I have had a large number of rifles made for me over the years. Mostly hunting rifles vs. target rifles. In many posts on this and other forums, folks will say a particular maker makes very accurate rifles. As an example, on the big bore rifle forum a man says he has a Cloward 375 that puts 5 rounds in one ragged hole.

My question is this. When a really good maker puts a rifle together, is the resultant accuracy more luck backed by skillfull work or is it a matter of the best skilled gets the best results? I know that in my rifles that I can manipulate the equaision by changing things about the rifle or the ammunition to achieve a better or worse group such as the bedding or free floating the barrel or even adding forend tip pressure. On the reloading end I can change multiple things in order to get the results I want.
The nuts and bolts of it is; Is having a rifle that actually is extremely accurate a game of luck or a measurable thing that being skill.???

quote:

When a really good maker puts a rifle together, is the resultant accuracy more luck backed by skillfull work or is it a matter of the best skilled gets the best results?

A good rifle builder knows the basics of accuracy and makes certain his product has the right "stuff". Further he tests the rifle before delivery is made, he does not leave his work to chance.

Years ago I built my first rifle and it was extremely accurate and only by dumb luck. Today the rifles I build are also very accurate but only because I know what the basics are and how to test for them before the project is done.

Once I had a Mauser action on a 25-06 that wouldn't shoot under three inches. It got rebarreled and no one ever saw it except me.

I didn't throw the barrel away as it shot beautifully on another action. Go figure!!!!!

More skill then luck. But every once in a while One gets plane lucky and gets a real winner.

But on the other hand makers who turn out accurate rifles more often then not have a lot of skill involved.

Both gun maker skill and some degree of luck are necessary. For every iota of skill the gunmaker doesn't have, that much more luck is required.

A skilled gunmaker knows how rifles are put together in order to shoot well, and why. However, unless he makes everything himself, the steel, the action, the barrel, the stock, everything else, he does not have absolute control of everything involved. So, to that extent, he has to go through a process which involves some luck.

Starting with the best products available for the money available, he assembles the rifle so it will shoot well IF the components are all up to snuff. If it doesn't shoot well, then he has to try to figure out why, bring the assembly up to where it should be, and try again and again, until it is "right".

Naturally, there are many things he assumes won't be perfect before he even starts, and that's why he "blue-prints" a lot of those purchased components before initially assembling them into a rifle, if the shooter's finances and time allow.

One of the reasons top gunmakers are rated as "tops" is that they thoroughly check their final product before it leaves the shop. Some have a reputation for destroying any rifle that doesn't meet their standards, rather than chance having it leave their shop and get into the hands of some one who bought it in reliance on the maker's name as an indication of quality.

Still, despite the very most a gunmaker can do, sometimes a rifle just won't shoot. In that case, the luck just wasn't with him, and all he can do is eat the cost and start over. Most of the time, though, his knowledge and skill can make a silk purse even out of a sow's ear....or at least a velvet purse.

Removing the shooter and ammo from the equation, about the only factor the custom gun builder has no control over with regards to accuracy is the bore. That is why it is so important to choose a reputable manufacturer when shopping for a barrel.

I, like other custom builders, have one or two barrel manufacturers who we will use, or, recommend without hesitation based on years of experience, past and present, working with them. But like everything, occasionally a bad barrel will slip through. And having a good working relationship with a top quality barrel maker is key to getting satisfaction if the barrel is found to be the problem.

If everything is perfect then the bullets should go all in the same place. Besides the wind, aiming and bench technique that leaves a list of things that can be wrong with the gun, scope and ammo.

Some of the things that can be wrong with the gun are the barrel including the crown, the bedding, scope, something loose and whatever you want to add. But common sense says that you can only add real things and the devil can't.

So that eliminates luck but not the physical variables.

To add, another variable is the gunsmith as you infered. On the next rifle that you have worked on you might ask if the gunsmith will fire the rifle for accuracy before he says its ready and what his standards are.

Barnsess on rifle accuracy.

Leonard, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!

