Most folks got the meaning of Johns post.

First off, it's a manufactured product, and it may be defective.
Second, it is clear that working on these barrels requires different methodology than other barrels. It seems very possible that your smith, especially with this being his first LW barrel to work on, could have not been using the proper methods. I would think that if your smith and LW speak, your barrel could be finsihed as you originally desired, and all be well. Hearing that LW was resistant to stand behind a barrel, even after they got it and did whatever they did to it, is disappointing, and frankly surprising to me....but there is where I see the point that your post might help others realize that LW barrels need different methods for good results....it does seem however, that truly experienced smiths here seemed to know this already, and it also seems clear that is a different type of steel.

Good luck on your outcome!

quote:

I'm going to presume that you are jokeing, unless corrected.

Of course I'm joking. I will continue to stand behind my work. If I screw something up I pay for it: period. I'd never ask a customer to pay for a barrel I had trouble with. LW has made thousands of barrels and they've earned a great reputation for quality, so if I had trouble with one I'd first find out what I was doing wrong, not blame the barrel and ask the customer to pay for it. Maybe I missed something here, but I think that's the crux of this.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fish30114:
It seems very possible that your smith, especially with this being his first LW barrel to work on, could have not been using the proper methods. QUOTE]

It is possible.

quote:

Originally posted by Toomany Tools:

quote:

I'm going to presume that you are jokeing, unless corrected.

Of course I'm joking. I will continue to stand behind my work. If I screw something up I pay for it: period. I'd never ask a customer to pay for a barrel I had trouble with. LW has made thousands of barrels and they've earned a great reputation for quality, so if I had trouble with one I'd first find out what I was doing wrong, not blame the barrel and ask the customer to pay for it. Maybe I missed something here, but I think that's the crux of this.

Have you ever barreled an action with one John?

quote:

Good to know you will not stand behind your work.

That is total tongue in cheek. John has done excellent work for me in the past and stands 100% behind his work. He will also be getting some work from me after the first of the year.

I've had two LW barrels. They happen to have both been CM but I found them to be very good in the accuracy department.

quote:

Have you ever barreled an action with one John?

i honestly don't remember; wish I could say for sure.

Call Charley and ask him what he thinks of them! LOL!

Ahhhh...what "special methods" are needed to work on a Lothar Walther barrel? This ain' t rocket science!...or is it ?

My experience is minimal..a pre threaded and chambered barrel was shit! So..where did I make the mistake? More goddamn rings in the chamber than a raccoon's tail!

I've learned a lot from Charley over the years; I'll have to call him before I work a LW barrel!

17-4 is a bit different to machine then 416 but not night and day. Good cutting oil is key no matter what you are machining.

The thing is knowing how to machine 17-4 just comes from experience. as in ask someone

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:
Most folks got the meaning of Johns post.

Really? How do you know? Just who is most? People who know the person and have made use of his services? That would hardly be MOST! I don't know John from Adam.

Typically on an internet post where readers don't have the benefit of tone, inflection, facial expression etc. the poster will provide some type of indication of their true meaning if it's different then the actual words. Smiley face or some other emotioncon perhaps.

For instance, how do you KNOW I didn't get the meaning of his post and was simply poking fun at him by replying in kind? Maybe MOST folks got the meaning of my post. LOL

Failing that one really has no choice but to assume they mean EXACTLY what they said. In this case what was said was pretty darn clear.

PS John glad to know you do stand behind your work and intend to continue doing so.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:
Most folks got the meaning of Johns post.

Really?

Yes, Really.

Quit being a pr*ck Howard!

I think the question here is who pre chambered and threaded it? Walther or a distributor?

I have no experience with LW larger caliber barrels period and no installation experience with any LW barrels, but their small caliber barrels, .17 and .22 are super accurate. I have used many (50 or so) and saw hundreds used in both Continental and International shooting competitions.

I will state again that European gunsmiths are amazed at how soft US made barrels are. Perhaps their reamers as well as their methods are different than ours?

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe:
Ahhhh...what "special methods" are needed to work on a Lothar Walther barrel? This ain' t rocket science!...or is it ?

