That's not your picture, or your barrel.
- Thread starter karagias
- Start date
Wow, reading recent posts in this thread caused me once again to wonder if some of our SH members were born assholes or have to constantly work to be an asshole 24x7. And I'm not talking about Lash or Tokay.
Some of us are so good at it that we can turn it on or off at will. But alas, some are just cunts
Last edited:
Looks good. See, now was that so hard?
So exactly the same as the coned CDG barrel posted above. All that back and forth for nothing.
I’m surprised you weren’t killed by doing this daring and challenging experiment! Who dares wins!
Putting your figurative life on the line before that other, uh, guy…imma tearing up…dusty in here…
Just think, you could have instead first argued with @lash and @Tokay444 for a thousand or more words, but no.
No!
You sacrificed all. For us.
Us!
Thank you for your service.
I get the impression @jzerfoss thinks his barrel is somehow chambered at more than 100% case support.
You quoted yourself just to continue to look dumber. Bravo brother lol.... A higher post count doesn't equal intelligence. BTW, how many cone breeched 223s do you own since you seem to be so experienced and knowledgeable about them? Or even 223 bolt actions in general?
Looks like I'm joining the 4 month wait! Excited to have a good budget 300 norma capable action!
How much have you actually produced in your life, and how many engineered drawings have you interpreted to be able to look at a case that's fully supported and say it's not fully supported?
This is the thinnest web i could find. So even at .047", the ARC spec for a .223 chamber is .023" past the point of being fully supported.
The joys of math.
The joys of math.
Judging by the fact that you are answering the question with a question the answer is zero. You have zero actual experience with anything you are talking about.
Awesome that's the thinnest you could find on the internet. Good job buddy! What you seem too dim to understand is that a FULLY supported case BODY is a case body that is completely SUPPORTED by the chamber not 99% or 97% or 95% supported. By your standard you could have .050" of exposed body and be "fully supported" when using the military brass example you pictured but have a separated case head if you used the federal brass in the example.This is the thinnest web i could find. So even at .047", the ARC spec for a .223 chamber is .023" past the point of being fully supported.
The joys of math.
You speak as if you know the thinnest case head is the example you've shown but you have no idea with the dozens of manufacturers out there and with their own lot to lot variances. Now having .025"ish of exposed cased body is probably safe in the vast majority of circumstances but if I can have more of the case body supported by the chamber there is no downside and only beneficial in the case of a bad lot of brass or poor manufacturing.
I have 1 .223 Wylde currently.
By your random guy on the internet definition of fully supported, your chamber isn't fully supported either.
Please produce evidence of your claim of thinner case webs being in the wild.
We've been told that extractor grooves are a wide open tolerance and vary from lot to lot, and manufacturer and cannot be used to determine a camber's dimensions. You keep talking out brass with paper thin web (no evidence to support. Just, "Trust me bro") so it's obvious to me now that no .223 chamber can ever be fully supported, because no one can ever know if the case web starts behind the extractor groove taper or in front of it. Essentially what you're saying, but we're the retards.
Last edited:
I could probably agree with you somewhat on my chamber in the picture. The breech starts were the extractor groove ends but there is about .005" deep chamfer which is why some of the case body is visible. I'd take .005" exposed case body over .025" simply because there is no downside. Also, the deviant has a .125" bolt nose while the Nucleus has a .115" bolt nose so the case extractor groove sets below the chamber chamfer. I don't have a spare Nuc barrel to placate you're a fascination with pictures sorry.
As far as thinner ones out in the wild I'll look around the interwebs if I do more bored than I am now.
So case extractor grooves vary greatly and case webs don't? Interesting, by all means you love proof so please provide it. Your logic that because extractor grooves vary a case body can never be fully supported makes absolutely no sense and doesn't take away from the fact that having more of the case body supported has no downside and can only have possible benefits. You're arguing over semantics to prove nothing.
Those aren’t .223 cases, or chambers.
Is there anything different about the long vs short actions in regards to the magazine interface?
I assume that there's not going to be any screwing around with mag latches on the long action?
I assume that there's not going to be any screwing around with mag latches on the long action?
Not sure what time you ordered yours, but my 2 orders were 12 minutes apart and it took a month in between shipments
Anyhow, maybe we should move on from the coned breech argument. I think Ted has it under control &, with the dimensions of the extractor on the CDG bolt, it doesn't appear to me that there is any problem with case head support.
I'm far more interested in how cartridges feeds from an AW magazine. Not having to fumble around in the dark, recharging AICS mags & having a bolt design that deals easily with sticky fired case extraction are some of the qualities I'm looking fwd to benefitting from.
I'm far more interested in how cartridges feeds from an AW magazine. Not having to fumble around in the dark, recharging AICS mags & having a bolt design that deals easily with sticky fired case extraction are some of the qualities I'm looking fwd to benefitting from.
Has there been a catastrophic Case failure or just this thread... Seriously guys go to PM's .. Some of us new guys are trying to learn ... Not the bad stuff or the unnecessary..
It’s just unnecessary. It’s all mental masturbation at this point.
But just for your education, once you get thousands of posts deep into a thread, you are going to have to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. That’s reality.
There have not only been no catastrophic case failures, but as far as this thread goes, there have been no case failures at all, of any kind.
That's right.
I'll worry about it if my face gets blown off. Until then, we should just talk about how much better the CDG feeds from an AW mag than the shit AI rifles do.
This thread is really one of the best group therapy around. We'll soon forget the topic, possibly the best action on the market today
I have a little more than 500 rounds on my CDG. By far the best action I've put my hands on. I used to have an unhealthy obsession with AI rifles. The CDG has changed that (for the most part). One thing I wish I could get for the CDG is a swept bolt handle. Not necessarily related to the CDG; I wish the Xylo chassis came as a folder.
The greatest part of this action is letting other people shoot the rifle and they ask "how did you get the bolt so smooth?" The look on their faces after you tell them that it comes from the manufacturer like that is great. I think I ruined high end off the shelf rifles for some people with this action. Oops.
The greatest part of this action is letting other people shoot the rifle and they ask "how did you get the bolt so smooth?" The look on their faces after you tell them that it comes from the manufacturer like that is great. I think I ruined high end off the shelf rifles for some people with this action. Oops.
I received my 7 PRC barrel from preferred barrel blanks and to my surprise it appears to have a conical breach.
That’s how I’d want it. Looks good.
Send an email to ARC.I asked about swept handle and they said they would ship with action if available.When I got the action there was a note saying in a month it would be available.It’s been about a month
I've been running an ACC on my rifle for the past 3 years. It's a great platform & has worked very well for the way I shoot but, I'm thinking I want to get back to a lighter more simple platform when I get the CDG.
I want to go a shorter, lighter barrel profile, a thumbhole stock for easier rifle manipulation & return to the warmth & softer feel of wood. I'd like to stay with the adjustability of the ACC which I find to be very beneficial.
I've been trawling the internet looking at everything I can find. I've looked at all kinds of custom thumbholes but I keep returning to the little cheap ass Boyd's "At-One", with adjustable butt plate & comb. There's a few thing I wish it had different but the overall package is basically what I'm looking for.
I've not seen a Boyds At-One in the flesh & was wondering if any of you guys has experience with them?
The one thing I don't prefer about the ACC is the thread adjustment system. I find it slow & cumbersome & I find myself making do instead of changing length of pull when I change to a different position in the vehicle.
I like the idea of the quick adjust system on the At-One but I don't know if it's a rattly, loose setup or not.
I want to go a shorter, lighter barrel profile, a thumbhole stock for easier rifle manipulation & return to the warmth & softer feel of wood. I'd like to stay with the adjustability of the ACC which I find to be very beneficial.
I've been trawling the internet looking at everything I can find. I've looked at all kinds of custom thumbholes but I keep returning to the little cheap ass Boyd's "At-One", with adjustable butt plate & comb. There's a few thing I wish it had different but the overall package is basically what I'm looking for.
I've not seen a Boyds At-One in the flesh & was wondering if any of you guys has experience with them?
The one thing I don't prefer about the ACC is the thread adjustment system. I find it slow & cumbersome & I find myself making do instead of changing length of pull when I change to a different position in the vehicle.
I like the idea of the quick adjust system on the At-One but I don't know if it's a rattly, loose setup or not.
My 7 PRC barrel from Carbon Six came today with a conical breech. Hope it shoots as good as it looks!
They've done a nice job.
The cartridge web looks to be fully supported.
What stock you going to run for this build?
Mine will be delivered next week. We'll see if it's conical.
Hot garbage, shot two different rifles with them and they are uncomfortable at best.
MDT HNT26 as long as it fits.
Keep us posted, that’s high on the list of options for my build as well.
Thanks for the feedback.
Are they a rattly settup with the adjustment system?
I can't see any way to tighten the system at all. The last thing I want is for the butt pad & cheek riser to be loose when behind the rifle.
If you reckon they're uncomfortable though, I think I'll keep looking.
I really like the Xylo but I'm kind of over the square, cold Aluminum.
I've looked at Woox. They are exceptionally well made. Maybe a Woox perhaps?
