cscc1f@menudo.uh.edu (Gregory W. Hayes) (06/11/91)
With all the discussion of target/benchrest shooting and my ongoing project of building a target quality shooter, questions arise. First of all, a little background. I am using an original Springfield stock which had been modified some time in the past so doing some fitting cutting doesn't bother me in the least. I probably should go the McMillan stock route, but this 80 year old piece of walnut is what really started it all. I'm using a Springfield action and most probably a stainless Douglas Target or Benchrest barrel. Glass bedding the stock versus making a floating barrel rifle. This is still really in the planning stages so I'm trying to work out everything before I spend money unecessarily or do some irrepairable cutting on the stock. My primary concern is accuracy, but since I'm doing this myself, ease also plays a big part. From my limited knowledge of rifles with floating barrels, I know that the barrels do not touch the stock at any point. Does the mounting point of the action need any special attention to take the added forces of the floating barrel? Does the action need to be bedded too? I would also like some input what the most prevalent caliber is and any advice on what the best twist is for that caliber. Right now I'm looking at .22-250, .25-06, .264 Win mag, 7mm Rem mag, .308, .30-06, .300 Win mag, and .220 Swift. I should also put that the range I shoot at has a 500 yard section and that is my ultimate goal. I guess what I could really use is a good book on this subject. :-) If anyone knows of some good titles, please pass them on to me; I'd appreciate it. Thanks again for bearing with this meandering post and any advice would be greatly appreciated. Greg Hayes
ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.OZ.AU (Geoff Miller) (06/12/91)
cscc1f@menudo.uh.edu (Gregory W. Hayes) writes:
#Glass bedding the stock versus making a floating barrel rifle. This
#is still really in the planning stages so I'm trying to work out
#everything before I spend money unecessarily or do some irrepairable
#cutting on the stock. My primary concern is accuracy, but since I'm
#doing this myself, ease also plays a big part. From my limited
#knowledge of rifles with floating barrels, I know that the barrels do
#not touch the stock at any point. Does the mounting point of the action
#need any special attention to take the added forces of the floating
#barrel? Does the action need to be bedded too?
I don't think the free-floating barrel adds any particular force to the
mounting point of the action - the pressure exerted by the stock will
be perpendicular to the bore, so any recoil forces will still be borne
by the action mounting. Certainly the action should be carefully
bedded, but I'd try it as is before doing any work that may not be
necessary (I'm basically lazy).
Rifles with fully-floating barrels do generally have large and possibly
somewhat cumbersome stocks (e.g. my Anschutz .22 or Sportco .308),
because the fore-end has to be solid enough that it won't warp under
tha tension of the sling, for example, and touch the barrel.
Geoff Miller (ghm@cc.adfa.oz.au)
Computer Centre, Australian Defence Force Academyhollen@UCSD.EDU (Dion Hollenbeck) (06/12/91)
In article <35425@mimsy.umd.edu> cscc1f@menudo.uh.edu (Gregory W. Hayes) writes:
# Glass bedding the stock versus making a floating barrel rifle. This
# is still really in the planning stages so I'm trying to work out
# everything before I spend money unecessarily or do some irrepairable
# cutting on the stock. My primary concern is accuracy, but since I'm
# doing this myself, ease also plays a big part. From my limited
# knowledge of rifles with floating barrels, I know that the barrels do
# not touch the stock at any point. Does the mounting point of the action
# need any special attention to take the added forces of the floating
# barrel? Does the action need to be bedded too?
Yes, when you free float a barrel, you should definately bed the
action. The only connection you will have is between the action
and the stock, so it is really necesary that this be really sturdy
and as immovable as possible.
