There has been some comments about the undesireability of takedown or "switch" barrel rifles on the AR forums.

Allen Day and Ray Atkinson have mentioned they have had them and didn't like them.

I would appreciate any comments especially from these two knowledgable persons as to why they didn't like them? What in particular was going or went wrong? Are they particularly unsuitable in big bores? Or is just another thing that can go wrong? Accuracy? Consistency of shooting to the point of aim?

Also what sort of takedown or switch barrel is being discussed? The sort I am talking about is where the foreend can be separated from the butt and action. No Blasers please! Is the Dakota method of having the receiver attached to the barrel better?

Any experience or knowledgable comments appreciated.

The only thing I have against them is that one never seems to have the right barrel on at the right time. Normally one can buy a differant rifle for the price of an extra barrel. For countrys that limit the number of guns one can own they make a little more sense. I have a double with extra barrels most the barrels just sit around gathering dust.

John,

The rifles like the Dakota or Sauer are quite different to "switch barrel" rifles. Switch barrel rifles are really only more than one barrel fitted to the action along with an action wrench and portable barrel vice. If the action is a push feed, you can also have barrels set up to switch between actions.

Switch barrel rifles might often be a combination of calibers like 7mm Rem and 338 Win or 243 and 308 or 300 H&H and 375 H&H or 30/378 and 416 Wby etc. If the rifle is to look all nice with either barrel, then with caliber differences like 300 H&H and 375 H&H, that might mean the 300 barrel is perhaps a bit heavier contour than you might normally select or maybe the 375 is a bit lighter contour than you might normally select.

However, the barrel changing while being a snack in the field for shooting like we do in Australia, would not be ideal for other hunting conditions.

I would say that the majority of switch barrel rifle owners usually have a benchrest background or have been involved with such people.

Rilfes like the Dakota are really "take down" rifles and unlike the "switch barrel" rifles, the action itself is different.

The disadvantage that rifles like the Dakota or Sauer have as compared to the Blaser or Mauser 66, is the scope is mounted on the receiver with the Dakota and Sauer. This requires the rifle to be resighted if a different barrel goes on. Also, if there are any problems with the barrel/action join, then accuracy and point of impact problems would result. On the other hand, the Blaser and Mauser 66 have the scope mounted on the barrel so as to elimiate such problems.

Mike

NitroX

quote:

---

"The sort I am talking about is where the foreend can be separated from the butt and action",

---

You mean like on the Blaser R93, Right? (Sorry, just couldn�t help myself!)I�m not very knowledgable (I have only been shooting and hunting for 8 years), but I do have a take down and switch barrel Blaser R93 in .375 H & H that can be taken down to fit a small shotgun case and reassembled without any change in zero. But the largest caliber you can get is only the .416 Remington, so I guess it�s not a gun for the real big bore nuts.

Tron

trb

The reason I made the - not the Blaser - comment is when you mention the Blaser you get a love / hate argument and the real data gets lost by the wayside.

Also I have just heard too many unfavourable comments about the Blaser to risk one. If there is that many people who hate it, somethings wrong. Not knocking your rifle. If you like it and it works for you, great

My preference is to look at a Mauser 98 takedown. But I am interested in the unfavourable comments about such rifles I have heard recently from knowledgable shooters. But specifically the why they don't like them.

I would be looking at a 338 Win Mag + 416 Taylor &/or + 458 Lott - not sure if the Lott would be too long in combination. Or a 300 H&H + my 375 H&H (could I allow my 375 to be cut ???!!!). + perhaps a 465 H&H. That would be cool if it worked.

I haven't handled on of these, but
Z-hat makes takedowns, and has recent gone into model 70's, so you could have just about anything you wanted. Not just a switch barrel, but switch forearm and barrel, with plate to align.
This is their site and their work



http://www.z-hat.com/Takedown70.htm
http://www.z-hat.com/takedown.htm
338 win and 416 taylor
340 weatherby and 416 rem or 458 lott
or 300weatherby(or hh) 375 w or hh, 416 rem, 458 lott and 470 capstick

throw in a heavy barreled 7stw, and you've got y our pronghorn long distance gun

[ 10-31-2002, 17:10: Message edited by: jeffeosso ]

You gents are forgetting the different feeding requirements for cartridges, say a rifle set up for 338 Win and 458 Lott. Different configuration of the rails and ramp and magazine box, plus bolt stroke.

When you get into the high recoil cartridges you gotta think about barrel recoil lugs, tight bedding of the action/barrel/lugs, proper stock configuration for recoil management, and several other items that IMHO prohibit the application for a switch barrel or removable barrel. I would not build a switch or removable barrel rifle in a large caliber, especially a DGR.

465 H&H is based on 460 Weatherby brass, will not work in conjunction with a 375 H&H.

There is another way to make a nice take down Mauser that does not require removing the barrel from the receiver.

