Gunsmithing Blue Printing An Action
- Thread starter hugo121175
- Start date
Re: Blue Printing An Action
Search Function. There are tons of info on this topic all over the site.
Search Function. There are tons of info on this topic all over the site.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
This is how William Roscoe (Louisiana Precision Rifles) did mine
Receiver Blue Printing
This is how William Roscoe (Louisiana Precision Rifles) did mine
Receiver Blue Printing
Re: Blue Printing An Action
I have searched the sight about Blue Printing an Action. All of what I find is guys looking for smiths to get it done, smith telling how to, or guys telling who did theirs. What I'll asking is "Why". What does it do for you or your rifle? Thanks for any help you can send my way.
I have searched the sight about Blue Printing an Action. All of what I find is guys looking for smiths to get it done, smith telling how to, or guys telling who did theirs. What I'll asking is "Why". What does it do for you or your rifle? Thanks for any help you can send my way.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
Hugo,
Just a quick explanation;
It's all about keeping the receiver raceway, bolt, receiver threads, barrel threads, chamber and bore on a centerline and the receiver face, lug abutments, bolt locking lugs, bolt face and barrel shoulder are kept perpendicular to that center line.
Granted, receivers are no more than a fire control device but variables need to be removed in order to maintain consistency with anything.
Factory receivers are notorious for having the threads and receiver face look in two different directions as compared to the receiver centerline. Scope base holes are another issue all together but, scopes usually zero better once a receiver is trued due to the barrel now being screwed on straighter than before and the centerline of all things being aligned.
Hugo,
Just a quick explanation;
It's all about keeping the receiver raceway, bolt, receiver threads, barrel threads, chamber and bore on a centerline and the receiver face, lug abutments, bolt locking lugs, bolt face and barrel shoulder are kept perpendicular to that center line.
Granted, receivers are no more than a fire control device but variables need to be removed in order to maintain consistency with anything.
Factory receivers are notorious for having the threads and receiver face look in two different directions as compared to the receiver centerline. Scope base holes are another issue all together but, scopes usually zero better once a receiver is trued due to the barrel now being screwed on straighter than before and the centerline of all things being aligned.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does having your action blue printed really do for you? </div></div>
Probably nothing unless your action was originally machined out of kilter in a bigtime way.
What does matter, if repeatable accuracy is your goal, is chamber dimension and throat, along with floated barrel. A Minimum Dimension, short OAL chamber will do more for accuracy than any other specification on your rifle. Having the throat cut to match a specific bullet will also deliver great results. If you own more than one rifle in same chambering, and each wears a custom barrel, you want to own your own reamer so both barrel chambers are identical; otherwise your ammunition will not interchange with full accuracy potential.
Not like you're gonna hear much about these things.
Yeah, if your bolt face has a .002 or .003" variance from side to side, then truing the boltface is very worthwhile. Likewise, if the back of one recoil lug shows wear-in, but the other shows no evidence of metal to metal contact; then you want to uniform the lugs. Removing metal from bolt lugs lengthens headspace, uniforming the boltface lengthens headspace.
Remington actions produced in the last 5-8 years are more likely to need action truing than earlier production actions. The B or C prefix actions are about the best they ever made. If your action is sloppy or way out of spec, and precision is your goal, action job is indicated. I think many guys just do them these days as a matter of course to eliminate possible concern. For the cost of the work, you are better off buying a custom action that won't need work done; resale value is much higher.
Anyone who is not a precision reloader likely sees an action BP job as essential. Minimum chamber and tailored handloads are more critical, and will deliver even if shooting a factory barrel. Having a factory barrel set-forward so your fired cases mike at .0005 to .001" longer than Go-Gauge or SAAMI minimum will do more to generate tight groups and longrange accuracy than any other gunsmithing mod.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does having your action blue printed really do for you? </div></div>
Probably nothing unless your action was originally machined out of kilter in a bigtime way.
What does matter, if repeatable accuracy is your goal, is chamber dimension and throat, along with floated barrel. A Minimum Dimension, short OAL chamber will do more for accuracy than any other specification on your rifle. Having the throat cut to match a specific bullet will also deliver great results. If you own more than one rifle in same chambering, and each wears a custom barrel, you want to own your own reamer so both barrel chambers are identical; otherwise your ammunition will not interchange with full accuracy potential.
