"Yes for the most part what you read is BS from a person who calls himself a heretic. He makes his living convincing folks they need him to rechamber a barrel for them since no one else in the world but him can make a chamber that will allow a barrel to shoot decent groups. It is pure bunk and BS to sell his services."

May I post the "before rechambering" report you did from your test of the factory .30/30 barrel used to develop the .308 Bellm data? I am referring to the one that also showed the effects of throating that same barrel.

I would like to post it on the website, if I may.

Thanks, Mike, THE Heretic.

I look at it this way. There are many things you can do to help out with the accuracy of the Contender. And I mean Hinge pin, grip, forend, scope and mount, the way you rest it on the bench, Holding it the same every time, and for the most part.....Finding a load it likes
My 1st. 14" 30-30 barrel shot very good in the factory form...BUT I have seen 1st. hand some of the other barrels that had a very poor cut chamber and missalinement. And seems to me that there is nothing other then a rechamber that will, for the most part correct this problem, and that's the bottom line.
I remember my 1st. phone call to SSK when I wanted to get my 35rem rechambered to 358JDJ. I asked if my barrel would be accurate after the rechamber. They said, It should be, if it was before the rechamber. They didn't say...Yes it will. I never shot it as a 35rem so I didn't know.
It is accurate BTW. but a little picky about bullets.
So what is acceptable accuracy from a barrel? I feel...and alot of you will disagree... that a barrel in a bottle neck case should be able to shoot 1 1/2" for 3 shots at 100yds with at least one load in any good bullet out there. I don't think that's asking too much. Now that's from a factory job, not custom.
From a custom barrel I feel that an inch or less should be average. And if that barrel is over $300. it damn well better do 1/2" with a few different bullets and loads if I do my part.
You know? When I go to the range to test a barrel or work up a load I never take anyone with me. I always go alone. My wife always asked me why that is. Well, this is the only way I can concentrate and keep focus on the job at hand. Yesterday, one
of the guys from our hunt club was dove hunting close to were my range is set up. He stopped to see what all the shooting was about. As soon as he pulled up, I stopped everything I was doing at the time, just to chat for a few. Kinda like makin a $1,000,000. putt while playing golf I guess. I'm sure you know what I mean.
I'm not saying I can't shoot while someone is with me, but I do my reloading for testing as I shoot. And that's the way I do it.
Anyway, For someone to tell me that most all barrels shoot good enough, is pure BS. Someone define good enough.
Oh, for alot of you newer shooters that shoot very good groups with 6mms on down, but can't get the 30s and up to shoot as well. Most of the time you just have to overcome the heavy recoil and I know this for a fact. I used to jerk like crazy with my 1st. 44mag. I would leave one round out of my revolver and when I pulled the trigger on the empty, it just went click but I jerked like I fired a round I still do it sometimes when I shoot freehand, but nothing like I used to.

[ 09-09-2002, 04:33: Message edited by: Jules ]

Mike,

I think you are talking about the tests I did with the Contender 30-30 barrel before it was rechambered to the 308 Bellm. That was the one that was manufactured with NO THROAT. You bet you can post it and if we need any more detail about its performance in factory configuration, after you cut a proper throat and after it was rechambered to the 308 Bellm, I can dig out quite a bit of data to support the conclusions we came to.

Don Shearer

BABY! I can't wait to post this one!!!

steve

I made and distributed paper copies of the report you did showing the results of throating for some time, but for the last couple years shelved it.

I wanted to test the water with you, Don, lest the report stir up things you did not want to be associated with.

I will say again, that so far as a testing regimen is concerned, Don's is sterling. He is highly qualified on the shooting bench, the reloading bench, and the keyboard, and he is superb at crunching numbers to see what they REALLY mean.

I will hand enter the material, post it here and on Matt's site, if that is ok. You can double check it and certify its validity and accuracy. I do not have a scanner that works.

Thanks. Give me a day or two, rather a late night or two. I need at least one more late night on the website store and some time with the local server before the store is ready to use.

Mike

I just packed the paper copy up to mail to 1buba to scan. Got to thinking that when the tables are put into html straightening out the tabs would be more work than worthwhile. Let's see how the scanned copy works.

Don't worry. GB won't believe a well trained scientist any more than he would THE Heretic, but for the benefit of those less discerning, it may help reinforce the facts in their minds and better explain GB's patronizing blather.

After leaving here Sunday night, I went over the to pond..... 3 posts in the Contender and Encore rifle forum for the day, and I think it was 8 on the handguns forum. Most of those were CA law related and not TC related.

With that little activity, there can't be much benefit from buying a banner on that site. Advertisers can get far, far more benefit with even minimal registration on the Google search engine, which I understand is where most of the other search engines get their info. Looks to me like money for banners on GBO is about as productive as the freebies for his "objective tests" that benefit only ole GB's pocket, since even if he does do something with them, he is no more qualified to test anything than the man in the moon. I could pay anyone to say something good about me..... ok..... I know..... it would cost a fortune. Who says talk is cheap?