Leonard,
If I send an action to someone to have him install a rifle for hunting, I do not expect one hole groups and if I get them, it is an interesting plus but it is nothing that really adds to the utility of a hunting rifle in my view. If I want a varmint or target rifle I would be seeking someone who specializes in small groups and who employs the steps to make the rifle as accurate as possible. I do not expect nor do I necessarily want someone to take that time and charge me for those tasks on a hunting rifle. If it comes out shooting extremely well it is just a bonus to me. The thing to remember is that shoot 1/2" different off the bench will not show that much difference offhand in the field. That 1/2" will shrink dramatically. The total error (group size) is not found by adding the individual errors that make up the final accuracy, it is the square root of the sum of the squares of those accuracies. Sorry for dragging you back into math class. The next time I see you, I'll get the beer and you can make me bleary eyed telling me about anesthetics.

Any gun I have ever had Mark Stratton barrel for me, shot an inch or under and I have been very pleased. On the other hand, Greg Sweezee in Bridgeport Washington specializes in bench rest and varmint guns and seems to be able to create guns that make small holes and you pay for it.

BTW, I have a new Savage model 12 right bolt, left port in 5X35 SMC (a variation of the .20 BR) that I have not shot as yet. I am awaiting dies, rings etc but 3 friends locally have purchased them and they are getting some incredible accuracy.

The main thrust of the question is that I always use the same great barrels, the same type of action and I spare no expense in the union of parts. I find that no matter whom puts the rifle together, that there seems to be a certain uncertanty about the final outcome when it comes to accuracy.

Well you have to communicate it to the gunsmith. How about this for words? "Some of the shooting with this gun will be at long range. I would like for the rifle to stay sighted in and shoot a inch at 100 with three shots."

Now listen to what he says. That should be a verbal contract.

Thanks for your input, but even Jarett cuts up a few rifles each year because they don't measure up. That was one of his trademarks that made him famous. I think it is nieve to think that every rifle will be a quater minute rifle regardless of whom the maker is. I doubt that when you contract for a rifle to be built that the maker will gurantee a quater minute of accuracy with the rifle. He would be a fool to do so, too many variables. Could you imagine getting a rifle from Heilman or Echols and telling them after their spending hours and tons of money on the rifle that it was not what was ordered cause it wouldn't shoot a half inch group. Personally I think we are far too obsessed with the accuracy thing and our focus should be on acceptable accuracy. I have read several discussions on the subject of accuracy and that in big game rifles that if you have one that will make the grade and is a solid performer at one minute or less that one should be feeling very good indeed. I would like to find a way to hedge my bet a little closer.

lb, I to would like all my rifles to shoot 1/2" or better but not all do.
One semi-custom stands out above all others and it is a true odd ball.
I wanted a half round/half octagon barrel on a super grade 264 win mag and had Mark Stratton do the work. I know Mark was a bit concerned about the octagon at the muzzle being rather thin. As it turned out, the work was 100+% and the gun shoots 1/2" all day long with factory ammo.
I'm not a lucky person so I have no doubt it was the craftsmanship of Mark Stratton that produced this 1/2" gun.

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
The main thrust of the question is that I always use the same great barrels, the same type of action and I spare no expense in the union of parts. I find that no matter whom puts the rifle together, that there seems to be a certain uncertanty about the final outcome when it comes to accuracy.

The only uncertainty I would have with stating deliverable accuracy when building a custom rifle for a customer would be, with the customer himself.

For instance, I know barring a bad barrel, that I can get at least .5 MOA performance out of anything I build, because I have control over the process, and I know me, and how I shoot, but, to guarantee the customer will have the same results is something else because the capability of the customer to deliver the shot is uncertain. Maybe that is what you're sensing, a little apprehension on the part of the gunbuilder.

When I build a gun for someone, I have no problem stating it's capabilities, always staying on the conservative side so that if the customer is capable, he will experience even better results than expected. But I always let the customer know that that outcome is what the rifle is capable of, not the combination of he, and, his ammo.

So I would have to say as far as your initial question goes, that the accuracy of the rifle, when built by someone skilled, is based on "Skill", AND "Luck" when in the hands of the customer.