My experience is minimal..a pre threaded and chambered barrel was shit! So..where did I make the mistake? More goddamn rings in the chamber than a raccoon's tail!

quote:

Originally posted by kcstott:
17-4 is a bit different to machine then 416 but not night and day. Good cutting oil is key no matter what you are machining.

The thing is knowing how to machine 17-4 just comes from experience. as in ask someone

Will someone please tell me why 17-4 is an issue at all? LW has never used 17-4 for stainless at all. If anything, its closer to 420 and thats only a close approximation. If the gunsmith used 17-4 as any sort of guide. THATS THE PROBLEM. Turning speed is all related to "surface feet per minute" and it changes. Read the little note in the reamer box.

And R in 416R stands for "resulfurized" ie made softer . That spec is so wide its nuts.

17-4?? No wonder it screwed up. If I can fine it, I will scan and post the LW guide for LW50 If I can find a clean copy ( oil & Fingerprints). It clearly states all of the how's and whys.

Seems to me that perhaps a lot of good info is being glossed over or otherwise ignored here.

To say that LW barrels are no good isn't very descriptive. Kinda like me asking My Bride what one of her girl friends looks like and she responds, "She's cute." Well, is she 8 or 88? 99 pounds or 199 pounds? Blonde, brunette, redhead or bald?

WHICH type of LW barrels, in what calibers, machined by whom and machined in exactly what way? How many LW barrels showed this problem, or any problem, for the writer? HOW, EXACTLY HOW, did the barrels show their inferiority? What was done to try to correct the problem?

More-complete answers to these questions have SEEMED to show that maybe the LW CM barrels are OK while their SS barrels require special machining treatment.

I don't pay any attention to Euro opinions of our barrels, for several reasons. Two of the best reasons? Euro bore sizes are all over the map & their dimensions seldom match the US ones, and perhaps most importantly their barrels simply aren't as accurate as ours and never have been.

For proof, simply look in the Benchrest record books.
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac:
Most folks got the meaning of Johns post.

Really? How do you know? Just who is most? People who know the person and have made use of his services? That would hardly be MOST! I don't know John from Adam.

Typically on an internet post where readers don't have the benefit of tone, inflection, facial expression etc. the poster will provide some type of indication of their true meaning if it's different then the actual words. Smiley face or some other emotioncon perhaps.

For instance, how do you KNOW I didn't get the meaning of his post and was simply poking fun at him by replying in kind? Maybe MOST folks got the meaning of my post. LOL

Failing that one really has no choice but to assume they mean EXACTLY what they said. In this case what was said was pretty darn clear.

PS John glad to know you do stand behind your work and intend to continue doing so.

It doesn't take much experience Howard. You just have to get out from behind the computer now and then and interact with regular everyday people. It's not magic Howard.

quote:

One thing I've gained from this thread is that from now on if a customer sends me a barrel and I screw it up, I'm not paying for a new one. For those 2 or 3 out there that I've bought replacement barrels for over the past 7 years, consider yourselves lucky!

John Farner

I'm going to save this post John! That way if that 17 hornet barrel doesnt shoot I'll point to this when you come after me for a replacement barrel.

quote:

I'm going to save this post John! That way if that 17 hornet barrel doesnt shoot I'll point to this when you come after me for a replacement barrel.

LOL! OK; fair enough!

John is an excellent gunsmith. I will use him again.
Tomerhawk, do you have the exact info on the LW50 stainless. It does machine like a PH stainless. I had the advantage of other gunsmiths trials and tribulations with them. I have never seen a BR quality LW barrel. If they were that good I would have seen them at the matches. Woody told me that he had furnished barrels to a few of the top BR shooters and that they won with them. He said these shooters claimed they were other brands. That is a bunch of BS! Woody may be a good guy when you agree with him, but disagree and Katy Bar the Door!
I think the LW50 barrels will last longer than a 416R stainless barrel, but in my opinion from my own experience they are hunting quality barrels. Most folks don't shoot their hunting rifles enough to wear them out, so an LW50 really isn't necessary. If you are wanting CM there are several brands out there that do an excellent job.
Toomanytools, how did you get drug into this?
Butch
Butch

rcamuglia are you sure your grouping problem wasn't the shooter?

