The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Double Rifles Double Rifle Regulation by H&H: Convergence at 50 Yards is Righteous!Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Double Rifle Regulation by H&H: Convergence at 50 Yards is Righteous! | Login/Join |
| one of us |
The "Holland & Holland Manufacturing Video" thread linked here by 577NE and Mehul was great. Thanks. Most interesting to me was the part showing the regulation of a "470" double rifle. Started off crossing by 6 inches at 50 yards: RR......LL Finished with 4 shots into less than an inch (center-to-center) at 50 yards: L.RR L This is very reminiscent of how my Merkel shoots, even to the point of putting 2 rights into the same hole, and the left barrel shooting slightly lower than the right, though all 4 shots into less than one inch: at 50 yards for H&H, and a superior 50 meters for Merkel.  The narrator said that the purpose of the regulation was to make the points of impact of the two barrels "converge" at 50 yards. Obviously they were very proud of having just barely uncrossed the barrels at 50 yards, and shooting 4 shots into less than an inch. Note: This perfect H&H regulation will have the barrels crossing at some point further down range, with the same ammo. That is a fact. It will happen somewhere around 75 yards, I must estimate, since I only have brief eyeball-estimated measurements of the subject targets for the H&H rifle. Verily, it is so. If you can get a double rifle to cross and make a small 4-shot composite group at 50 to 75 yards, that is the cat's meow. If you want it to shoot parallel to infinity, then that is done by infinitesimal adjustment of ammunition velocity by handloading to slightly lower velocity. There was no mention of elevation of POI and how that related to the sights. That is a trivial matter that would be easily sorted out by filing of the rear sight and proper front sight height, when the regulator had the barrels shooting in the same horizontal plane AND CONVERGED at the stated 50 yards ACCORDING TO H&H!!! I submit to you, again, that getting the barrels to cross at some point down range, in the same horizontal plane, is the goal of perfect regulation of a double rifle. A corollary to this is: if your big bore double rifle is crossing somewhere between 50 and 100 yards, that is about right, and you do not want to load the ammo any faster. You might want to slow it down if you are obssessive and compulsive about "Parallel to Infinity." If your double rifle is crossing at 25 yards, then the ammo is ridiculously too fast for the bullet weight used in regulation. | ||
|
| one of us |
I don't agree with your premise that a crossing set of barrels is the goal of perfect regulation... That not withstanding, it is my experience that a load at a certain fps with a certain powder and bullet, might cross at 25yds but the same bullet pushed with a different powder to X + 50fps might be shooting just right. JPK  Free 500grains | |||
|
| one of us |
JPK, The goal of regulation is to get them to "converge" at 50 yards and as close to same horizontal plane as possible, in as small a group of four as possible, hopefully with the lefts just barely left of center and the rights barely right of center. That is how they do it at H&H, the video shows, which is as good as it gets, unless you go to Merkel. They do it at 50 meters instead of 50 yards. Of course a faster or slower powder could change everything, due to recoil and barrel time differences with the differential charges and pressure/time curve variations, etc. For the sake of argument, assume you are stuck with one powder, like it was when they had only cordite. Remember that the double rifle can be regulated for only one load. Period. Big bonus if it works satisfactorily with other loads by chance or by purposeful handloading. I am stuck with only H4831SC in my 470 NE Merkel. The fine tuning part of regulation is that finessing of the load, and filing of the sights, after the barrels are set to converge at x distance in XZ horizontal plane. | |||
|
| One of Us |
IMO the bullets should never cross. | |||
|
| one of us |
Never crossing is a silly affectatation given the velocity variances of factory ammo such as Federal makes now. The barrels would have to be set to diverge in order to never cross in real world terms. Angels dancing on pinheads and playing horse shoes while picking fly poop out of the pepper: that is what "Parallel to infinity" is all about. Regulation makes the barrels converge at a certain range x in horizontal plane XZ. The rest is sights and load finesse. | |||
|
| one of us |
RIP, If the barrels converge then they cross. Crossing is not ideal, therefore, a rifle regulated so that the barrels cross with the regulating load is not perfectly regulated. The same rifle may be well regulated and a great shooter, a good show at the loading bench may even produce better results but it isn't and never will be perfectly regulated. Why are you limited to H4831SC? "If your double rifle is crossing at 25 yards, then the ammo is ridiculously too fast for the bullet weight used in regulation." Again, this is not true. If you switch powders you may find that the same velocity shoots well, you may even find you need to speed things up a bit. JPK Free 500grains | |||