# I would also like some input what the most prevalent caliber is and any
# advice on what the best twist is for that caliber. Right now I'm
# looking at .22-250, .25-06, .264 Win mag, 7mm Rem mag, .308, .30-06,
# .300 Win mag, and .220 Swift. I should also put that the range I shoot
# at has a 500 yard section and that is my ultimate goal.
If you are talking about REAL accuracy, the 6mm PPC is the hot caliber
in all the national and international benchrest competition at this
time. Years ago it was the .17 Remington. The drawbacks for the
6mm PPC is that brass typically will be 3 to 4 times as expensive
as other calibers. You could build your own, but it would take
several forming dies and LOTS of work. Any of the stages if not
done with enough care could introduce inaccuracies which would
defeat your purpose. The shortcomings of the .17 is that no one
makes a neck sizing die. If you're going for accuracy, you
certainly don't want to be full length re-sizing, merely neck
sizing. The 6mm is undoubtedly more accurate that the .17 by
virtue of the results in competition, but the .17 at 4400fps is
AWESOME!! Also, the .17 can tend to have more fouling problems.
Another disadvantage for the 6mm is that by the time you get
a barrel, action, and stock, you are looking at probably $1500
as a bare minimum and this does not count the gunsmithing to put
it together.
I realize that I have not addressed any of the calibers you have
mentioned, but you said ACCURACY. If your idea of accuracy is
not the same as mine ( a 5 shot group center-to-center measurement
of .010" ) then all I said is irrelevant. If you merely want
to be able to get in the 10 ring, then the calibers you mentioned
probably would be fine, and you merely need to be sure of a LOT
of details which make any caliber as accurate as it can be.
Look for my postings in the future about accuracy gunsmithing and
relaoding in relation to benchrest shooting. I intend to post
this stuff, but I need several hours to sit down and organize it
and type it in and my employer is paying me to write software
not educate people on guns.
--
-----
Dion Hollenbeck (619) 455-5590 x2814
Megatek Corporation, 9645 Scranton Road, San Diego, CA 92121
uunet!megatek!hollen or hollen@megatek.uucpcmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) (06/13/91)
As quoted from <35425@mimsy.umd.edu> by cscc1f@menudo.uh.edu (Gregory W. Hayes):
# I would also like some input what the most prevalent caliber is and any
# advice on what the best twist is for that caliber. Right now I'm
# looking at .22-250, .25-06, .264 Win mag, 7mm Rem mag, .308, .30-06,
# .300 Win mag, and .220 Swift. I should also put that the range I shoot
# at has a 500 yard section and that is my ultimate goal.
My suggestion would be .308, .30-06, or 6.5x55 in that order. The former two
I recommend because of the vast resources of components, loading data and
experience available. The latter I recommend, just because it's such a
good round. Very accurate and not at all punishing to shoot a lot. A friend
is using a Swedish M96 as a match rifle.
----------
"Few people are smart enough to have these opinions...."
--
Christopher Morton
{uunet|backbone}!ncoast.org!cmort cmort@ncoast.orgwebdw@mvutd.att.com (Bruce D Woods) (06/14/91)
In article <35554@mimsy.umd.edu> cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) writes:
#As quoted from <35425@mimsy.umd.edu> by cscc1f@menudo.uh.edu (Gregory W. Hayes):
#
## I would also like some input what the most prevalent caliber is and any
## advice on what the best twist is for that caliber. Right now I'm
## looking at .22-250, .25-06, .264 Win mag, 7mm Rem mag, .308, .30-06,
## .300 Win mag, and .220 Swift. I should also put that the range I shoot
## at has a 500 yard section and that is my ultimate goal.
#
#My suggestion would be .308, .30-06, or 6.5x55 in that order. The former two
#I recommend because of the vast resources of components, loading data and
#experience available. The latter I recommend, just because it's such a
#good round. Very accurate and not at all punishing to shoot a lot. A friend
#is using a Swedish M96 as a match rifle.
I'd rate the 30-06 slightly above the .308 Win. esp. for
long ranges.
Also, for superior long range target shooting, you'll want
to investigate the 6mm "bench rest" cartridge. Very accurate.
(I've not personally shot the 6mm, look for yourself.)
BDWcmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) (06/15/91)
As quoted from <35502@mimsy.umd.edu> by ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.OZ.AU (Geoff Miller):
# Rifles with fully-floating barrels do generally have large and possibly
# somewhat cumbersome stocks (e.g. my Anschutz .22 or Sportco .308),
# because the fore-end has to be solid enough that it won't warp under
# tha tension of the sling, for example, and touch the barrel.
I saw a bolt gun with a free floating barrel at a high power match in Ohio
a while ago. It took the concept to a rediculous extreme. As I recall, the
barrel wasn't even NEAR the stock, but instead the forend was significantly
BELOW the barrel, giving the appearance of, of all things, a Japanese
aircraft carrier! The barrel was the "flight deck" and the forend the "deck".
I saw that things and said to myself, "Is that a rifle or a Vulcan harp?!" :)
-----------------
"Most people aren't smart enought to have these ideas...."
--
Christopher Morton
{uunet|backbone}!ncoast.org!cmort cmort@ncoast.orgcbl@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu (Chris Luchini) (06/16/91)
In article <35689@mimsy.umd.edu>, cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) writes: #As quoted from <35502@mimsy.umd.edu> by ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.OZ.AU (Geoff Miller): # ## Rifles with fully-floating barrels do generally have large and possibly ## somewhat cumbersome stocks (e.g. my Anschutz .22 or Sportco .308), ## because the fore-end has to be solid enough that it won't warp under ## tha tension of the sling, for example, and touch the barrel. # #I saw a bolt gun with a free floating barrel at a high power match in Ohio #a while ago. It took the concept to a rediculous extreme. As I recall, the #barrel wasn't even NEAR the stock, but instead the forend was significantly #BELOW the barrel, giving the appearance of, of all things, a Japanese #aircraft carrier! The barrel was the "flight deck" and the forend the "deck". #I saw that things and said to myself, "Is that a rifle or a Vulcan harp?!" :) I asked my smith about those rifles that were free floated by about 1-2", he said it's for cooling. The .100" gap that is used in the normal free floating results in the top of the barrel cooling faster than the underside that is covered by the stock. The effect is even more pronounced with fluted barrels. -cbl | Chris Luchini/1110 W. Green/Urbana IL 61801/217-333-0505 | | cbl@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu (best) |Cluch@fnald.bitnet (second chance) | no cute sig found. . . thinking . . . thinking . . .
dambrose@dri.com (David Ambrose) (06/19/91)
In article <35554@mimsy.umd.edu> cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) writes:
#As quoted from <35425@mimsy.umd.edu> by cscc1f@menudo.uh.edu (Gregory W. Hayes):
#
## I would also like some input what the most prevalent caliber is and any
## advice on what the best twist is for that caliber. Right now I'm
## looking at .22-250, .25-06, .264 Win mag, 7mm Rem mag, .308, .30-06,
## .300 Win mag, and .220 Swift. I should also put that the range I shoot
## at has a 500 yard section and that is my ultimate goal.
#
#My suggestion would be .308, .30-06, or 6.5x55 in that order. The former two
#I recommend because of the vast resources of components, loading data and
#experience available. The latter I recommend, just because it's such a
#good round. Very accurate and not at all punishing to shoot a lot. A friend
#is using a Swedish M96 as a match rifle.
#
I've had excellent results with a lovely 6.5mm Gibbs rifle. I
suspect that much of the 6.5's accuracy comes from the *long* bullets
generally used. They have excellent form stabilisation.
The 6.5 Gibbs is a wildcat round though. Forming the cases is
straightforward though. Take a .270 Win case (Remington only), size it,
trim it, ream the neck, and fireform it. This is somewhat time-consuming
and there are some variation in chamber dimensions for different guns.
I now read that Mr. Gibbs was obsessed with long range accuracy. It
might prove worthwhile to investigate his other rounds too.
--
Play it cool; play it cool; fifty-fifty fire and ice -- Joni Mitchell
David L. Ambrose, -- Digital Research, Inc dambrose@pan.dri.com
Don't blame DRI. They wouldn't approve of this anyway.