I really see no reason why a custom gun shouldnt be expected to produce "reasonable accuracy" considering the accuracy geared technology available today, save the occasional boner bore that Malm already mentioned. And that does happen, but I would suggest that if great accuracy is what you seek then bring that up from the onset. Much can be done to enhance accuracy, from action/bbl choice, to bedding, truing, trigger selection etc, etc. But if this isnt disgussed initially then one shouldnt really expect too much. Just something as simple as less than smooth feeding could bang up ammo enough to cause some grief.

That being said, there is also still much involved in making those tight little groups even after the gun leaves the shop. Look at the lengths that benchrest shooters go to just to produce their ammunition. Scope issues, coffee factor, and dont forget technique.

Good accuracy is no accident..

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
... I doubt that when you contract for a rifle to be built that the maker will gurantee a quater minute of accuracy with the rifle. He would be a fool to do so, too many variables.

Depends on the Gunsmith's ability and the Shooter's ability as Malm said. Plenty of Gunsmiths to choose from. The difference between small group capable accuracy and factory capable accuracy, confidence in the feeding and rugged reliability seems to be what a lot of folks I know spend their money for.

Then there is the group who doesn't care about accuracy at all, but prefer their rifles to be "pretty". Fine by me cause I don't have to carry one of them.

quote:

Could you imagine getting a rifle from Heilman or Echols and telling them after their spending hours and tons of money on the rifle that it was not what was ordered cause it wouldn't shoot a half inch group.

Can't imagine being duped into spending that kind of money and not getting 0.25MOA capable accuracy along with exceptional feeding and rugged reliability.

quote:

Personally I think we are far too obsessed with the accuracy thing and our focus should be on acceptable accuracy. I have read several discussions on the subject of accuracy and that in big game rifles that if you have one that will make the grade and is a solid performer at one minute or less that one should be feeling very good indeed. I would like to find a way to hedge my bet a little closer.

No problem at all being able to get that accuracy level coming from a factory rifle. Every factory rifle I have will shoot way better than MOA.

If a Gunsmith can't get one to shoot as well as a typical factory rifle, then it is probably best that he just stick with making them "pretty". Seems to be plenty of folks who value "pretty" over accuracy anyhow.

Years ago I was in Gayle McMillans shop in Phoenix. One of the US service rifle teams had just left with their new rifles. For me, it was like gaining admittance to the shrine of the Holy Grail. He has in a talkative mood, nice guy. One of the things he said to me that has always stuck with me was (paraphrasing) that he could set out to make 10 rifle barrels as neary perfect as he could, never mind the time or cost. After all was said and done, 3 or 4 would shoot really fine, 3 or 4 would shoot like a house afire (his phrase) and the others wouldn't shoot worth a damn. He said this always baffled him thru the years, he always tried to make the best barrels he could, but every now and then you wound up with a stinker.

quote:

Originally posted by Head Trauma:
Years ago I was in Gayle McMillans shop in Phoenix. One of the US service rifle teams had just left with their new rifles. For me, it was like gaining admittance to the shrine of the Holy Grail. He has in a talkative mood, nice guy. One of the things he said to me that has always stuck with me was (paraphrasing) that he could set out to make 10 rifle barrels as neary perfect as he could, never mind the time or cost. After all was said and done, 3 or 4 would shoot really fine, 3 or 4 would shoot like a house afire (his phrase) and the others wouldn't shoot worth a damn. He said this always baffled him thru the years, he always tried to make the best barrels he could, but every now and then you wound up with a stinker.

Not to offend anyone, but i think this guy needs a little prakticing in producing consistant accuracy.
A little statistic.
Over the last 4 year we has delivered more than 2500 barrelblanks to a compagny that finishes them for svitchbarrels for targetrifles.
As a part of their quality controll, every barrel is mounted on a reciever that is fixed on a pair of liniarguids, installed on a heavy concretblock. all barrels are fiered 5 factoryloaded rounds trough a electronic target on 100meters distans. The qualitylimits ia 5 rds within ½" and the testprotocols shovs an avarage of .3 inch, and there has only ben 1 that failed the ½" limit(when analyzing this barrel it showed up that ther was a defect in the lockingarea caused by an brocken down carbide insert)
So if you knows what you are dooing down to the tinyest detail it is posible to make barrels where it is a waste of time to test to find one better than the other

1 out of 2500 failed hmmmmmmm!!!!!!