Not like you're gonna hear much about these things.
Yeah, if your bolt face has a .002 or .003" variance from side to side, then truing the boltface is very worthwhile. Likewise, if the back of one recoil lug shows wear-in, but the other shows no evidence of metal to metal contact; then you want to uniform the lugs. Removing metal from bolt lugs lengthens headspace, uniforming the boltface lengthens headspace.
Remington actions produced in the last 5-8 years are more likely to need action truing than earlier production actions. The B or C prefix actions are about the best they ever made. If your action is sloppy or way out of spec, and precision is your goal, action job is indicated. I think many guys just do them these days as a matter of course to eliminate possible concern. For the cost of the work, you are better off buying a custom action that won't need work done; resale value is much higher.
Anyone who is not a precision reloader likely sees an action BP job as essential. Minimum chamber and tailored handloads are more critical, and will deliver even if shooting a factory barrel. Having a factory barrel set-forward so your fired cases mike at .0005 to .001" longer than Go-Gauge or SAAMI minimum will do more to generate tight groups and longrange accuracy than any other gunsmithing mod.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bignada</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does having your action blue printed really do for you? </div></div>
Probably nothing unless your action was originally machined out of kilter in a bigtime way.
What does matter, if repeatable accuracy is your goal, is chamber dimension and throat, along with floated barrel. <span style="font-weight: bold">A Minimum Dimension, short OAL chamber will do more for accuracy than any other specification on your rifle.</span> Having the throat cut to match a specific bullet will also deliver great results. If you own more than one rifle in same chambering, and each wears a custom barrel, you want to own your own reamer so both barrel chambers are identical; otherwise your ammunition will not interchange with full accuracy potential.
Not like you're gonna hear much about these things.
Yeah, if your bolt face has a .002 or .003" variance from side to side, then truing the boltface is very worthwhile. Likewise, if the back of one recoil lug shows wear-in, but the other shows no evidence of metal to metal contact; then you want to uniform the lugs. Removing metal from bolt lugs lengthens headspace, uniforming the boltface lengthens headspace.
Remington actions produced in the last 5-8 years are more likely to need action truing than earlier production actions. The B or C prefix actions are about the best they ever made. If your action is sloppy or way out of spec, and precision is your goal, action job is indicated. I think many guys just do them these days as a matter of course to eliminate possible concern. For the cost of the work, you are better off buying a custom action that won't need work done; resale value is much higher.
Anyone who is not a precision reloader likely sees an action BP job as essential. <span style="font-weight: bold">Minimum chamber</span> and tailored handloads are more critical, and will deliver even if shooting a factory barrel. Having a factory barrel set-forward so your fired cases mike at <span style="font-weight: bold">.0005 to .001" longer than Go-Gauge or SAAMI minimum</span> will do more to generate tight groups and longrange accuracy than any other gunsmithing mod.
</div></div>
Mostly I agree with you, but min-spec chambers (while something to brag about) are little more than something to brag about from my experience.
I've used the same reamer to cut a super tight Min chamber and then the next time I ran the reamer 0.010" deeper for a 30-06 spec reamer from PTG. I did this with 2 otherwise identical rifles as I wanted to settle the experiment in my mind once and for all. I was working on a personal rifle and one with a buddy.
The looser chamber shoots just as well, the loads are identical between the two rifles for accuracy nodes, and both shoot touching holes or better at 200yd. The longer chamber is out of headspace and to make the initial 1st time the brass is fired work properly I need to load the bullets into the lands or create a false shoulder in the neck to help the headspace.
Once that's done it runs just dandy. I've since fixed the out of spec conditions because the test is done IMO, but nonetheless I chalk it up as a success.
Chamber concentricity is the first concern for me. Then if I decide I'm going to get a reamer cut specifically for me I use a different leade angle and freebore length.
If you're ONLY shooting factory ammo from a rifle then the tight chamber tends to help. Making the chamber too tight so that BR tolerances are maintained for a tactical rifle can screw you worse than if the chamber is cut a little off the bore line. Now you get the slightly off of nominal case and you can't chamber the round.
Case in point on chamber size. Many many guys on here with AI chambers report excellent repeatability from fireforming loads. That's a prime example of a "big" chamber. As long as you can make it headspace properly (loading tricks and whatnot) and the chamber is cut aligned with the bore properly the results are generally very good.