Jeff

that is the sort of takedown I looked at quite a few years ago, and if certain choices were made, wasn't that hard to do.

John Ricks

"There is another way to make a nice take down Mauser that does not require removing the barrel from the receiver."

Don't tease. tell how? (If I guess, like the Dakotas where the receiver is integral and stays with barrel? This adds big $ to the cost though.)

Feed ramps, yes I was forgetting that.

Regarding DGR yes it probably isn't an ideal idea but is it practicle or can it be done in a workable rifle?

If you were building a takedown with 2 or 3 barrels and say one was a 338 Win Mag what would be practicle? Would a 416 Taylor work?)

Thanks for the replies.

[ 10-31-2002, 19:15: Message edited by: NitroX ]

I was talking to a sales person at H-S Precision about ordering one of their takedown rifles in .375 H&H for our SCI Chapter fund raiser. Last year I ordered one in the fall for our show in the spring, no sweat. (I buy 30 long guns a year for our show.)

This year H-S says demand for their takedown rifle has seriously jumped. The backlog reached one year last March after the show season, but they report they have reduced it by increasing production.

I don't know how much of this is due to hunters wanting to travel with cases that don't look like cases, but I found it interesting.

jim dodd

While John is absolutely correct, I will admit to liking switchbarrels myself.Particularily when travelling and not wanting to advertise I have a gun. My number 1 test mule is a basic M700 Remington with a HS precision aluminum bedding block stock. The MULE has a set of barrels each with an individual recoil lug and threaded and fitted specifically to this action. I have barrels in .257 WBY, 300 WBY, 30-06, 25-06, .338 ultramag and 450 Akley Magnum for this rifle. The set has two bolts, each set up with a Sako extractor, one for the .532 boltface and the other for the 30-06 boltface. The barrels are simply screwed in and out with a set-screw fastener in the reciever ring.( although I honestly have never had a problem without it). The rifle is set up with Warne bases and each barrel has its own scope. You can change barrels with a simple barrel vise clamped to a table and T-handled action wrench in less than 5 minutes. I switch barrels about 5 times a year these days, but I never noticed any looseness in the threads( which are well lubricated. I once switched barrels 10 times in a row and POI shifted at most 1 inch at 100 yrds! It's far from ideal, but it works. By the way, all those barrels will shoot <1 MOA groups out of this set-up. The old saw that switch barrels are not accurate just isn't true.
A nice feature is that with fixed receiver dimensions and thread class details, I can take any new barrel and set it up to fit this gun with absolutely no trial fitting at all. It makes it very easy for me to test new cartridges. By the way I also have a set of spare magazine boxes that must also be changed with some of the the cartridges. The only problem is that the 5 barrel set with the entire kit weighs about 50 lbs!-Rob

[ 10-31-2002, 20:03: Message edited by: Robgunbuilder ]

Rob,
I am seriously interested in your type of setup. It sounds simple enough. A few questions though.

The set screw, which direction does it face? Do you have picturees of your setup?

How much torque is put on the barrel when tightened?

Why does each barrel have it's own recoil lug and they do not just share one?

Thanks for the help. I would like to buld a series of RUMS like this on one action with custom barrels. I'm picking up a SS 300 ultra today with the laminated stock, but switching to an HS as you have. Do you see a problem feeding all the RUMS from this one action and box?

[ 10-31-2002, 22:12: Message edited by: Brent Moffitt ]

I put the set-screw on the left side. For about two years I didn't even have one, butI saw H-S precisions switch barrel at SCI two years ago and thought it could not hurt.. I'm not convinced it adds much other than a small degree of insurance. The barrels lock up with just enough torque to allign the witness marks on the barrel and recoil lug. Like benchrest gun barrels, when you have a really good thread fit, you don't need alot of twist to lock up the shoulder. I'd say 15- 25 lbs of torque is more than enough. Having the barrels set up with their own Holland recoil lugs is because there are small differences in the thickness of the lugs and it just seemed simpler that way. These lugs are surface ground , but there were .001-.002 difference between the thickness of the lugs I've purchased. You could easily use just one lug if you wanted to.
The RUM Magazine box has a cut out for clearance and actually works quite well with the 338 ultamag barrel thats on it right now. I see no reason that it would not work just as well with a 300 Ultra or a 375 ultra. I should point out that this action has had the original Remington threads removed and been re-threaded by me about .025 oversize. This way, the thread fit of the action to the barrel is much closer and hopefully will result in minimal wear over time. So far this has not been an issue at all.
When I get a chance I'll take some pictures.-Rob

As Nitrox knows, I am/was keenly interested in just such a rifle, specifically a .416Rem.Mag. with an extra .458 Lott barrel on a Winchester Model 70 action.

I still think it would be a good choice for Africa (with pre-zeroes scopes in Talley mounts for each barrel), but if feeding is going to be problematic, I'd rather have one gun that feeds right than an armful that don't.