Chic, would you mind explaining in English how you come to your total error. As far as paying for accuracy, most of the gunsmiths that work on true bench guns do not really charge much if any more then your run of the mill gunsmith. The vast majority of the expense of a true bench gun is in the components used to assemble it. A Stolle action runs between 1100 and 1400 bucks, depending on what it is, and with a Jewell trigger. A Hart or Lilja barrel blank [there are other premium barrels] runs about 290. A McMillan BR stock costs over 400 and has to be inletted and bedded. All of this and the last gun that I had built cost me somewhere between 2300 and 2400, a while ago.
To my knowledge none of the guys that build bench guns actually shoot them to see how well they shoot, they have enough faith in their work and the components that are used. I have nine complete bench guns and 21 barrels for them, and have never had a gun that did not shoot competativly.

By the way Chic, your stockwork is beautiful.

quote:

Is having a rifle that actually is extremely accurate a game of luck or a measurable thing that being skill.???

Perhaps I should have taken the time to read all the posts before chiming in but... in answer to the aove question, in my most humble opinion, there is only so much that CAN make a rifle accurate machanicly. Any reputable gunsmith or builder should know these principals and they are not that difficult to master. That said, it does take skill and patience to put it all together. However I doubt there is a professionally built custom rifle or an off-the-shelf production rifle that will not produce "hunting accuracy." I've always felt too much emphisis is placed on "bench rest-type" accuracy in normal big game rifles. Except for varmints or unusually long range hunting when is 1/2" one way or the other going to matter? What's more, who in a hunting situation is capable of bench rest accuracy?

Sure I want every advantage - best accuracy being one - but I find it depends much more on the shooter and ammunition than the rifle.

An inaccurate shot is due to a bad rifle, bad ammo or a bad shooter. And I know it isn't me, and I handloaded the ammo.....

Then what is stellar accuracy in a hunting rifle. The key here is "HUNTING" rifle. A Stole action as well as numerous others are not suited, in my mind, to hunting. I use pre-64 model 70 or Mauser actions for my hunting rifles. I use Kreiger barrels unless one is not available.I use a smith that has produced exellent results for me in the past. I now have, for example, a 25-06 that will not produce a group, consistantly, of under an inch. I have loaded till I am Blue in the face and about to give up.

lb404, here are two things that will make you a better shooter and solve your problem.being poor and having a stong desire to shoot good

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
Then what is stellar accuracy in a hunting rifle. The key here is "HUNTING" rifle. A Stole action as well as numerous others are not suited, in my mind, to hunting. I use pre-64 model 70 or Mauser actions for my hunting rifles. I use Kreiger barrels unless one is not available.I use a smith that has produced exellent results for me in the past. I now have, for example, a 25-06 that will not produce a group, consistantly, of under an inch. I have loaded till I am Blue in the face and about to give up.

Provided the barrel isn't toast, it is not unreasonable to expect a well tuned bolt action hunting rifle to consistantly produce inch groups or better using handloads. If it is a custom built hunting rifle, then it damn well better provide sub MOA performance using handloads. If it is a custom built rifle and you can't get consistant groups, i.e., your 25-06, take it back and have it rechecked. Something ain't right.

FWIW, when someone say's it's only a hunting rifle, how accurate does it have to be, my personal belief is, if the rifle is used to take game, it should be as accurate as possible so as to assure a clean and humane kill.

When the adrenalin is pumping and your breathing and grip is unsteady the chance at a clean kill is already crumbling so it is here when the rifle needs to be at it's best. At this point it not only takes skill to pull off a clean kill, but a weapon that is up to the task and capable of the shot.

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
...The key here is "HUNTING" rifle. ...I use pre-64 model 70 or Mauser actions for my hunting rifles. I use Kreiger barrels unless one is not available.I use a smith that has produced exellent results for me in the past. I now have, for example, a 25-06 that will not produce a group, consistantly, of under an inch. I have loaded till I am Blue in the face and about to give up.

I know you will not take this kindly, but apparently the Gunsmith you seem to like is not as competent as you believe, or your reloads need tweeking, or perhaps where the gas hit you in the eye from using the rag pre-64s has damaged your vision more than you thought.