|
| one of us |
JPK, Read again and comprehend what was addressed to you above, please. I will sleep well knowing H&H is doing things the right way. Good night. | |||
|
| One of Us |
My bet is that no one is going to fork out $175,000 for a double rifle that crosses. If H&H wanted to do so, it is also my bet that they could get both barrels touching one another at 50 yards. I do not believe the use of the word "converge" meant "cross". Converge also means to bring closely together. And if they indeed cross, the crossing distance will increase as yardage increases. If you are going to shoot at anything beyond 50 yards, you would have to know at what point the barrels crossed and how far apart they shot at 75, 100, 125, 150, 175..... Or are we just stirring the pot again  ?SCI Life Member DSC Life Member | |||
|
one of us |
Jim, go back and watch that film again! This rifle was perfectly regulated, and the two lfts were slightly on the left of POA, and the rts were on the right of POA, and notice the distance between the centers two individule barrelgroups,and you will see that distance is equal to the distance between the centers of each barrel's bore. You don't want the centers of the two groups to touch, or cross each other at any distance, and H&H knows that, that's why they regulated the rifle the way they did, because that is proper for that rifle! IOW, paralell! The center of those two groups will never cross! The barrels being converging is to place the barrel at a place in the recoil arch so the bullet exits at a place that is paralell to the exit point of the other barrel, PARALELL! As the groups from the barrels go farther down range the groups will enlarge, so that the right side of the left group will overlap the group from the left side of the right barrel group, but the center of each group will remain paralell, to infinity! So a composit group of both barrels will become slightly egg shaped along the same horrizonal line through the POA! The misconception that the double rifle's groups cross at some point is incorrect,if the load is correct! This is why you can have flip-up sights out to very long range, all in line with each other, and if the load is proper for the individual rifle, it will shoot to those sights at the range the sight is cut for, without ever crossing!  NO just fact!....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Mac WHOA NELLIE! The point I was trying to make was that it was properly regulated. And that if H&H did not think that to be the case, they could have probably put two bullets through one ragged hole. The goal is not to have the rounds touching, but to regulate just as we saw in the video. My other point was that you never want to see shots crossing, lest shooting a double becomes a computerized artillery exercise in adding "crossover" to POA determination. SCI Life Member DSC Life Member | |||
|
| one of us |
Seems I misunderstood your post, and we were saying the same thing! Sorry.  ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| one of us |
Another way regulators put it is to have the barrels "converge to infinity". Geronimo | |||
|
| One of Us |
Mac Unfortunately for me, my brain works faster than my fingers when I'm typing!), so there are times my thoughts don't quite come out the way it is written. I could have been a bit clearer. SCI Life Member DSC Life Member | |||
|
| one of us |
NO! I could have read closer! By the way, hows your leg? ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| One of Us |
Well, the ligament (MCL) was about on schedule. The Dr said it would take about 6 months to reattach itself or grow back - whatever the hell it does. Hit 5 months and got stability back (no more shifting left and right). The middle ligament (PCL) is getting there, although it still causes the most pain. The ACL is "like new"! Come our June hunt, I won't have that as an excuse for any crappy shots! SCI Life Member DSC Life Member | |||
|
| One of Us |
i'm glad to see the consensus opinion is that messrs Holland know how to make a double rifle shoot properly..... no matter how it is described / defined, or explained. TOMO577 DOUBLE RIFLE SHOOTERS SOCIETY | |||
|
| One of Us |
converge does not mean cross, it means that they come close together. think of it as a mathematics term. i am obviously no expert (but i am no idiot, i go to UCSD - CSE major), but from what RIP says makes sense in terms of the physical manifestation if one lowered the velocities of the rounds slightly ________________________ Mosin Nagant m91/30 (1942) Winchester .22 (1943) | |||
|
| one of us |