EDIT: Removed some examples are they are not pertinant to the discussion.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bignada</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does having your action blue printed really do for you? </div></div>
Probably nothing unless your action was originally machined out of kilter in a bigtime way.
What does matter, if repeatable accuracy is your goal, is chamber dimension and throat, along with floated barrel. <span style="font-weight: bold">A Minimum Dimension, short OAL chamber will do more for accuracy than any other specification on your rifle.</span> Having the throat cut to match a specific bullet will also deliver great results. If you own more than one rifle in same chambering, and each wears a custom barrel, you want to own your own reamer so both barrel chambers are identical; otherwise your ammunition will not interchange with full accuracy potential.
Not like you're gonna hear much about these things.
Yeah, if your bolt face has a .002 or .003" variance from side to side, then truing the boltface is very worthwhile. Likewise, if the back of one recoil lug shows wear-in, but the other shows no evidence of metal to metal contact; then you want to uniform the lugs. Removing metal from bolt lugs lengthens headspace, uniforming the boltface lengthens headspace.
Remington actions produced in the last 5-8 years are more likely to need action truing than earlier production actions. The B or C prefix actions are about the best they ever made. If your action is sloppy or way out of spec, and precision is your goal, action job is indicated. I think many guys just do them these days as a matter of course to eliminate possible concern. For the cost of the work, you are better off buying a custom action that won't need work done; resale value is much higher.
Anyone who is not a precision reloader likely sees an action BP job as essential. <span style="font-weight: bold">Minimum chamber</span> and tailored handloads are more critical, and will deliver even if shooting a factory barrel. Having a factory barrel set-forward so your fired cases mike at <span style="font-weight: bold">.0005 to .001" longer than Go-Gauge or SAAMI minimum</span> will do more to generate tight groups and longrange accuracy than any other gunsmithing mod.
</div></div>
Mostly I agree with you, but min-spec chambers (while something to brag about) are little more than something to brag about from my experience.
I've used the same reamer to cut a super tight Min chamber and then the next time I ran the reamer 0.010" deeper for a 30-06 spec reamer from PTG. I did this with 2 otherwise identical rifles as I wanted to settle the experiment in my mind once and for all. I was working on a personal rifle and one with a buddy.
The looser chamber shoots just as well, the loads are identical between the two rifles for accuracy nodes, and both shoot touching holes or better at 200yd. The longer chamber is out of headspace and to make the initial 1st time the brass is fired work properly I need to load the bullets into the lands or create a false shoulder in the neck to help the headspace.
Once that's done it runs just dandy. I've since fixed the out of spec conditions because the test is done IMO, but nonetheless I chalk it up as a success.
Chamber concentricity is the first concern for me. Then if I decide I'm going to get a reamer cut specifically for me I use a different leade angle and freebore length.
If you're ONLY shooting factory ammo from a rifle then the tight chamber tends to help. Making the chamber too tight so that BR tolerances are maintained for a tactical rifle can screw you worse than if the chamber is cut a little off the bore line. Now you get the slightly off of nominal case and you can't chamber the round.
Case in point on chamber size. Many many guys on here with AI chambers report excellent repeatability from fireforming loads. That's a prime example of a "big" chamber. As long as you can make it headspace properly (loading tricks and whatnot) and the chamber is cut aligned with the bore properly the results are generally very good.
EDIT: Removed some examples are they are not pertinant to the discussion.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
Running the risk of cutting my own throat a little. . .(I'll get the dull knife for you sadists)
Having an action, rifle, engine, car, airplane whatever that's built to a rigid standard is just a nice thing to have, own, operate. The confidence it inspires alone compels a person to push things a little further and improve the skill sets.
Now that its been said, I'll address something specific; both lugs touching the receiver at the same time. In actuality they can't both touch at the same time. There has to be a gap between the OD of the bolt body and the ID of the receiver. How much or how little is often a subject of great debate, but the truth is ALL actions are going to have it if they want to function in any reliable capacity.
I had a discussion with the famous Gordy Gritters about this a little over a year ago on BR central. I tuned a Remington and allowed for a .005" diameter difference between the bolt and the receiver bore. He responded by stating that he holds the actions he builds to .002". Less than half.