But what does that do by way of informing others about the facts surrounding a product other than lending some warm fuzzy words anyone can buy?

Mike

Mike,

I just read your post from 9/9, and many thanks for the kind words, but it now has me wondering. What is going on at the pond that needs detail from my test of the Contender factory barrel. I haven't looked in over there in some months now and don't really see a need to. Is the issue of interest or concern to this forum?

Don Shearer

Don -
The thread has been deleted by GB. It was in re: to the fact that TC barrels do indeed come from the factory less than optimum. He basically took the opportunity to degrade and berate Mike and his concern about throats and the part they play in accuracy. I tryed to clear up a few miss-statements he made and got nailed too.

I believe that Mike just wants to show fact, that indeed rechambering does make a difference. In this particular case, you proved it.

steve

1buba should have your report by now, Don, and it should bet posted soon.

You sent me pictures of the soft lead slugs you tapped into the barrel showing the image of the length of the neck and the absence of a throat.

I have them buried in my things and stuff somewhere, but wonder if you might have copies handy. They were quite graphic and may help others to see what we are talking about in regard to the factory "no throat" chambers.

I am just a delirious old fool to some who know it all, yet don't know a thing. We have wallowed in subjectivity enough on this forum and the pond. Your straight forward, factual, objective, empiracal reports speak volumes more than my alleged bias is worth, anyday.

But there will no doubt be some that figure you have something to gain from this personally and must therefore be simply patronizing me. For those, well, it is their loss.

You have made what I feel are monumental contributions to the store of TC knowledge, and I DO feel it is highly worthwhile bringing your work to the surface again, and again, and again. The shackled thinking from old concepts and half truths dies hard.

Mike

FWIW,

The big fish himself has been posting lately over on the handgunhunt.com site's www board. Of course, all of his posts have a picture of him and a link to his website. Must be slow over there at the pond?

Stush

Erik,

What join button is dead? I think something got lost in your post.

I don't know why anyone would care what I post here. I was just sorry to see him show up on http://www.handgunhunt.com/forum/index.html. I post there, as well as here and at the shooters.com site. The handgunhunt.com site has nice bunch of guys posting there.

[ 09-14-2002, 08:58: Message edited by: Stush ]

Mike, I said it before, and I will say it again,

Great spirits have always received
violent opposition from
mediocre minds...

Albert Einstein

Richard.

Mike,

I agree, the pictures of bullets pushed into the throat of that barrel would help explain the need for a proper leade. I did come across those pictures just a few days ago and will dig them out this weekend. I think one will do the trick. Since it is a picture print (4"x6") it will have to be scanned. So do you want me to send it directly to Steve?

Don Shearer

Don,
Yeah, please send them to me. Unless Mike got one in the last week, he doesn't have a scanner.

Thanks alot. I'm going to try and have one of my daughters type the report in for me. The scan doesn't look as good as I would like. The pics will be a great addition.

steve

Steve,

I found the pictures. Will drop them in the box this eve.

Don

Don, that was I believe about 1997 that I gave you the initial .30/30 factory barrel for testing, not realizing at the time that TC had made a change in the reamers they were using. The barrel of course was a brand new factory barrel, new in the box obtained through the distributor I was using at the time.

When the actual change took place in chamber design, I do not know, but can only guess. Consider how many .30/30 barrels have been made over the last 7 or 8 years at least with this "no throat," extra long neck design. The number must be substantial, and thus, I think the information about these .30/30 chambers is essential. They were not just a hiccup in TC's production, and the design probably persists yet today. I have not seen anything .30/30 in Post-fire Production that does have a throat in it, but if someone has, I would like to know about it.

As I recall, the first barrel, the one I gave you to test, was a pre-fire barrel, but wasn't the replacement post-fire with the heliarc weld? Refresh me. I'm still working with a Kodak Brownie mind in a digital pix world.

Thanks for resurrecting pics. They were pretty graphic as I recall. Should help others better see and understand what is inside these barrels.

The change to narrow rifling in the .30 cal. barrels is a big plus, I think. Now if they could combine a throated barrel with the narrow rifling, TC shooters would have a "win/win."

The older .30/30s with a throat usually shot pretty well.

1buba, sorry to hear that hand entering the material is needed. We all owe your daughter a big Thank You for her efforts. Nice to see you are raising those girls right! That is two less anti-gunners growing up, hopefully.

Thanks again to both of you for helping bring this information to light for others.

And, Richard, Albert Einstein was no doubt vindicated at Hiroshima, right? I am certainly no Einstein, just an old fool with a different color set of lenses in my glasses compounded with a Hawkeye borescope. Still wish I could justify the cost of the camera to go with it..... MAN WE COULD REALLY HAVE SOME FUN!

Mike

Mike,

Some details about the 30-30 barrel.