You could spend half the money on about any current production Remington and cut those groups considerably "if" it is rifle related.

Or a Savage.
---

Why anyone would try to justify "poor accuracy" as being acceptable has always amazed me.

assuming the rifle is put thgether square, most will have higher inherent accuracy than the shooter.. and then comes the question of sight system THEN trigger, then, frankly, the load.

For example, you can not expect a 204 ruger to shoot the same sized groups with a leupold 2x heav y duplex as it can with a 24x 1/8moa dot. and if the trigger is rough, or inconsistant, it's even worse.

IMHO, the shooter is the largest variable in shooting small groups.. How many of us have had 3 toughing, decide to try for 5, and blow the 4th or 5th shot? Everyone!

jeffe

quote:

You could spend half the money on about any current production Remington and cut those groups considerably "if" it is rifle related.

What a joke, Now that's funny!

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:

quote:

You could spend half the money on about any current production Remington and cut those groups considerably "if" it is rifle related.

What a joke, Now that's funny!

I agree.

Actually, I should have said much less than half the money you spent....

H.C.You are a true optomist to make a statement like that about Remingtons. The Remingtons that I have had and have average over an inch with my loads and shot from the same set up that I shoot I.B.S. benchrest matches. Some do shoot fairly well, the average stink. Attending Registered B.R. matches that there is a factory class shot, Savages are consistant winners. A gentleman on this forum has a tag line along the lines of your accuracy requirement is dependent on the size of your target and it it 100% true. If you are shooting a 1/8 in dot at 100 yds. in a B.R. match, you will not have much success with a factory Rem, any make for that matter.

Hey Bob, No argument from me that a BR rifle is more accurate than a (few) Factory Remingtons.

However our buddy, IB404, who nearly got blinded by the poor gas-handling characteristics of a (rag) Pre-64, is talking about a Hunting rifle. And he is saying after spending money with a Gunsmith to tune it up, put on a new Kreiger and using his Best Reloads, he is only able to get (maybe on occasion) MOA.

And from the way I read it, he is not only satisfied with that level of accuracy(for all that invested time and money), but it seems he is saying having "more accuracy" is a waste of time.

Perhaps I read it all wrong, or perhaps you skipped a few posts. If that level of accuracy is really all he needs, about any H&R single shot will meet those requirements.
---

Bottom line is, as long as IB404 is happy with his rifle, I'm happy for him.

Can't agree he got any kind of a bargain though - unless - it is "pretty".

Accuracy is a function of design, and understanding the weaknesses of the design, and then, finally, addressing and shoring up those weaknesses with skilled and meticulous attention.

Some designs have fewer weaknesses than others, and can be put right with less (or even no) work.

The Blaser R93 for example. I have two receivers, with five different barrels. All will shoot one hole groups, if I do my part. And that is the result of design.

Hot Core you're not happy if you aren't pissing in someones post tosties. Where did you get the idea I about put my eye out with a pre-64 actioned rifle. That has never happened. I had a Classic rifle blow up on me, twice, and got one scratch. You like to change the game as you go don't you. Not staying true to the topic is pretty par for you. I agree that Savage rifles can be accurate, they are butt ugly. I won't hunt with one.
The remington is a joke and the reason gunsmiths have a job "DJ". I guess you don't pay much attention to the posts as your remarks are disjointed and confusing(stay out of the pot and whisky it is affecting you judgement and ability to reason). I shoot well enough and much better than most. I only put about 2000 to 3000 rounds a year on the range, down about 2000 a year due to job and shoulder surgery. None the less, I have my share of shooters. There are some that will not perform irrespective of shooter and load development. Most of my rifles are custom rifles. Not the paste together stuff of plastic and parts, Mostly rifles in fine wood. It is my preference and there can be some limits of wooden stocks ability to withstand moisture changes that may affect accuracy. In that case I will take the nice looking rifle with "acceptable" accuracy all day long over that paste together stuff. It comes down to class or lack of same.