I have the luxury of pretty good software (really good) so I sat down and "did the math" to just see what the differences were. On a Std length Remington the .005" clearance (.0025 per side) yields an angular deflection of .054" degrees. Across the 1.0" swept OD of the bolt lugs this results in the top lug being a few tenths away from the receiver lugs when the bolt is in battery and the sear is attempting to slip past the cocking piece (which results in the ass end of the bolt going skyward till it contacts the rear bridge of the receiver.)
Mr. Gritter's actions are less than half of this, I have no doubt he is being truthful in that statement.
My point is, we are talking a hair on a head split 16 to 32 times. Man has visited the moon. I really wonder if anything on a Saturn 5 rocket was held to that sort of tolerance.
I think tuning an action is important. I think using a quality barrel (fitted by someone committed to doing good work who understands accurate gunmaking), quality ammunition, optics, and investing the time to learn to really become proficient with a rifle is more important.
Good luck.
C
Running the risk of cutting my own throat a little. . .(I'll get the dull knife for you sadists)
Having an action, rifle, engine, car, airplane whatever that's built to a rigid standard is just a nice thing to have, own, operate. The confidence it inspires alone compels a person to push things a little further and improve the skill sets.
Now that its been said, I'll address something specific; both lugs touching the receiver at the same time. In actuality they can't both touch at the same time. There has to be a gap between the OD of the bolt body and the ID of the receiver. How much or how little is often a subject of great debate, but the truth is ALL actions are going to have it if they want to function in any reliable capacity.
I had a discussion with the famous Gordy Gritters about this a little over a year ago on BR central. I tuned a Remington and allowed for a .005" diameter difference between the bolt and the receiver bore. He responded by stating that he holds the actions he builds to .002". Less than half.
I have the luxury of pretty good software (really good) so I sat down and "did the math" to just see what the differences were. On a Std length Remington the .005" clearance (.0025 per side) yields an angular deflection of .054" degrees. Across the 1.0" swept OD of the bolt lugs this results in the top lug being a few tenths away from the receiver lugs when the bolt is in battery and the sear is attempting to slip past the cocking piece (which results in the ass end of the bolt going skyward till it contacts the rear bridge of the receiver.)
Mr. Gritter's actions are less than half of this, I have no doubt he is being truthful in that statement.
My point is, we are talking a hair on a head split 16 to 32 times. Man has visited the moon. I really wonder if anything on a Saturn 5 rocket was held to that sort of tolerance.
I think tuning an action is important. I think using a quality barrel (fitted by someone committed to doing good work who understands accurate gunmaking), quality ammunition, optics, and investing the time to learn to really become proficient with a rifle is more important.
Good luck.
C
Re: Blue Printing An Action
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does having your action blue printed really do for you? </div></div>
I've spent the better part of this week "Skunkworking" (different than what most refer to as "Blueprinting") and barreling 13 Remington receivers. I do this because I've seen the differences that it makes at the target. There are those that believe that it's not necessary or question the benefits, and that's fine, but I've tuned my process to drain everything I can out of a platform that was originally designed during the late '50's.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hugo121175</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does having your action blue printed really do for you? </div></div>
I've spent the better part of this week "Skunkworking" (different than what most refer to as "Blueprinting") and barreling 13 Remington receivers. I do this because I've seen the differences that it makes at the target. There are those that believe that it's not necessary or question the benefits, and that's fine, but I've tuned my process to drain everything I can out of a platform that was originally designed during the late '50's.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
The chamber is the MOST OVERLOOKED aspect of custom rifles on this and other "sniping" boards.
Guys will spend $4K for a custom build with all the bells & whistles, but not supply reamer or pay for a new one to be returned with the rifle. Same guys will own numerous rifles in same chambering and most will be custom barreled. ALL Cut With Different Reamers...
Yep, a .30-06 with a chamber in excess of Field-Gauge would work fine, and shoot accurately; IF you could obtain brass that would stretch that much w/o weakening or separating. Most brass comes several thousandths UNDER Go Gauge dimension, so can it actually stretch .020 or more on the initial firing to fill the chamber and still be viable? Maybe???
