can anyone tell me is there any advantage of glass bedding a rifle about 1 incj in front of the recoil lug ?? basically the first inch of the barrel ?? opr does it need to be fullt free floated

I haven't seen where it makes any difference. If it does anything, then it is probably nothing more than psychological. Somehow you feel better knowing that the barrel isn't simply hanging in mid air.

I can tell you that none of the short range B.R. shooters that I know bed any part of the barrel at all, and these are about the most accurate guns there are for up to 300 yards. In my case and for most of the guys that I shoot with, it also facilitates changing barrels which we do quite often. Our actions are built with a longer barrel tennon than any of the production guns, this helps with barrel sturdiness. It will be easier, I would think, to add bedding later if you feel you need it than it would be to cut existing stuff out. Certainly be a neater job anyway.

I agree with Malm- I have tried it both ways and as far a accuracy goes have't seen much/any noticible difference. I will bed a couple of inches on some of the "tupperware" stocks as a way of adding some stiffness to the forearm. It also might be benificial when hanging a 30" 1.25" barrel on a Mauser because of the short extension.

Interesting question... comparing 2 techniques of what essentially gets the same thing...

if I float a barrel I like to "spot" bed, which means about the length of the shank of the barrel back to the mag, and then on the rear tang... works fine.

i PREFER full length bedding, though some rifles won't shoot well that way.. and some won't shoot well floated, and some require a pressure point.

Bob,
- benchrest changes so often that it's sometimes hard to tie those to "shooters" rifles... after all, bedding came out of the benchrest world, full length or not!

The smith that taught me to bed some 20+ years ago did the 98 different than he did the M700 and M70. He said this was because of where the front screw entered the action. The 98 in the tang and the other two behind it. He also commented about the short thread on the 98. He would bed the chamber or at least the flat part of the chamber on a M98. On the other two he would not. I have an article written by Jack Belk called Bedding for Accuracy that talks about bedding the chamber. I can't say one is more accurate in my 98s because I have never done only the action.

I view comparing the bedding of a hunting rifle to a BR as an apple to orange. My BR has a fully floated barrel. However the action is glued solid to the stock a hunting rifle has only the front and back screws holding it.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
The smith that taught me to bed some 20+ years ago did the 98 different than he did the M700 and M70. He said this was because of where the front screw entered the action. The 98 in the tang and the other two behind it. He also commented about the short thread on the 98. He would bed the chamber or at least the flat part of the chamber on a M98. On the other two he would not. I have an article written by Jack Belk called Bedding for Accuracy that talks about bedding the chamber. I can't say one is more accurate in my 98s because I have never done only the action.

I view comparing the bedding of a hunting rifle to a BR as an apple to orange. My BR has a fully floated barrel. However the action is glued solid to the stock a hunting rifle has only the front and back screws holding it.

I generally bed the same distance ahead of the lug, that I do behind it. And it isn't a conscious application, it's just where the excess epoxy goes. There and on the floor. I keep it neat and make it look like it was well thought out.

quote:

I generally bed the same distance ahead of the lug, that I do behind it. And it isn't a conscious application, it's just where the excess epoxy goes. There and on the floor. I keep it neat and make it look like it was well thought out.

Hmmm maybe that is why he taught me that way. I have found that the gel keeps it off the floor.

I've always bedded the chamber area to the point that it starts to taper down, thats the way I was taught by an old smith friend by the name of Jack Oakley.

Ramrod, I can't see why you say that bedding in a BR gun and a hunting gun is so different. It is all trying to get the utmost accuracy out of a particular gun. I have 9 BR guns, 4 are glued in and 5 are HBR guns that are held to the stock exactly as a hunting rifle is with 2 screws. The I.B.S. says that all HBR guns must be screwed in and not glued. As I said, in the 8 Stolles and a Nasika that I have the tennons are longer that factory guns which helps a lot in securing the barrel. I am certainly not saying that this is the only way to bed, or even the best in all cases, just the way that I have had real good luck with. Our hunter guns [HBR] are not really that much different then a hunting rifle, other than cost and some crazy assed paint jobs. Take care

quote:

Ramrod, I can't see why you say that bedding in a BR gun and a hunting gun is so different

First I have no clue as to HBR regs. I agree both the hunter and BR shooters are looking for accuracy. In my 98s I bed the chamber to help take stress on the action since the screw is basically at the front of the action. I see it as less of a problem on other actions with the screw further back. My reference to BR was towards what I was familiar with. My action is glued in solid. The stess on the action is spread more even. I also need to remove the barrel and not the ction. Thus the barrel must be free of any bedding.