I'm reading this thread just to see what the issue was, I have a project in the works that the barrel on is supposedly harder than most CM barrels. One smith that told me that didn't really care for them due to this and felt they were too hard and wore out tooling too quickly. I mentioned this to the person that is working on it but after finish chambering and installation no problems were reported. it behaved itself. I'm always curious though.

By the way, I had a mauser take off barrel I used to use as a bbq/fire poker, loved it, lost it and miss it.

Red

If you check my post again you'll see the mention of a 22-250 I have with a LW barrel that shoots great. .4" groups with only charge weight tuning. I left it alone and was happy!

My main issue with Woody and LW is the way they handled my unhappiness with the .264 barrel. Absolutely pitiful non-customer oriented business policy.

The barrel would not shoot. Sometimes it happens. Simple to solve. Send a replacement and keep a customer. Also keep that customer from having a poor experience and telling e everyone about how poor it was. As you can see it seems I'm not the only one who has had a bad experience with Woody and LW

(see OP)

There's a lot of good barrels out there and good companies who stand behind their product. I own a business that does and shoot for one that does. LW it would seem would want to keep guys like us (competitive shooters and rifle enthusiasts who build a lot of rifles) HAPPY. We are their target market.

OK RC, I see from your post that you have one rifle with a LW barrel that you are happy with, and it's accurate. And you have another one that is not satisfactory. So far, that's fifty percent satisfaction - glass half full kinda thing.

Plus, you had an unhappy customer relations event with Woody involved.

Also two or more gunsmiths were involved, and one of them had no previous experience with LW barrels. On the unsatisfactory barrel installation, the gunsmith who finished it was not the gunsmith who started it.

That's complicated, and somewhere along the line, it didn't need to be. There was a breakdown, seemingly for several reasons, primarily starting with a flawed barrel, and the unsatisfactory installation of its replacment, which may also have been flawed. I'm sorry to read of it. We want to learn from it, especially me, and help if I can.

Now, this thread is about resolving MY situation. Your situation is apparantly a done deal. My situation is yet in the works.

Consider that, please.

KB

416 is the free machining grade of 410 but it's sulfur content has a large range . 416R is a Crucible designation which DOES have an upper range limit !!
17-4 is a PH steel and can be hardened .I have no idea whether LW uses HT'd 17-4 or not .AFAIR LW has used 17-4 for some years.

LW 50 is a chromium steel with a very low nickel content. It this respect,
it is similar to 17-4 PH. But all similarities end there. If it were
classed in the AISI system, it too would be a 400 series stainless. But,
there is no AISI class number that exactly relates to LW 50. It is not a
US product. The sulfer of the 416R is replaced by another element which
does not allow wear so fast as the sulpher.

LW 50 can be easily machined at low rpm and also at high rpm. At low RPM HSS
is preferable but all rake angles must be increased to double the norm. And
cutting edges must be very sharp. At high rpm, normal coated inserts can
be used.

Then there's the comment on the reamers. Every reamer I've handled has been M2 HSS. I don't believe anyone makes a M42 reamer as the cobalt is of little use at the speeds and feed theses reamers are to be used at. All this talk of reamers and barrel steel tells me just how limited someone's experience is with exotic steels.

quote:

Originally posted by D Humbarger:

LW 50 can be easily machined at low rpm and also at high rpm. At low RPM HSS
is preferable but all rake angles must be increased to double the norm. And
cutting edges must be very sharp. At high rpm, normal coated inserts can
be used.

And there in lies the problem.
I'm not saying all gunsmiths and I'm not say any or all that post here. But how many Smiths do you know of that would have the experience to change the rake angle on a cutting tool to produce better results?? Maybe the ones that went to a decent trades school but not everyone has the luxury of being able to attend Trinidad university or a decent tool makers apprenticeship program

This is what I meant by "There is nearly no reason for it to not take a thread"

With the correct information and tooling any metal is machinable.

Every had to grind threads or burn them??? Been there and it ain't fun but it can be done.

quote:

Originally posted by kcstott:
Maybe the ones that went to a decent trades school but not everyone has the luxury of being able to attend Trinidad university or a decent tool makers apprenticeship program.