What about chambering .0005 over the minimum average of Winchester brass? That would be a chamber under Go Gauge length. What do you get? The longest brass life possible and least amount of energy wasted filling brass out to chamber dimensions. Does this matter? Not like you probably want to chamber under Go Gauge dimension unless you're shooting a true wildcat, but having a short OAL chamber is beneficial.
Anyway, in my experience, every rifle I've had with a set-forward barrel or custom barrel chambered to minimum oal has shot extremely tight groups. Even without benefit of an action truing job.
How much we talking to do a complete Truing Job? $350?? More?
Is it worth the money? You sure won't get the cost out of a sale if you later sell the rifle, even if brand new.
Better to buy a custom action or rifle like Sako TRG that has a perfect action already, than to buy a $500 Rem action and then bump your cost up to almost $1000 by the time all is said and done. Then there is the time factor.
The benchrest guys have done this debate for years. Sure a Rem 40X action can be sleeved and "made to shoot", but consensus is you're better off buying benchrest action for resale value and because not having to do the work avoids many questions. Custom action either measures with all correct concentricities or it goes back in exchange for one that is In-Spec... Same way with a tactical rifle.
If you stubbornly have to have a Rem 700; start with a receiver with a B or C prefix and minimize the necessity of any action truing being necessary.
The chamber is the MOST OVERLOOKED aspect of custom rifles on this and other "sniping" boards.
Guys will spend $4K for a custom build with all the bells & whistles, but not supply reamer or pay for a new one to be returned with the rifle. Same guys will own numerous rifles in same chambering and most will be custom barreled. ALL Cut With Different Reamers...
Yep, a .30-06 with a chamber in excess of Field-Gauge would work fine, and shoot accurately; IF you could obtain brass that would stretch that much w/o weakening or separating. Most brass comes several thousandths UNDER Go Gauge dimension, so can it actually stretch .020 or more on the initial firing to fill the chamber and still be viable? Maybe???
What about chambering .0005 over the minimum average of Winchester brass? That would be a chamber under Go Gauge length. What do you get? The longest brass life possible and least amount of energy wasted filling brass out to chamber dimensions. Does this matter? Not like you probably want to chamber under Go Gauge dimension unless you're shooting a true wildcat, but having a short OAL chamber is beneficial.
Anyway, in my experience, every rifle I've had with a set-forward barrel or custom barrel chambered to minimum oal has shot extremely tight groups. Even without benefit of an action truing job.
How much we talking to do a complete Truing Job? $350?? More?
Is it worth the money? You sure won't get the cost out of a sale if you later sell the rifle, even if brand new.
Better to buy a custom action or rifle like Sako TRG that has a perfect action already, than to buy a $500 Rem action and then bump your cost up to almost $1000 by the time all is said and done. Then there is the time factor.
The benchrest guys have done this debate for years. Sure a Rem 40X action can be sleeved and "made to shoot", but consensus is you're better off buying benchrest action for resale value and because not having to do the work avoids many questions. Custom action either measures with all correct concentricities or it goes back in exchange for one that is In-Spec... Same way with a tactical rifle.
If you stubbornly have to have a Rem 700; start with a receiver with a B or C prefix and minimize the necessity of any action truing being necessary.
Re: Blue Printing An Action
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bignada</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The chamber is the MOST OVERLOOKED aspect of custom rifles on this and other "sniping" boards.
Guys will spend $4K for a custom build with all the bells & whistles, but not supply reamer or pay for a new one to be returned with the rifle. Same guys will own numerous rifles in same chambering and most will be custom barreled. ALL Cut With Different Reamers...
Yep, a .30-06 with a chamber in excess of Field-Gauge would work fine, and shoot accurately; IF you could obtain brass that would stretch that much w/o weakening or separating. Most brass comes several thousandths UNDER Go Gauge dimension, so can it actually stretch .020 or more on the initial firing to fill the chamber and still be viable? Maybe???
What about chambering .0005 over the minimum average of Winchester brass? That would be a chamber under Go Gauge length. What do you get? The longest brass life possible and least amount of energy wasted filling brass out to chamber dimensions. Does this matter? Not like you probably want to chamber under Go Gauge dimension unless you're shooting a true wildcat, but having a short OAL chamber is beneficial.
Anyway, in my experience, every rifle I've had with a set-forward barrel or custom barrel chambered to minimum oal has shot extremely tight groups. Even without benefit of an action truing job.