RIP, Converge; from the first definition in Dictionary.com: "to tend to meet in a point or line; incline toward each other, as lines that are not parallel." Ergo, barrels that shoot the regulation load so that the barrels converge are not perfectly regulated. They do not shoot parrallel to each other with the regulating load. Again, they may be well regulated. Good hand loading may even get them shooting parrallel, shooting parrallel may be unneccesary but the barrel are not and can never be perfectly regulated if the shoot the regulation load so that the barrels converge. JPK Free 500grains | |||
|
| one of us |
The barrels converge, the bullet paths do not! if the load is proper! A properly regulated double rifle, shooting a proper load never crosses, PERIOD!  ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
Moderator |
Mac, If you would  , please indulge this probably very dumb question from one of the sunburnt-neck, dirt-under-the-fingernails, knuckle-dragging bolt rifle trash crowd (me) that lurks on this forum only to become more enlightened.....  Is DR regulation shooter specific? ie. is the "recoil arc" different for every shooter? It seems to me it would be, but then of course I started to wonder if barrel time wasn't so quick that it might not be influenced very much by whomever was holding on to the rifle (as long as it was done similarly..like, no death grip or pinning to a forearm rest, etc). TIA, Canuck | |||
|
| one of us |
Canuck technically It does, but as you say the difference is so slight it couldn't really be detected, and would be less than the difference in the same man shooting the rifle in a string of shots under hunting conditions! The things that cause noticeable deviation, with a double shooting proper loads for it's regulation, have more to do with resting the rifle improperly, like against something solid, like the fore-end dirrectly on the sand bags without holding the fore-end in his hand. The fact is, once the load is found, not much will effect the way the rifle shoots, except there is usually a deviation frm a cold winter load, and hot weather load, one needs to develope both if he is to use his double all year round, especially if he lives and hunts in a very cold country at home, and in Africa in hot climates, with the double!
The above quote is laughable! Canuck, I don't think much gets by you! ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think it is interesting that lots of experts jumped all over the Chapuis video and their statement that they regulate at 50 yards. Comments like being cheap, not doing it right, not the same as doing it at 100 etc etc. All the while it is the exact same way the masters do it. | |||
|
| one of us |
To converge at infinity, yes that's the idea, and the same thing as parallel to infinity, which is a more pleasant thought, for we will be aiming at angels dancing on a pinhead out there at infinity, and we would rather have each right and left pass the pinhead by. It would be a real shame to disturb the angels' dancing. It takes: 1) infinitesimally perfect regulation AND 2) infinitesimally perfect ammunition AND 3) an infinitesimally "perfect human" shooter ... ... to achieve either of these purposes, A or B, both of which are equally tall orders: A. To put all your bullets into one hole at 50 yards: converged to a crossing point at 50 yards. B. To shoot a two-hole group, with all rights in the hole right of center, and all lefts in the hole left of center, with the distance between the centers of the holes the same as centers of bore of the double rifle: parallell to infinity Both of these are impossible in the real world. They are both imaginary. The odds of either happening are equal to one divided by infinity times three, and that is obviously zero. In reality all good side-by-side double rifles will fall in the continuum between A and B. All of these are wonderful things and sometimes the only difference between two good rifles on opposite ends of the continuum is the velocity of the ammo that has been matched to them and the heights of their sights. I would gladly accept any double rifle in this continuum. I would know it well and make it shoot where I wanted. One thing is infinitely clear: The double rifle that "almost" converges to crossing at 50 yards ... is always going to shoot a smaller composite group at any range between 0 and 100 yards, than one that is "almost" parallel to infinity. Likewise a double rifle that converges to crossing at 100 yards will shoot smaller groups all the way out to 200 yards than the one that is parallel to infinity ... if either of these infinitesimal situations were possible. So go on dancing with angels, you parallel-to-infinity boys. I will dance with neither angels nor the devil, just physical reality, the good doubles in the continuum between A and B. They all cross somewhere short of INFINITY!!! | |||
|
| one of us |
Thank you, GeoffM24, for making that observation! Some of the sermons from "Mount Double Rifle" always bothered me too.  | |||
|
| one of us |