I can assure you that a decent toolmakers' apprenticeship will offer about 5 times more and better machining knowledge than the finest smithing program I've ever even heard of. Wasn't that the knowledge wasn't AVAILABLE, the problem was the short time allowed and the different focus of the programs.

I can make a fairly decent gunstock but even on my best day I wouldn't make a pimple on a GOOD toolmaker's butt!
Regards, Joe

quote:

but even on my best day I wouldn't make a pimple on a GOOD toolmaker's butt!

Or want to I'd hope!

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
John is an excellent gunsmith. I will use him again.
Tomerhawk, do you have the exact info on the LW50 stainless. It does machine like a PH stainless. I had the advantage of other gunsmiths trials and tribulations with them. I have never seen a BR quality LW barrel. If they were that good I would have seen them at the matches. Woody told me that he had furnished barrels to a few of the top BR shooters and that they won with them. He said these shooters claimed they were other brands. That is a bunch of BS! Woody may be a good guy when you agree with him, but disagree and Katy Bar the Door!
I think the LW50 barrels will last longer than a 416R stainless barrel, but in my opinion from my own experience they are hunting quality barrels. Most folks don't shoot their hunting rifles enough to wear them out, so an LW50 really isn't necessary. If you are wanting CM there are several brands out there that do an excellent job.
Toomanytools, how did you get drug into this?
Butch
Butch

Butch...LW50 is closest to US 420 but has additives to promote difference performance. It is special barrel steel with heat treating to match its performance envelope.

One of the issues is that it will not work with a normal preground threading tool. It just spits chips and tears. You have to change both the top and back rake angle to create a proper chip. If not, you just tear metal and create a bigger push and more back pressure on the barrel and tool. If you follow the instructions it cuts pretty well, even with old equipment.

Another interesting aspect of LW50 is that it is designed to work within CIP/SAAMI specifications. Both max out (on almost all cartridges) at 65 to 68K. If you exceed 70K it will firecrack from the throat forward.

Kinda tells you that you have exceeded safe pressures.

I think that may be part of RC's issue too.

My gunsmith also found that the barrel was tight by 1/2 to 3/4 of a thousandth.

LW disagreed and stated it was to specification.

My gunsmith chambered the barrel with the same reamer that a friend of mine's rifle was chambered with. He can't get his to shoot worse than .3" groups.

LW stated,

quote:

There is an oddity in the chamber. There is no real angle between the leade and the bore. The forward section of the chamber ends and the undisturbed bore begins. There should be an angle on the lands leading to the leade diameter. The throat shows the intersection of the land and groove at the same place. It is a finite line of demarcation. What you should see is no land or groove, this is the leade. Then rifling starts and goes up ange. The groove is formed and terminates at the grove diameter and the lands continue on until they get to the land diameter.

My gunsmith disagreed saying it has a taper of 1 1/2 degrees.

LW stated,

quote:

The crown lacks an inner chamber. This is a 45 ro 60 degree angle joining the land and the groove to the muzzle face. It reinforces the release area of the bullet. In this barrel's case, the angle is not there. There is also notches at the exit point and some burring.

My gunsmith examined the crown and could find nothing wrong with it.

He is one of the best in the country. He built the F-Class National Champion's rifle and the 6.5 Creedmoor I used to grab a share of the course record at the Whittington Sporting Rifle Match. He is a competitor as well. I have faith in his work. It is proven.

I was loading US-869 with the 140's mostly in the .264 WM. Found the max was around 80 grains in my rifle. My gunsmith had some WC-872 that Stonecreek loads and I was excited to try it. Found the max with the 140's was around 81 grains in my rifle. My gunsmith had throated it so I could seat the 140's out far enough to have room for the slow powders.

After about 200 rounds, I gave up on the barrel.

LW told me that the barrel was so worn that I had to have been firing 75K PSI rounds.

I ran the numbers on Quickload with my gunsmith and found that even the max load was within .264 WM specs; Less than 62K. I never had any consistent pressure signs. LW stated that with "the oddity in the chamber" that I could have been shooting 75K PSI loads and would not have known it from the brass

LW rechambered it and recrowned it. When I got it back, I went out with a ladder loaded with the WC-872. Remember I had found the max at 81 grains before.