How much we talking to do a complete Truing Job? $350?? More?
Is it worth the money? You sure won't get the cost out of a sale if you later sell the rifle, even if brand new.
Better to buy a custom action or rifle like Sako TRG that has a perfect action already, than to buy a $500 Rem action and then bump your cost up to almost $1000 by the time all is said and done. Then there is the time factor.
The benchrest guys have done this debate for years. Sure a Rem 40X action can be sleeved and "made to shoot", but consensus is you're better off buying benchrest action for resale value and because not having to do the work avoids many questions. Custom action either measures with all correct concentricities or it goes back in exchange for one that is In-Spec... Same way with a tactical rifle.
If you stubbornly have to have a Rem 700; start with a receiver with a B or C prefix and minimize the necessity of any action truing being necessary. </div></div>
I have a $65,000.00 turning center with about $8k in tooling that I use ONLY for threading, chambering, and crowning barrels.
Hardly overlooked.
Now, to address your other statements/claims.
One, I don't want any sort of tactical, sniping, or general "killing" rifle with a chamber .0005" over the size of my brass because it's going to get the person using it killed if its ever put into service. A rifle used to take or save a life has to do one thing above all else. It has to WORK. It always has to WORK.
From my chair as a builder I have serious reservations using client supplied tooling. Primarily because I don't know the history of the tool. I know the exact chamber count on every reamer in my inventory. If the tool isn't heat treated properly, is dull, or in poor condition its quite possible something terrible may happen to his expensive barrel that takes up to 9 months to get. 2nd would be because if someone is hellbent on reinventing the wheel he's likely to be seduced by the "less is always better" mentality. This can very well result in a chamber that is totally inappropriate for the application. Guess who's stuck with that bill and who's name is going to be stoned in the street? It's not the customers. . .
Having spent 3 years in the middle east as a security contractor under the high threat office of the Bureau of Diplomatic Security for the St. Dept. I can assure you the last thing I (or any of my colleagues for that matter) was ever concerned with was brass life.
If you want a target rifle painted black so you can impress the local click then by all means, chamber your gun with whatever you want. If you want a purpose built weapon system designed to run in any climate/place on the globe then perhaps bold statements about minimal tolerance chambers in field(tactical/sniper rifles) should be reexamined.
What anyone caring to read this can take from it is chambers are as specific as the rifle being built. Minimal tolerance guns belong on the firing lines at bench rest matches or some other competitive venue. To suggest/imply that builders don't take it seriously is kind of insulting. If you don't trust your smith's abilities then perhaps you should seek out one who inspires more confidence.
Where we do agree is the fundamental accuracy potential of a gun. I'd say conservatively 90% of it is in the barrel. 5% is the ammunition, and the rest is diluted between the straightness of the action, the lock time, the fit of the shroud, trigger tune, type of recoil lug, and the bedding.
Chad
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bignada</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The chamber is the MOST OVERLOOKED aspect of custom rifles on this and other "sniping" boards.
Guys will spend $4K for a custom build with all the bells & whistles, but not supply reamer or pay for a new one to be returned with the rifle. Same guys will own numerous rifles in same chambering and most will be custom barreled. ALL Cut With Different Reamers...
Yep, a .30-06 with a chamber in excess of Field-Gauge would work fine, and shoot accurately; IF you could obtain brass that would stretch that much w/o weakening or separating. Most brass comes several thousandths UNDER Go Gauge dimension, so can it actually stretch .020 or more on the initial firing to fill the chamber and still be viable? Maybe???
What about chambering .0005 over the minimum average of Winchester brass? That would be a chamber under Go Gauge length. What do you get? The longest brass life possible and least amount of energy wasted filling brass out to chamber dimensions. Does this matter? Not like you probably want to chamber under Go Gauge dimension unless you're shooting a true wildcat, but having a short OAL chamber is beneficial.
Anyway, in my experience, every rifle I've had with a set-forward barrel or custom barrel chambered to minimum oal has shot extremely tight groups. Even without benefit of an action truing job.
How much we talking to do a complete Truing Job? $350?? More?
Is it worth the money? You sure won't get the cost out of a sale if you later sell the rifle, even if brand new.
Better to buy a custom action or rifle like Sako TRG that has a perfect action already, than to buy a $500 Rem action and then bump your cost up to almost $1000 by the time all is said and done. Then there is the time factor.