GeoffM24, there is nothing wrong with regulating at 50 yds, or 100 yds. As far as the barrel convergance goes it makes no difference at all, because the distance is simply the area where they do their controled manipulation of the barrels to get them to shoot paralell. The misconception here is that the Barrels are regulated to converge "AT THE DISTANCE STATED". The regulation is only done to get the barrels to shoot paralell with the regulation load, and at the same elevation for both barrels. Regulating for distance is done in regard to the final sights, not the barrels, and is usually tied to the chambering more than anything. 100 yds for things like 375 flanged, or 9.3X74R, and 50 yds for stopping chamberings. What I'm struggleing to get accross is, the barrels are regulated to shoot paralell, and both at the same elevation horrizonally, no matter the distance. When you read, the rifle is regulated for 50 yd, or 100 yds, all that means is, the standing rear sight is cut to place the shots on the target at the same elevation at that distance. This doesn't mean the rifle crosses at that distance, because a properly regulated double rifle shooting a proper load never crosses at any distance! So what I'm saying here is, it make no difference what distance the sights are regulated for, as far as the quality of the regulator's work in concerned. The rifle's barrels can be well regulated, or poorly regulated, and the distance between the regulator, and his work target has nothing to do with it! The difference between the H&H, and the Chapuis film simply dimenstrates the difference in the quality of fit and finish, between the two brands, but that is reflected in the price as well. I don't think anyone with half a brain would compare the quality of workmanship, between these two makes! Even if both shoot equally as well, the difference in quality of the finished products of each are miles apart. IMO, stateing that fact is, in no way, calling the Chapuis rifle shoddy, they aren't, but you must admit they are not H&H quality. Even a blind man can feel that with his fingers alone! ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| Moderator |
Thanks Mac! Cheers, Canuck | |||
|
| one of us |
| |||
|
One of Us |
I saw the video too. Guess what I've been dreaming about besides "telemundo girls?" -eric " . . . a gun is better worn and with bloom off---So is a saddle---People too by God." -EH | |||
|
| one of us |
And then there is the philosophy of Sarasqueta Double Barrel Rifles circa 1953. Read all about it in teroenza's thread, "Wouldn't it be nice..." "The gun must then be repeatedly targeted and adjusted to bring the center of impact of both barrels at 100 yards to the same point." This is equally as impossible as parallel to infinity is, however it is just as admirable as parallel to infinity, yes a 100-yard bugholer double rifle.  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Rip I'm sure that when you work on a patient that you stop when it is 'Good Enough'. No point in going the extra distance to 'Best job I can do" or making it 'Perfect' eh? Why then accept a rifle that is 'Good Enough' but not 'Perfect'? | |||
|
| one of us |
Yes, RIP, you miss the point. The goal is perfection - or at least should be. Perhaps perfection can never be achieved, that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be the goal. As I have repeated several times, a rifle may be well regulated and not be perfectly regulated. But why set out to regulate a rifle to a second best standard? JPK Free 500grains | |||
|
| one of us |
I don't miss the point at all. Give me a perfectly regulated parallel to infinity double rifle, please! If I had one that put all its bullets from both barrels into one hole at 100 yards, should I destroy it so no one else could be exposed to such obscenity? No, I should have the solder melted and a different wedge hammered between the barrels. Let's not quit until that sow's ear becomes a silk purse. Or should I just slow down my load by using less of the same powder and no other changes? Yes that's it! It is just a matter of the velocity of the load and the height of the sights! There is hope!  | |||
|
| one of us |
RIP, you have me confused! You seem to keep disagreeing with the barrels shooting paralell, being the perfectly regulated double, yet you say in the next breath,below, you discribe exactly how to achieve that level of regulation!  Talk about Angels danceing on the head of a pin.  ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| one of us |
Yes Mac, I too am confused. Perfect regulation, according to RIP has changed from converging at 50yds or 50 meters, maybe 100yds or so to now shooting parrallel, like it has actually always been for the rest of the world. Like I said several post ago, a rifle that shoots so that it converges at 50yds or so with its regulating load may still be well regulated. And for most purposes I believe a heavy rifle that is regulated so that the barrels converge, with the regulating load, at 50yds is more than sufficient, but it ain't perfect and never will be. JPK Free 500grains | |||
|
| one of us |
Mac, Sarcasm. Enough of this parallel-to-infinity bull.  Now let us contemplate our navels, something more important by far. | |||
|
| one of us |