I started the ladder at 76 grains to be safe. I fired about 7 rounds, the 76 grainers and the 76.5's. I had to use the handle of a screwdriver against the bolt handle and tap it with a crescent wrench to open the bolt on about 3 rounds. I've heard of this but have never seen anything like it. 200 fps less velocity with the same worthless accuracy.

A Brux will be used.

Hmmmm, a lot of technical stuff here, all beyond me.

BUT I have 3 rifles with LW barrels. 2 stainless and one CM. A 6.5x55 on a Lawton 7000 action that has shot in the .3s since new with 120 Gn NBts, a Sako 75 rebarreled in 7-08 that shoots the same with 140 Gn NBTs, and recently a Tikka 695 in 275Rigby calibre that is showing promise with 140 Gn Accubonds and NBTs.

So the generalised criticism of LW holds no water for me. Thats my tuppence worth of experience.

The main advantage for us in UK, is that LW barrels are obtainable on realistic delivery times at sensible prices. Regrettably US components are becoming a rare luxury on this side of the Pond, due to the export restrictions.

I cannot comment on After Sales Service as I have not needed it, up to present.

Best

P

rcamuglia,
Please keep me posted on how the Brux barrel works out. When do you expect to have it done? My LW barrel shoots good at low velocities but that isn't really the point of a 264. I might get it worked out yet but I have considered trying a Brux.

My LW50 7-08 barrel shoots nice groups with Nosler BT's. It fouls very little too.

RC
With out looking at the barrel I'd have to lean toward LW 60/40 on this.

I don't think a lot of smiths have gage pins in .0002" increments. So how was he able to accurately measure the bore?

The crown is easy, either the chamfer is there or it's not.

Either way what LW is say is that there is no throat and that should be easy to see even on the smallest of calibers

quote:

Originally posted by Marc:
rcamuglia,
Please keep me posted on how the Brux barrel works out. When do you expect to have it done? My LW barrel shoots good at low velocities but that isn't really the point of a 264. I might get it worked out yet but I have considered trying a Brux.

My LW50 7-08 barrel shoots nice groups with Nosler BT's. It fouls very little too.

I will.

My 22-250 barrel by LW shoots well as I've posted twice before. Maybe a problem with the .264 barrels? Both .264 barrels I had fouled terribly. Wherever the problem lies, the real failure is in dealing with the unhappy customer.

A sure way to smaller profits and bad press.

quote:

By kcstott;
RC
With out looking at the barrel I'd have to lean toward LW 60/40 on this.

I don't think a lot of smiths have gage pins in .0002" increments. So how was he able to accurately measure the bore?

The crown is easy, either the chamfer is there or it's not.

Either way what LW is say is that there is no throat and that should be easy to see even on the smallest of calibers

I'm not sure what he uses to measure with. He told me I may not be able to achieve the velocity I was looking for when I picked it up immediately after he finished it because of the undersized bore specifications.

He obviously can measure the bore dimensions to the 1/2 thousandth or he wouldn't have been able to tell me it was off by 1/2 to 3/4 a thousandth. Is it your thought that he's making it up?

There was plenty of throat. I had it long throated to accomodate longer COL.

The crown is the same as he has ever done on any of my rifles or any that have won National Championships.

How can you come to your conclusion without seeing the barrel, knowing my gunsmith and his history, knowing my load development practices, knowing my shooting skills? I own rifles that shoot sub .5 MOA groups made by my gunsmith.



1.25" 3-shot 600 yard group with the Creedmoor


1/2" 3-shot 300 yard group with the Creedmoor


.23" 4-shot 100 yard group from the Creedmoor


little over 1" 5-shot group from a .300 WM Chambered by my gunsmith


Factory .223 A-Bolt group at 100 yards


Factory .243 WSSM A-Bolt group at 300 yards



Have you never chambered a barrel that was incapable of acceptable accuracy? I've got plenty of FACTORY rifles that are capable of better accuracy than the CM LW barrel last installed.

That fact should tell you something.

Not trying to throw any stones or dis anyone's pet cartridge, but in 50 years of looking, experimenting and trying to make the 264 perform, I've never seen or heard of a single one that would shoot into 1 MOA or less, consistently.

