar to the Win Model 70 contours). The rear base hole spacing from BSA was .605". So far as I can find, only a #36 in the Weaver line-up has that hole spacing. If that rear base is #36, it has a larger radius than the rear bridge was ground for, and apparently can "rock" under recoil, even though the screws are tight. Might be worth investigating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom