had scope on this rifle with 30-06 barrel and shot fine had rebarrelled to 6-284 and my poi was 30'' to the right had rebarrelled to original barrel to put back into original issue condition and opted to keep the scope since i cant hardly see, still hit 30''to the right had to get offset ring inserts to bring back in what could have changed???

What scope bases do you have? What you are describing is so gross a change that it is something pretty obvious. Bullets usually don't move 30 inches with a reason. Did the guy who installed the 6mm barrel "true" up the receiver face?

I was going to ask the same thing about receiver face , then realized , he installed the old barrel ! That would mean , no receiver work , otherwise the extractor cut would not index .
This is puzzling me .

Bad scope is my first thought

Hope he didn't tweek(twist) the receiver on the change out!

Was it a one piece base or 2 ? Is it all the same as before , scope base , rings , scope , stock ?

quote:

Originally posted by Wes62:
Hope he didn't tweek(twist) the receiver on the change out!

I had the same thought

same bases and scope, my thoughts too was receiver got tweeked

O3A3 barrels are extremely hard to remove due to the large shoulder area. So it is very possible for the receiver to be warped or twisted. What does the smith say? I am sure he will deny any responsibility. But you will be able to tell; put a straight edge on the bottom flats and see; a warped receiver will be easy to see. I am surprised that the bolt still works smoothly though.

Have never heard of warping a Springfield receiver but knew that the barrels were a "bear" to remove sometimes. If the scope is OK, scope mounts, bases, what you propose must be the problem. As you mention the 'smith if he is a relatively young one in the trade may well deny such a thing but the check that you mention will verify it. Learn something everyday.

Spoke with very experienced barrel maker in my area and has heard of twisting the action, but also told me it was necessary at times to cut very small cut at breech end of barrel where it engages the front ring of the receiver and this is done to relieve some of the pressure enabling you to remove the barrel without such extreme effort. Did tell me that the Enfield actions(1917) were even more difficult to remove a barrel and takes huge effort to do so, but they have done it many times.

quote:

Originally posted by Instructor:
Spoke with very experienced barrel maker in my area and has heard of twisting the action, but also told me it was necessary at times to cut very small cut at breech end of barrel where it engages the front ring of the receiver and this is done to relieve some of the pressure enabling you to remove the barrel without such extreme effort. Did tell me that the Enfield actions(1917) were even more difficult to remove a barrel and takes huge effort to do so, but they have done it many times.

Good info there

Bill Prator was the shop instructor at TSJC in 1961 and was the barrel maker for P O Ackley before they moved to Trinidad. One day a student was trying to remove a barrel off an Enfield. Bill took the barrel off with a brass hammer by striking the barrel a couple of inches from the receiver front. He held the barrel and action straight up and stuck with a fairly hard hit. Then he hit the recoil lug with a side blow and the barrel came off easily. I have used this on Springfields, Enfield, and NOT MAUSERS. The shock on the receivers without the C ring will come off, but the Mauser will tighten up.

I have found Enfields and Springfields with cracked receivers with factory barrels as original. Take a close look for cracks before working on these actions. A 2nd year gunsmith student came into my stock making room and showed me his Enfield. The first thing that stood out to me was the receiver was cracked. I had an extra receiver and he was glad to change to the new receiver.

Use the brass hammer method at your own risk!!! You could crack a receiver which is under stress from the original set up.

I worked for Knight's Gun Store in the '60's and I watch Al Knight try to get a Springfield barrel off and he had been working for several minutes before I asked if he would let me show him a new trick. Sure "KID" and I gave it the brass hammer treatment. He placed the barrel back into the barrel blocks and he almost fell when he applied pressure to the 2 ft barrel wrench. From then on he didn't call me KID anymore as he was 75 yrs old.

Not to belabor the topic, but the firm I spoke with told me that he had no idea how in the world did Enfield get those barrels on so tight. In those days did they use some sort of machine/hydraulic, etc. to thread the barrel into the receiver or just a very large strong "grunt" to use cheater bar??

The problem is the amount of surface area that the barrel shoulder has in contact with the receiver, and the tremendous torque that Enfields, and 03A3s are installed with. And some Mausers; they vary all over the place from barely hand tight, to Kenworth lug nut tight. I always use a lathe parting tool on the barrels from Enfields and 03A3s, and Mosins., then unscrew them by hand. I have no warped receivers that way.

Instructor:

Very likely one part was hot, the other cold.
Here's a related torque to show how.

FIL had a D-8 dozer, sprocket bearing went out. During a very cold winter we changed it. CAT said it had to have xxx thousand pounds torque. How in the hell are two guys supposed to apply that out in the field by hand??

Bob came up with: Dry ice to pack around the shaft. and rosebud torch on the nut. He was 280, and my 170 on a 10' cheater pipe bouncing on it.

Two years later he had CAT do a major overhaul. They split 3 hydraulic sockets before calling to ask him how he got it so tight. "ok, you're buying a new $48 nut!"

Just sharing info.

George

If you have a two piece set of bases, could one or the other been put on backwards.
If the screw holes were a bit out of line then the bases were right with it set up before the barrel change, after if one base was put on backwards could that have thrown the bullet off that much?
leo

quote:

Not to belabor the topic, but the firm I spoke with told me that he had no idea how in the world did Enfield get those barrels on so tight. In those days did they use some sort of machine/hydraulic, etc. to thread the barrel into the receiver or just a very large strong "grunt" to use cheater bar??

Eddystone used an inertia flywheel to torque theirs in, I believe. On the ones I've examined, you can certainly see the grip-slip marks adjacent to the receiver face, so something maxed-out it's bite at that spot.

Aging, the metalogical change with age more than anything else, its not that the barrel and receiver were put together so tight, but rather the aging process of all metals. That put together with the harsh conditions most of these rifles were put through.

Tapping the two corresponding structures with a soft-blow or brass hammer has been the trusted and true method of breaking the fit for ages. The small relief cut helps in instances where some form of peening has occurred.

Breaking with a wrench with no thought is the worst possible solution.

Phils

Greyghost:

quote:

Breaking with a wrench with no thought is the worst possible solution.

Too right, Phils! And "breaking" would be the operative word...

I do not subscribe to the age thing; I have never seen any form of metallic change in the joints; It is rather the large contact areas of some barrel and receiver combinations; evidenced by the fact that an 03 Springfield or an M1 barrel can be easily removed, whereas an 03A3, of the same era, will present issues even in new condition rifles.
Much larger contact area. And the Enfields; huge contact area and massive installation torque. Even new condition rifles have barrels torqued like the nuts on a Kenworth. And some Russian Mosins.
Other rifle barrels of the same era are easy to remove because they were not installed so tightly.

Gentlemen, is not this very large receiver area plus the high torque used to secure the barrels the reason that Eddystones in particular had a reputation for cracked receivers?

Yes, plus the brittle nature of some of the receivers of that era. I never try to unscrew Enfields of any make without parting the barrel first, near the receiver ring.
If the receivers were soft, they might warp. Hard too deep; might break.