Might be my own lack of experience, might be something wrong in the chamber specs (a la the 22 Hornet), might be coincidence, but in my experience some cartridges are sometimes just not very accurate compared to others. 280 Remington is another, it's one of my theoretical favorites but Ive never been able to get gilt-edge accuracy from any of the ones I've built or shot. 270, 30-06 & 300 Mags, fine and well below 1 MOA; 264 WM, 280 Rem & factory Hornet, not so good.

Just a thought.
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:

quote:

By kcstott;
RC
With out looking at the barrel I'd have to lean toward LW 60/40 on this.

I don't think a lot of smiths have gage pins in .0002" increments. So how was he able to accurately measure the bore?

The crown is easy, either the chamfer is there or it's not.

Either way what LW is say is that there is no throat and that should be easy to see even on the smallest of calibers

I'm not sure what he uses to measure with. He told me I may not be able to achieve the velocity I was looking for when I picked it up immediately after he finished it because of the undersized bore specifications.

He obviously can measure the bore dimensions to the 1/2 thousandth or he wouldn't have been able to tell me it was off by 1/2 to 3/4 a thousandth. Is it your thought that he's making it up?

I'm not saying he is but stranger things have happened. Is he doing it by feel then. I've no experience with LW that is why i said 60/40 I'm just slightly more inclined to believe LW over your smith As I don't know who he is.

quote:

Originally posted by rcamuglia:
There was plenty of throat. I had it long throated to accomodate longer COL.

The crown is the same as he has ever done on any of my rifles or any that have won National Championships.

How can you come to your conclusion without seeing the barrel, knowing my gunsmith and his history, knowing my load development practices, knowing my shooting skills? I own rifles that shoot sub .5 MOA groups made by my gunsmith.


Have you never chambered a barrel that was incapable of acceptable accuracy? I've got plenty of FACTORY rifles that are capable of better accuracy than the CM LW barrel last installed.

That fact should tell you something.

Everyone is capable of a simple mistake No one is perfect. and it is possible that your smith could have made a mistake. Again I have zero experience with LW. I'd personally have to see the barrel myself before I drew any concrete conclusions.

Keep in mind there RC that this is just an internet bulletin board and conclusions and opinions here are only as valuable as you want them to be.

See with all the bad opinions floating around about LW I honestly don't know who to believe.
Personally I stick with tried and true.
Douglas, Shilen, Hart, Pac Nor, and the least favorite A&B But you just can't stick a $300 barrel on a $50 action.

Here's one:

quote:

My gunsmith chambered the barrel with the same reamer that a friend of mine's rifle was chambered with. He can't get his to shoot worse than .3" groups.

Here's another:
Sorry to keep saying "my gunsmith"...but we talked about the new barrel yesterday. He has a super accurate .264. He built it as an easy carry rifle; I think it weighs about 5.5 pounds. 22" light contour barrel with a brake. He took it out to sight it in a couple of weeks ago before a deer hunt and here's how it went in his words...

quote:

the first shot was 4" high. I shot again and there was still only one hole on the paper. Made a sight adjustment and fired 3 mor shots. 5 shots and 2 holes on the paper

He says it's more accurate than his competition Creedmoor

quote:

See with all the bad opinions floating around about LW I honestly don't know who to believe.
Personally I stick with tried and true.
Douglas, Shilen, Hart, Pac Nor, and the least favorite A&B But you just can't stick a $300 barrel on a 50 $ action

My poor opinion of LW has to do with customer relations, not necessarily barrel quality, accuracy

I have one that shoots and 2 now that wouldn't.

The idea of really hard steel for long barrel life I think is great, especially for high intensity cartridges. But it seems from other members input, it may be at the expense of accuracy

Another "P.S." in my dealings with Woody Woodall was the accusation by him that all my loads were of the 75K PSI variety

I told him that that was impossible. I would have had blown primers, needed to hammer the bolt open, ruined brass. I even called Hodgdon and spoke to the ballistician, told him of LW's and my conversation, and filled him in on the components I was using. He told me he doubted I could get enough US-869 in the case to have that happen. It's slow and WC-872 is much slower