George

[ 11-01-2002, 01:16: Message edited by: GeorgeS ]

George,

Perhaps with feeding considerations, 450 Ackley and 416 Remington is the way to go.

Mike

For what it is worth, Duane Wiebe who built my .458 Lott is going to set it up with a switch barrel in .416 Remington, and assures me that he can get it to feed 100% with both barrels. I have tried feeding .416 Remington through it as it is, and there does not appear to be any difficulty. Since Duane is specifically known for the quality and reliability of his take-down and switch barrel rifles, I have no reason to doubt him.

Mike , what do you think of a push feed M-70 for a switch barrel setup ? The gun started out as a .264 and I am going to add .338 Ultra , or maybe .340 , and .416 Rem. . Probably a second stock for the .416 barrel ........

I don't really like the idea of a switchbarrel gun.

The more complicated it is, the more likely it is to fail.

I have looked at a few takedown Mausers built by Martin Hagn and have watched him working on them. They are very nice as is typical of Martin's work.
One was a four barrel set and I dont recall what the calibers were.
Martin get's the receiver from Hartmann & Wiess, I think, and they are thread with an acme thread. His felling is that the acme thread is more durable and stronger.
All in all, the rifles are neat but I don't think I'll ever make one. Regards, Bill.

Thanks Rob.
I talked to Dave my smith, and he said I should have got a M70 for the project for two reasons. First he said the M70s reciever has an integral recoil lug so it would just be simpler. Second, was that he says the Remingtons do not feed the Ultra Mags well to begin with. The magizine box is too narrow and something about Remington ignoring the formula to figure feed rail length, width and shape etc. He says they're a bitch to make feed 100% reliably, thanks to Remington.

I already have the gun so we'll make it work, he just shakes his head because he hates the Remington and the fat cased Ultra combination.

Brent

I have a Rigby takedown in 275 HV with an extra 9.3x62 barrel. The forearm is intergal with the barrels with the Rigby shotgun lever that pushes a bevelled pin into the face on the action. It has full threads and is adjustable for wear. It shoots about two inches to the right and 1 inch up with the 9.3 barrel. Both barrels group 1 1/2 inches give or take.

I'm sorry I don't have the technical expertise to explain properly, I hope you understand. The 9.3 barrel was made in Australia, I don't know by whom. I saw one exactly like it in a gunshop in Melbourne last summer.

A friend in Queensland has 300 H&H and a 375 H&H with a very nice wood stock made by a fellow in Cairns I believe and another in Victoria has a 7 x 64 and a 9.3 x 64 on a Brown Precicion Stock. They all seem to function very well with no problems. These are both take downs with the forend attached to the barrels. Mausers, of course.

The beauty is they fit in a duffle or a swag, as you want.

Gator1

Email on the way regarding the info in your post

It's news to my gun that it won't feed well with the Ultramag's. Let's see I have one switchbarrel, one factory 338 ultramag and one factory 300 ultramag. They all feed just fine. I think I'd find another gunsmith. Now I will admit, a good pre-war M70 is a thing of beauty and would be great to build a switch barrel on, but a cheap M700 works well as long as you don't switch barrels every day. The only concern I would have is eventual loosening of the threads from wear. So far though it's not been a problem.-Rob

Gator1

Do you have pictures of your Rigby Take Down?
I would like very much to see them.Thanks

James

James

I don't have pictures as the rifle is in Australia. I travel back and forth alot and it is easier to just leave one there. I will try and get some pictures of it if you want to see it though.

Fred Zeglin of Z-Hat just replied to my query.

The takedown M-70 custom will cost you $4895 for a single-barrel model, $10,000 for two barrels mated to the same receiver.

George

Gator1

I would like very much to see pictures of your Rigby. I have a customer who obtained one through an estate. When he went to pick up the gun the barrel assembly was not there and nobody knows what happened to it.He has tried to locate it with no luck. The gun has sentimental value and he wants me to rebarrel it as close to original as possible. I can not find pictures or drawings of the take down mechanism anywhere. If anyone has quality pictures or drawings I would be willing to pay a reasonable price for them. I have e-mailed Rigby but got no answer. I have tried to locate a patent # to do a patent search with no luck. If anyone can help it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, James

GeorgeS

For that price for two barrels I think I would get two receivers and two barrels ie two separate takedowns!

I really can't see how that sort of price can be justified (especially for the extra barrel and fore-end) as I have seen them for a lot less and they worked very well too. I don't believe it is actually that hard a job to do (not by me though, I wouldn't have a hope).

John;

Did you get my emails? (2)

Gator1

Yes. Sorry I didn't reply. Thought I had.

And if you do get some photos of your takedown, I would appreciate seeing them as well. Thanks.

Email on the way regarding your emails.

[ 11-06-2002, 08:47: Message edited by: NitroX ]

But, of course, the ultimate big game takedown rifle is a double!!!!!

(Just had to add my 2 cents worth!).