My targets show the first round of tests began on 2/27/98. The barrel was new in the box from the factory and had not been opened nor fired. The first few groups came in at about 2" to 3". At that point I began to wonder why they were so poor. Close inspection showed the rifling came right to the end of the chamber neck. At that point I called T/C and the fellow I talked to wouldn't speculate at all, just said send it back and "we will fix it or replace it". I made a small mark on the barrel in an inconspicuous place so I could see if they sent the same one back. There was no explanation at all, they sent a different new barrel. Lo and behold, it too had the same rifling configuration. I called T/C again and don't recall who I talked with, but he told me "That is what we intend to produce". I challenged, saying it was not possible to seat a spire point bullet with anything but the ogive sticking beyond the end of the brass, and asked if they intended to shut out the handloaders. He repeated "that is what we intend to produce - so the shooter can shoot factory loads" and hung up.

Well, after you throated the barrel I shot my first targets on 4/3/98. Dramatic improvement! ! But lets let the write-up and pictures speak for themselves.

Don Shearer

I gave you the first barrel before I closed the shop in '97 as I recall, and we put things on hold until later.

Again, refresh my memory, but didn't the replacement barrel have a different weld than the first one as further evidence that it was a different barrel than the one I gave you, and you sent to them for replacement?

I have made a big issue of the fact that they replace barrels liberally, ok, but then send you another barrel with the same inherent problems.

I guess I would have friends in the trade if I kept my mouth shut, but I am sorry to say I just can't seem to bring myself to do that. It is a matter of principle. Good folks deserve to know the difference, I feel.

Mike

Mike = mouth shut? Ain't no possible way! :-)

Wouldn't want it any other way. I always enjoy listening to a dissenting voice when the argument is backed by fact. Sometimes, as I believe it is in this case, the dissenting voice becomes the accepted by most... Interesting, no?

steve

Thanks for the vote of confidence, 1buba. Now get your butt back up here, and I'll show you some stuff that'll blow your socks off.

That report of Don's is a pretty good starting point for you, though, wouldn't you agree? When you see Don's pix, you will understand it better, I'm sure.

Then again, it could turn out like one person's visit when everything I picked up was ok and had nothing seriously wrong with it. Then after he left, the next job I did was a ringer.

Mouth shut? Right, no way.

Cogitate this for a minute. Average Joe Schmuck, in this case Mike Bellm, walks into P.O. Ackley's shop for the first time in about 1977 thinking he was a pretty sharp dude on guns. Why, I read all the magazines just like the rest of you. I had old Harold Graham get me started right in gunsmithing projects, bullet casting, reloading, and competitive pistol shooting as a teenager. For a shooter, there are few finer people than old Harold was. Great guy who taught me an awful lot.

I had been through the Air Force Marksmanship Instructor/Armorer Course at Lackland AFB where the All Air Force competitive teams and the huge competitive weapons gunsmithing facility are located..... just across the field from the barracks and underground test tunnels.

Why, I thought I was pretty sharp on my subject. I certainly had a helluva lot broader and more technical background than 99% of the posters on these forums.

But you know what? I did not have the first clue what all the racks of tooling and machines in Ackley's shop were about. Then after I bought it all, I found out about the Shit family, and I certainly did not know Jack.

That is the way it is with most of the dissenters. They don't know Jack either, but they don't have enough experience to realize it yet. So the best they can come up with is to get nervous, bad mouth me, or in GB's case, run me off their lilly pad. Wha, wha.

After 23 years, this stuff is still fascinating, and there is a lot more to learn still. It won't do any good if it ends up 6' under with me, so why not share it?

All the best.
Mike

Okay - this is probably an okay place to post this... Mike sent it to me last week when the board was down and I just now got back to it. The following is MIKE BELLM...
***************
I admit to being down on TC's factory barrels, but DO acknowledge there are
a lot of good ones.

The point I am trying to get across is that here are deliberate and continual practices at TC that undermine their products, leaving "luck of
the draw" for chamber alignment as one's only hedge other than foreknowledge of certain deficient designs to avoid, such as the "no throat" .30/30s and the long forcing cone .357 Mags, Maxes, and .44s to name a few.

As an informed buyer of EITHER used or new barrels, you should be able to side step many of the money traps others step into.

I haven't tried posting a pic here yet and don't know if it has to have its own url or not, but I will try to put up a pic of the "Quality American
Made" product I just did a trigger job on yesterday [see below]. I have see quite a few
similar to this one, but this is more extreme than most. Note how the trigger is canted in relation to the housing AND to the striker. TC had cut the sear notch cattywompus in a half baked manner I suppose to get a better alignment with the striker, but it had to be recut.

What you are looking at is the pivot pin hole not drilled right in the trigger. This one should have been scrapped, not put out.

The net result was an excellent trigger pull at 1 3/4# that the user should be tickled with. But such lack of basic workmanship runs throughout the products, not just the barrels. Rather sickening.

Mike


[ 09-17-2002, 01:59: Message edited by: 1buba ]

Steve, you might want to give this its own "topic" where it isn't buried.

Looks like my fingers need to keep up with my thinking. I left out quite a few letters in the above post.

Thanks for putting this up. Interesting, no?

Mike