The benchrest guys have done this debate for years. Sure a Rem 40X action can be sleeved and "made to shoot", but consensus is you're better off buying benchrest action for resale value and because not having to do the work avoids many questions. Custom action either measures with all correct concentricities or it goes back in exchange for one that is In-Spec... Same way with a tactical rifle.
If you stubbornly have to have a Rem 700; start with a receiver with a B or C prefix and minimize the necessity of any action truing being necessary. </div></div>
I have a $65,000.00 turning center with about $8k in tooling that I use ONLY for threading, chambering, and crowning barrels.
Hardly overlooked.
Now, to address your other statements/claims.
One, I don't want any sort of tactical, sniping, or general "killing" rifle with a chamber .0005" over the size of my brass because it's going to get the person using it killed if its ever put into service. A rifle used to take or save a life has to do one thing above all else. It has to WORK. It always has to WORK.
From my chair as a builder I have serious reservations using client supplied tooling. Primarily because I don't know the history of the tool. I know the exact chamber count on every reamer in my inventory. If the tool isn't heat treated properly, is dull, or in poor condition its quite possible something terrible may happen to his expensive barrel that takes up to 9 months to get. 2nd would be because if someone is hellbent on reinventing the wheel he's likely to be seduced by the "less is always better" mentality. This can very well result in a chamber that is totally inappropriate for the application. Guess who's stuck with that bill and who's name is going to be stoned in the street? It's not the customers. . .
Having spent 3 years in the middle east as a security contractor under the high threat office of the Bureau of Diplomatic Security for the St. Dept. I can assure you the last thing I (or any of my colleagues for that matter) was ever concerned with was brass life.
If you want a target rifle painted black so you can impress the local click then by all means, chamber your gun with whatever you want. If you want a purpose built weapon system designed to run in any climate/place on the globe then perhaps bold statements about minimal tolerance chambers in field(tactical/sniper rifles) should be reexamined.
What anyone caring to read this can take from it is chambers are as specific as the rifle being built. Minimal tolerance guns belong on the firing lines at bench rest matches or some other competitive venue. To suggest/imply that builders don't take it seriously is kind of insulting. If you don't trust your smith's abilities then perhaps you should seek out one who inspires more confidence.
Where we do agree is the fundamental accuracy potential of a gun. I'd say conservatively 90% of it is in the barrel. 5% is the ammunition, and the rest is diluted between the straightness of the action, the lock time, the fit of the shroud, trigger tune, type of recoil lug, and the bedding.
Chad
Re: Blue Printing An Action
I have to agree with Chad here. I've spent far too much time on my own reamers to use a customer supplied reamer and my reamers were designed for one thing. To work, regardless of the environment that the rifle is being used in.
I know the condition of my reamers and I don't have just one reamer of any design for the same caliber in the shop....I have at least three of the most common and sometimes two of the lesser common. My chambers are not and have never been suspect in any build I done.
I do agree with you 100% about the actions though. I spend an enormous amout of time on Remington actions, which for the most part makes sense when the Customer already owns the donor. If a Customer doesn't own the donor, it makes better sense to sink the money in a Custom action instead.
I have to agree with Chad here. I've spent far too much time on my own reamers to use a customer supplied reamer and my reamers were designed for one thing. To work, regardless of the environment that the rifle is being used in.
I know the condition of my reamers and I don't have just one reamer of any design for the same caliber in the shop....I have at least three of the most common and sometimes two of the lesser common. My chambers are not and have never been suspect in any build I done.
I do agree with you 100% about the actions though. I spend an enormous amout of time on Remington actions, which for the most part makes sense when the Customer already owns the donor. If a Customer doesn't own the donor, it makes better sense to sink the money in a Custom action instead.
I just pulled the barrel off a stock Rem700VS in 223. This rifle was a tac driver. It shot 1/2moa very consistently with reloads. My buddy and I could not believe how poorly this rifle was machined. The receiver has chatter marks and the lugs both have minimal contact. One lug had almost none. Ill see if he can forward the pictures and ill post them. That being said I guess the barrel was a hummer and it shot just fine. I bet is you installed a custom barrel on a rifle and shot it before and after truing I bet the groups would be pretty much the same. It would be a great test to see.