The fact still remains that what happens after I take delivery of the rifle is on me. That is true. Malm wants to assume that I perhaps can not shoot. That might be true but I think it also might not be true. Neither of you know how I shoot. If it is the shooter it should be seen in any rifle he shoots. If it is the rifle then there can be variation in the way they perform from one specimen to another. Using the best components I can find with good advanced loading techniques I should be able to get the most out of the equipment. Some of those instruments are more accurate than others and I am trying to descover what makes the difference.

Finally if the gunsmith is very sure of his work, produces a load that he has proven to himself to be a half minute rifle and sends that hardware to me and I can't reproduce the accuracy then It is on me. Sorry for the run on sentence structure. However, If I take that load and shoot it, and also have others whom have significant shooting skill also, and they can not produce the results then we do have a problem. Is it luck or is it skill????

LB404-

I hear exactly where you are coming from, and it is from "experience", or the "school of hard knocks" or whatever you want to call it. It is a good place to learn from. (Maybe not the only place, but a good one of many.)

I must admit that one of the things that pulls my chain as I get even older (and this is NOT refering to you), is shooters AND gunsmiths who put everything in absolutes. Some people need to look up the definition of "Hubris" once in a while.

As to rifle barrels so good they eliminate the need for testing barrels, all I can say is, "Yeh, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." Both claims carry about the same credibility with me.


There are reasons pretty much all competitive rifle shooters at the top of their respective games DO test their barrels and use the best ones where it counts. And there is a reason that no one make of barrel is used exclusively by all the competition shooters of the world.

I suggest that may be because all barrel makers make some hummers, some bummers, and a bunch of in-betweens. The trick is to chose a maker who you believe gives you the best chance of getting a hummer. But chance still plays a role in that script.

In making any rifle, there is only so much time and so much money available. With it, top gunsmiths buy the best stuff they can. And they make, re-work, check, whatever, all the components they have the time, knowledge and equipment to do. Usually, the rifles they produce shoot pretty well.

But it is hardly feasible to control EVERYTHING that affects the possible aiming, launching, and flight characteristics of the projectile at every shot. And those things which are not absolutely controlled depend on some degree of luck to minimize the number of "flyers" produced when shooting.

So, I still believe that skill is an important part of building good rifles. but I also believe it doesn't hurt any to be lucky, either.

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
Malm wants to assume that I perhaps can not shoot. That might be true but I think it also might not be true. Neither of you know how I shoot.

lb404, do you wish to point me to the part where I make such an assumption that you don't know how to shoot? Right now I'm thinking you might not know how to read.

lb404, do you wish to point me to the part where I make such an assumption that you don't know how to shoot? Right now I'm thinking you might not know how to read.

There were a couple of statements that aluded to the fact the perhaps the problem was the shooter;
So I would have to say as far as your initial question goes, that the accuracy of the rifle, when built by someone skilled, is based on "Skill", AND "Luck" when in the hands of the customer. Big Grin

And another;
When the adrenalin is pumping and your breathing and grip is unsteady the chance at a clean kill is already crumbling so it is here when the rifle needs to be at it's best. At this point it not only takes skill to pull off a clean kill, but a weapon that is up to the task and capable of the shot.

In the whole discussion I never mentioned accuracy when hunting only hunting grade accuracy verses bench target shooting accuracy. I can read as well or better than most gunsmiths can write. The proof of the ability of the rifle and its inherent accuracy would be on the bench. That was, I take it, understood. However, if that was not specified in the begining then that is my fault. The variables at the range are numerous. When you add the hunting jitters you mentioned, then the error factor goes up from there. That does not necessarily reflect the inherent accuracy of the rifle nor the skill of the shooter.