I'm still confused. Is the BS flag flying because you now believe: a) parrallel regulation is perfect regulation b) it isn't perfect regulation c) converging at 50yds is perfect regulation d) it isn't perfect regulation e) converging at 50 meters is perfect regulation f) it isn't perfect regulation g) converging at 100yds is perfect regulation h) it isn't perfect regulation JPK Free 500grains | |||
|
| one of us |
You're confused??? So is RIP! His flag is waveing for "b"! "c" through "h" do not apply to barrel regulation, they only are in relation to cutting of the iron sights, for distance elevation. Regulating of the barrels, and regulation of the sights are two different opperations, intirely. Where you place the target for barrel regulation makes no difference at all, because all you are doing is adjusting the barrels so the bullts hit the target side by side, at the same elevation. When the barrels are printing the bullets side by side, no farther apart than the space between tha bores, the barrels are regulated. Distance has nothing to do with it. Now that, that is done, the sights are regulated for the distance you want the rifle to shoot "dead on" for elevation, and windage, of you standing rear sight. It is usually 50 yds for stoppers,like say a 470NE, and 100 for smaller faster chamberings, like the 9.3X74R. If that is the only rear sight you have the work of regulation both barrel, and sights is complete. If your rifle will have multiple flip-up sights, then the sight appetures must be all in line with the standing rear sight, and with each other, and are adjusted for elevation only. If you will go back and view the H&H video, you will see the left shots are on the left of POA, and the two rights are on the right of POA, at aprioximently the same elevation, and the distance between the centers left barrel group, and the right barrel group is just about the distance apart equal to the distance between the bore centers of most 470NE double rifles. It is plain to see, if you simply open your eyes. The regulation of the Chapuis on it's film is not as well regulated,and I predict, most here thought the Chapuis was better regulated than the H&H. It isn't, because the left and right shots are almost in the same hole, which indicates bullets crossing to what ever range they were shooting, and the barrels need to be seperated slightly, so they shoot side by side, or one over the other for a O/U rifle. Certainly, like any rifle as the range gets longer, bullets from each group will widen out to cross the line between the barrels,into the other barrel's group, but the centers of each group will not cross, but remain side by side. I understand the desire for one hole shooting by folks who have only studied single barrel rifles, and that is posible with a double rifle as well, and still be regulated, but just like the single barrel rifle each barrel has it's own group, and one hole group for the left barrel, and one hole group for the right barrel, is desireable, as long as both barrel's groups are not in the same ONE HOLE, and the centers of the two groups are no farther apart than the distance between the bore centers of the barrel set! This keeps the barrels shooting side by side, and close enough together to form a composit group of both barrels,that is slightly egg shaped along the horrizonal line for elevation. What you are ajusting is not the bullet holes of each barrel, but the center of each barrel's group, in relation to the point of aim, with the center of each barrel's group onit's own side of the POA! Then and only then is the rifle properly regulated! NOW! I'm through with this thread!.............BYE  ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| One of Us |
Patients? Does RIP's experience with reboring and reaming have anything to do with his medical specialty?  SCI Life Member DSC Life Member | |||
|
| one of us |
Urologist? No I do not do RotoRooter jobs on prostates. Somebody's gotta do it so old farts can pee, however. It is an honorable profession. Forget the rest of the alphabet! Even "A" and "B" are imaginary, they are ideals that don't exist in the real world. Only what lies between A and B is real, and quite a good thing, and anything beyond those limits is no good. We are all beating around the same bush here. I am the realist, not the idealist. The last word on the subject, which cannot be controverted, is here, to repeat myself: To converge at infinity, yes that's the idea, and the same thing as parallel to infinity, which is a more pleasant thought, for we will be aiming at angels dancing on a pinhead out there at infinity, and we would rather have each right and left pass the pinhead by. It would be a real shame to disturb the angels' dancing. It takes: 1) infinitesimally perfect regulation AND 2) infinitesimally perfect ammunition AND 3) an infinitesimally "perfect human" shooter ... ... to achieve either of these purposes, A or B, both of which are equally tall orders: A. To put all your bullets into one hole at 50 yards: converged to a crossing point at 50 yards. B. To shoot a two-hole group, with all rights in the hole right of center, and all lefts in the hole left of center, with the distance between the centers of the holes the same