I can see the HBR being more like hunting. However in each of these three case you have different issues and needs while looking for accuracy. Thus the apple/orange.

Plus most important last time I checked my opinion and a couple $ would buy you a cup of coffee.

Have a good one.

I certainly respect your opinion, along with a lot of the guys on this site. Without trying to sound like a wise guy, and I am not, would you mind going into these differences. Not particularly as to the L.V. and H.V. glued ins, but between the hunter class guns and a hunting rifle. If I get to Houston some time I will buy you a cup of coffee for your opinion.

Bob,
As I reread your post for the most part I see us saying pretty much the same thing. My comment about BR was focused on my use of a L.V glue in Panda. Nice long thread and glued in solid. Nothing touching the barrel. I view a glue in different that a screw in. Different stresses etc. With a screw in you need to decided full bed the action, bed front and rear tang only, bed the barrel etc. In the case of a glue in does BEDDING as we discuss it really come into play? I don't see that it does. Thus my apple/ organge.

I see the 98 as different than the actions with the front screw behind the tang. All but a couple of my hunting rifles are 98 based. Short thread and front screw forward. I was taught to bed the chamber by the 80 year old smith that took me under his wing years ago. At that time other than an FN now and then they were all surplus finger groove. He felt that the barrel could (I have no physical proof that it does) stress the action. So he bedded the chamber only on the 98s. So that lesson stuck with me. Years ago I tried floating the barrel on a couple MKXs. I saw no difference in accuracy in that small test. So I kept bedding the chamber on my 98 actions. When I bed a M700 I float the barrel. Unless I get a little in the wrong spot like Malm said. The only M70 I have is a 26" 7STW sendero and I bedded the chamber to try help support the long heavy barrel. Needed? I have no clue if it helped or hurt but it shoots both 120 & 140 noslers to .5MOA.

I free float from the front edge of the bedding. While light barrels might be picky as to the load I've always found that given time I can find a tighter group than with a pressure point. I'm sure others have found a pressure point better.
So while in each case we are looking for the greatest accuracy. Depending on the action, stock, barrel length, weight, etc there are others factors that enter in.

Don't know if any of this makes sense it is way past my bedtime.

There are many ways to skin a cat, and I guess what ever works is easy to stick to. I am not telling anybody is doing anything wrong, but since my tecnique is somwhat different I thought you might like to hear. In my part of the world it is very wet during hunting season. I will not go as far as to say dry-suits are common in gunstores - but very, very close. In addition hunters has to shoot a test every fall before huntingseason, so everybody shoots their barrels hot. This calls for freefloating barrels, and I freefloat all barrels all the way. So I only bed the actions, M98's and all. The front ring, and the last inch of the tang. I have never felt the need to "help support" the barrel with bedding compound, and this also goes for heavy copetition barrels wich are only thightened against the inner flange, not at all against the front end. This is common on military competition rifles in Scandinavia, althoug obsolute theese days. But, I have had many mausers group better than 1/2MOA this way, and feel very confident about it.
So is it the only way to do it?
Probably not, but you know, dont change a winning team!

Hey Bent. You know what they say if it isn't broke don't fix it. As far as bedding the chamber it more than likely is "psychological" as malm stated. I have no "real" proof either way.

I sure wish the hunters here in the states had to taking a shooting test like yours each fall. Some of the guys I see at the range scare the crap out of me.

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:

I sure wish the hunters here in the states had to taking a shooting test like yours each fall. Some of the guys I see at the range scare the crap out of me.

Yea, it is a grand thing! We also have to shoot 30 shots at target before the test! It has improovd the shooting tremendously!

quote:

Originally posted by ramrod340:
I sure wish the hunters here in the states had to taking a shooting test like yours each fall. Some of the guys I see at the range scare the crap out of me.

From what I've seen, there should be a minimum of four tests. First test would be to see if they can spell their name and wipe their ass. Test two would determine if they know which end is which of a rifle.

Test three would be kinda like looking at a police mugshot book, only this book would depict various objects. One object could be a stop sign, maybe another object a tractor, there could be a person and a game animal. To move on, they should have to be able to identify the game animal 2 out of 3 times.

And they mustn't be allowed to re-test for a period less than it would take for a typical commercial TV break, or, 5 minutes. People have short memories and so that time limit must be Firm! After successfully completing the above tests, then and only then would they be allowed to actually handle a gun and proceed to the shooting test.

If they would implement something like this prior to issuing hunting licenses, it may provide enough of an incentive to some kids to finish school, and I might actually think about hunting again... Oh yeah, and based on the results of the shooting test, one could determine whether their gun was bedded right or not, and after all, isn't that the gist of this thread?

malm,

I love it.