Ding ding ding. That is so true. If he said it was GAP, SAC, or some other well known smith so many here would have their panties bunched up so far in their ass the OP could state anything true and it would be heard as a lie. Now on the other hand if he said it was TR not one person would question it. They would be on a rant about how there is one more TR rifle out there that has been documented and thank the OP for his good work.
- Thread starter jerseymike
- Start date
Ding ding ding. That is so true. If he said it was GAP, SAC, or some other well known smith so many here would have their panties bunched up so far in their ass the OP could state anything true and it would be heard as a lie. Now on the other hand if he said it was TR not one person would question it. They would be on a rant about how there is one more TR rifle out there that has been documented and thank the OP for his good work.
Original post, 1/2 to 3/4. Either way he said it was shooting over 1/2" and this particular company guarantees sub 1/2. Now someone states he mentioned a group in the .1s. Ive had that with a bad rifle. First time out one group in load devo shoots great. Put the rifle away, make a post about how great it is and you love it. Take it out the next few times and it just wont come close to replicating that one tight group you got. He shouldve sent it back originally and had them take a look at it yes, but he admits he didnt and now its 2 years gone by. So he did some work himself and now it shoots like the original makers guarantee consistently. Lesson is to check work when you recieve it. Give them a chance to fix it first, if they dont go ahead and flame them on here by all means.
Last edited:
I have been thinking about these sentences for a bit. To me, what you're saying is that if I ever get a $3500 rifle, I need to be able to break it down so I can verify everything down to the barrel threading to make sure everything is tight and tolerances are low. I think this is horseshit. This is the job of the gunsmith or rifle producer to verify these aspects of the build. The onus is not on me to make sure the threads are cut right and the chamber is baby's-ass smooth, it is the builders responsibility to make sure they are putting out a product worthy of the price tag and lead time. If not, every person that refuses to divulge who they got the product from is complicit in allowing this cycle to continue.
At the very least, the builder should be notified. As a matter of courtesy to other shooters, the builder should be revealed. This builder will either get back on their game or won't care enough to do better, it's their choice.
Good job Jerseymike!
My take on this thread.... there are those who grow and learn.... and others who chose to remain in kindergarten in their diapers!
My take on this thread.... there are those who grow and learn.... and others who chose to remain in kindergarten in their diapers!
Well, you could take a flashlight and look down the pipe at minimum no? I was fed, "I hold this blah blah tolerance to .000001 of an inch", "I only use match chamber reamers". I believed it and that's what I got for not checking.
Last edited:
Jerseymike,
I am also a "tinkerer" and loved your post. I don't have the machining equipment you do, so I'm glad you were able to do what you did, AND show pics along the way. Your post was very informative, and should be taken as such. Your not mentioning the builder does not lessen the contribution of your post one bit. Thanks for sharing your experience, and your admonishment is taken about buyer's beware.
I am also a "tinkerer" and loved your post. I don't have the machining equipment you do, so I'm glad you were able to do what you did, AND show pics along the way. Your post was very informative, and should be taken as such. Your not mentioning the builder does not lessen the contribution of your post one bit. Thanks for sharing your experience, and your admonishment is taken about buyer's beware.
Nice rig. What would have been a very interesting experiment is to swap that BAT action out for something else and see how it shot. Naturally, the threads probably wouldn't match, but food for thought nonetheless.
Has to be at least $3000 in parts alone on that rifle?
Has to be at least $3000 in parts alone on that rifle?
Hey, dumbass, did you read the original post where the original poster said he had been happy with the rifle?
So, I decided to take apart my rifle which I had made about two years ago. It hasnt been shot much, maybe 500 or so rounds down the pipe. The rifle is a bat action with a krieger barrel chambered in 243. The rifle shoots fairly well, 1/2-3/4 MOA. I was pretty happy with that. Honestly, I only took it apart because I was bored. Glad I did. I discovered a few things I was not too fond about.
The first thing I noticed is once I cracked the action from the barrel was that the barrel tenon threads were cut loose and had a good amount of play in them. As I dug further into it. I noticed that the chamber had been cut with a spoon. The face of the tenon looked like more of a roughing cut rather than a finish pass. Hard to tell from the shitty pics but you can see the flaws.
As I removed the surefire brake, I also noticed that the portion of the barrel which was turned down so the brake slips over the barrel, was also lacking quality. Very rough finish. I know it's only aesthetics but seriously. I paid for this kind of work?
Top two pics are the old work. Bottom pic is after I recut everything.
Well, to make a long story short. I pretty much hacked off the old tenon, cut new threads and chambered it. Took a finish cut for the surefire brake and recrowned it.
Photo of old chamber and new chamber. Mine left, old right. Don't mind the face of the tenon. I hadn't taken a finish pass yet.
Barrel tenon threads are now nice and tight with no play.
Without getting into a debate about the "right" way to chamber etc. I chambered the rifle using a steady rest, a Jacobs drill chuck in my tail stock with a solid pilot reamer.
Once I had it together, I took her out with the same loads as before.
The results. Prone on bipod with rear bag. Top pics is 3 shots, bottom pics are 5 shots per group. All groups were shot at 105 yards. That's where the target was set and I was too lazy to move up 5 yards to make it the perfect 100.
Sorry, I don't have pics of the completed build. I took it all apart again to cerakote it.
Also, I'm pretty sure some will ask who originally built the rifle but I'm not going to say. Yes, it was from a reputable company. This is more of a, beware of what's out there thread. Even with a well known name you guys could still get junk.
Rant over.
There you go. Read that again.
when I pay good money from a company with guarantees and im "happy" with the rifle, I dont use phrases like "shoots fairly well" or "pretty happy". Those two phrases are indicators of his skepticism of how it shot but he obviously wasnt pissed enough to send it back. He also stated he was told the rifle was held to .001 blah blah and he took it apart and found that it wasnt. You still think he should have been perfectly content with a rifle that did not fit either claim that the company made? And the fact that it shot better after he cleaned it up?
You can say what you want, and post all the memes you want, but for that kind of money, I expect way more than you got. If the builder tried to pass that off as a match grade, custom rifle, I, sure as hell, would be outing them and letting others know about it. I could shine a light down the bore, sure, but I am not a machinist, so I don't know what is "great" and what is "custom, match-grade great", that's where we rely on the experts and the guys who have been doing this a while. I am paying for their experience as much as I am paying for a rifle.
Seems, from the pictures and description, they either didn't know what they were doing, or didn't care enough to give you a high quality product they professed to deliver. Maybe you should get into the business? Looks like you did a hell of a lot better than they did.
Similar threads