I am not picking on anyone. If you think your skills are up to the task and I hope they are, then that is fine. I have over xx custom rifles. Many made on order for me and many more acquired at gun shows and private sales. I do have considerable experience with mid to upper tier makers to know good from bad. That said, I have seen very few rifles that were consistant shooters at half minute. I have a couple of project rifles in mind now as well as many more ideas for the future. Can you produce a fine hunting weight rifle that will form the nucleus for a custom wood stocked hunting rifle using a pre-64 model 70 action? I don't want some butt ugly rifle with a sewer pipe barrel in a single shot bench rest configuration and a fiberglass stock that could qualify for the unlimited class. That is not a hunting weapon, that is a target weapon. There is a difference and a good smith would know that. Malm you seem to be getting snippy when no statements were directed at you personally and yet you made it personal. All I am seeking is the reality of this skill verses happenchance when getting good quality barrelled actions made. You have provided many helpful hints on this thread and we have many opinions that are essentially the same. Pick good actions, pick good barrels, get good smithing done and the rest is up to the loading and shooting. I do have a question for you. After you make up a barrelled action for a customer do you proof the rifle at a range? Do you use factory ammunition to do the testing. Is all of the factory ammunition you use capable of half minute groups? If you roll your own loads to test your work do you divulge the load to the owner of the rifle? All of the makers I use proof or test their rifles with factory ammo. Usually they produce adequate velocities and adequatee accuracy. The factory definition of speed and accuracy is different than mine.

A little snippy??? All I'm saying is IF a skilled and competent gunsmith builds a rifle, he will know, barring a bad barrel, what it will deliver. Besides the barrel, the other unknown factors in the equation is the skill of the shooter and the quality of the ammo. No where did I say you aren't a skilled marksman. How the hell would I know. What I was trying to impart was, the gunsmith probably isn't aware of the customers shooting and handloading abilities, and so he may be a little apprehensive in guaranteeing the over all accuracy of the "package".

I also said that I don't have a problem declaring what the gun will do because I have control over the entire process from start to finish. But since I'm not actually assembling the ammo or pulling the trigger, then it would be a little difficult to state with any certainty, how a particular gun will perform in the hands of the customer. That is not questioning yours or anyones abilities, just stating fact.

I will never guarantee anything less than "Barn" size groups if the customer is intent on shooting nothing but over the counter stuff. As far as me working up a load for the rifle, I will gladly provide this service if the customer wishes to hire me to do that. I don't usually include that as part of the job. I figure the customer will want to develope his own loads and all that fun stuff himself. I don't need to do any loading in order to state an expected outcome. I stand behind the finished product, and if it fails to perform to MY expectations, which is rather high, then I will do what is necessary to make it perform. That is why I went on to say that a good working relationship with the barrel maker is so important when building custom rifles.

We do agree on the barrel part of the equaision. Thanks for your input.

quote:

Originally posted by lb404:
Hot Core you're not happy if you aren't pissing in someones post tosties. Where did you get the idea I about put my eye out with a pre-64 actioned rifle. That has never happened. I had a Classic rifle blow up on me, twice, and got one scratch. You like to change the game as you go don't you. Not staying true to the topic is pretty par for you. ...

I remember distinctly in a thread a year or so ago concerning the rag pre-64s. It may have been the one where "bradly" was telling everyone what a magnificent trigger design they have and Matt Williams entered the discussion to blow him out of the water.

The thread continued on to list numerous design flaws in the old and new M70s, including gas-handling, or I should say pitiful gas-handling. That was when you mentioned the "poor gas handling design" nearly cost you an eye. At that time you mentioned you continued to use M70s, because I was surprised that anyone would do such a thing.

Edit in correction: I just listed the link below and IB404 DID NOT say it nearly cost him an eye. I was indeed wrong about that. However the last post in the thread was made by IB404 and he seems to understand how pitiful the design is - but still continues to use it to today.
---

I also said in my last post:

quote:

Bottom line is, as long as IB404 is happy with his rifle, I'm happy for him.

Can't see how you see that as being negative toward you.

You seem to want everyone to "agree" with your trying to justify having poor shooting rifles is OK. Won't be happening from ANYONE who actually uses a rifle at distance, but it will bring them(and me) a lot of laughs to see your attempt.

But if that is what you desire, I can comply:

Anyone who would understand the inherent gas-handling design disaster of the rag M70s and continue to use them - says all a person needs to know.

bradly is an idiot

So I have one gunmaker that came forward to look at my projects. I expected more but one is enough if it is the right one.

Hot Core, LB is a good buddy of mine. He has more fine extremely accurate rifles in his collection than most people ever see much less own. Your comments here are so far out of line with reality and anything approaching commen sense your really should quit and try again on another thread. You are talking completely out of ignorance here.
LB,Hill Country might be a good place to try. Our Drill bit buddy will have their address etc. I think he's used them on a couple rifles...............DJ