as centers of bore of the double rifle: parallell to infinity Both of these are impossible in the real world. They are both imaginary. The odds of either happening are equal to one divided by infinity times three, and that is obviously zero. In reality all good side-by-side double rifles will fall in the continuum between A and B. All of these are wonderful things and sometimes the only difference between two good rifles on opposite ends of the continuum is the velocity of the ammo that has been matched to them and the heights of their sights. I would gladly accept any double rifle in this continuum. I would know it well and make it shoot where I wanted. One thing is infinitely clear: The double rifle that "almost" converges to crossing at 50 yards ... is always going to shoot a smaller composite group at any range between 0 and 100 yards, than one that is "almost" parallel to infinity. Likewise a double rifle that converges to crossing at 100 yards will shoot smaller groups all the way out to 200 yards than the one that is parallel to infinity ... if either of these infinitesimal situations were possible. So go on dancing with angels, you parallel-to-infinity boys. I will dance with neither angels nor the devil, just physical reality, the good doubles in the continuum between A and B. They all cross somewhere short of INFINITY!!! Above we see the technique of double horse regulation. | |||
|
| one of us |
Gentlemen, RIP is correct that no matter how the rifle is regulated at the factory, nobody can consistantly get the same results, with every loading they shoot, even if the loads are the same. The difference in powder lots, brass weight, and the bullet's tiny differences, will make some difference. He is, also, correct that an owner adjusting his load so it shoots one hole at 50 yds will serve well in the field, and will shoot as close as most can hold, but that doesn't mean it is loaded correctly simply because IT'LL DO! However, I think the misunderstanding is one of us is talking about the regulator at the factory regulateing the barrels, and the other is talking about working up loads to shoot to that regulation after the fact. In this case both scenarios are correct. The other misunderstanding is the the barrels are regulated to a fixed distance, they are not! The sights are! At the factory, the barrel regulator adjusts the barrels till they hit side by side which is the correct way they SHOULD be regulated. When you look at the care taken in every tiny aspect of the building of that rifle, you will see that nothing is left as "GOOD ENOUGH" from the fitting of the barrels to the action the very percision fitting of the locks almost a press fit into the action, and wood, the turning of the barres so there is as little difference in the wall thickness of those barrels at any point along their length, to the fine engraveing that is flawless (TO THE NAKED EYE), so if the standard for fitting every part of that rifle is so fine, one would expect the regulator the adhere to the same set of standards when regulating the barrels to the proper configuration. In the film you can see that is exactly what he did. So all I'm saying is when the rifle leaves the factory, the regulation is perfect, to the same standard that the factory holds for all phases of the building of this rifle. The customer, my settle for "IT'LL DO" loading, and nothing is lost in the field, but he, on the other hand, expects the maker to leave nothing to chance, because that is what he is paying all that money for. So my contention is, if you expect perfection from the maker, I see no profit in loading to ALMOST a regulating load, by stopping when you load prints all in the same hole, when a simple slowing only slightly will make your load perfect, the same standard you expect from the maker. One can settle for OK, or one can enjoy finding perfection. To be fair both settings will work in the field. However, I don't think anyone would say I'll pay $150K for a rifle that the factory said "well, it's not perfect, but it's OK, so we will leave it at that level, the customer doesn't know the differnce anyway!" What RIP is saying, and the only thing I diagree with him about is, Perfection is not attainable, in the real world, I say it is. It is simply a fact that, in the case of perfect regulation it is! Perfection is ATTAINABLE, even if it isn't SUSTAINABLE! I think what RIP is saying is since perfection is not sustainable,long term, why bother to obtain perfection in the first place, by denying it exsists! I say part of the fun of haveing a rifle that is the gun maker's best, is doing my part as close to the same care they put into building my rifle. What, pray tell, is wrong with that, dead horses be damned ? ....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1 DRSS Charter member "If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982 Hands of Old Elmer Keith | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Double Rifles Double Rifle Regulation by H&H: Convergence at 50 Yards is Righteous!
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia