CraigP, I think that is McGowen. Harry McGowen makes great barrels. I have used four of his barrels on my rifles. My 460 Wby, two 510/460 Wby's, and a 470 Capstick. They are capable of 1/2 MOA easily, in these big bores.
If you want, Harry McGowen can do the integral rib stuff too, in stainless or chrome moly.
Have you ever had them install a barrel or did you you buy the barrels from them and use other smiths to install? I have one of their barrels in 375/338 that I need installed on an Interarms Mark X action and I was thinking of having them do the work.
Posts: 530 | Location: Kulpmont, PA | Registered: 31 December 2000
CraigP, I have had McGowen barrels installed by independent gunsmiths. I cannot say anything about McGowen work in this regard, because I have not tried it. I would trust Harry McGowen to do whatever he says he can do, however. He certainly makes a great barrel, just about anyway you could ask for it. He offers a lot of faster twist rates along with the more standard twist rates.
I've been using Harry for all of my little projects for about 15 years now. It seems to me that he bought out a rather famous barrel maker 20 or so years ago. Can anyone rememeber the name of that company or am I confused again? Rich Elliott
------------------ Ethiopian Rift Valley Safaris
Posts: 2013 | Location: Crossville, IL 62827 USA | Registered: 07 February 2001
i have 3 of his barrels..221FB,.222 rem and a 22-250.well satified with his work.would highly recomend his services.he makes a super accurate barrel. Rod
I sent him my .500 A-Square wanting him to install scope mounts. I specifically stated Talley mounts. I received it back with Weaver bases. I called to tell him that isn't what I wanted. He told me it would be fine. Not wanting to spend another $70.00 in shipping, I tried to use them. The first shot smeared the aluminum. Nope. Also, when whoever in his shp drilled the holes for the rear bases, they left the lip on the inside of the bolt raceway. The bolt was stiff to operate. How could they have sent something like that out of the shop?
I then sent it to a more reputable 'smith. I was told McGowen almost ruined the rifle. The holes in the receiver bridge were almost drilled all the way through which would have relegated the receiver to the trash pile as it is a stressed member during the shot and would have been unsafe.
Lastly I saw a "restored" 45/70 that the owner proudly stated he had had McGowen do. Looking closely at the lettering on the barrel, it had been smeared by over-zealous buffing. The blueing was beautiful but that doesn't make up for ruining the metalwork.
I cannot recommend him. Whoever he had working in the shop isn't qualified.
Were exactly did he drill the holes in the receiver bridge? I have seen thru holes in receivers before and quite frankly I did not realize that it weakened the receiver. Please explain in more detail so I will know to pass on a gun with this type of mod in the future.
Just a pair of 8-40 holes. When I fired the second cartridge the hole in the target went to a different place. The mounts were very tight, I fired couple more times and it was all over. Took the 1.5-6x Vari-X III off and the slot was almost wiped off the cheapo Weaver bases. So I sent it off to a better smith. Week or so later I got a call and he asked me who did the work. He told me on the very heavy rifles the receiver is stressed. Drilling through would weaken it. This rifle is an A-Square built on an Enfield action.
Thanks for the information. I will make sure that on any future purchases that I pass on through holed receiver big bores. This bit of information also makes me happy that I got rid of my two big bore Winchester M70s as they had through holes in both receiver bridges! I guess that is further proof that Winchesters are not suitable for big calibers.
Roger, I am glad I never got any work done there, if that kind of $hit happens there. He does make good barrels is all I can say. Even if the apprentice there made the $hit happen, Harry should be responsible. I have never been the least bit interested in getting my work done by any barrel maker. That is why I depend on the smith I use. My condolences.
CraigP : I have no knowledge of McGowen rifle barrels or the quality of his gunsmithing. However, I believe the "better" smith referred to in a previous post, who determined that McGowen would have ruined the Enfield receiver if he had of drilled 8-32 holes through the bridge, is full of hooey. Consider :
1. The bridge of the Enfield receiver is already holed with the slot for the ejector plate. The manufacturer/military was obviously not concerned about holes through the bridge. 2. The bridge in this Action would only be subjected to significant stresses if the Bolt handle were to directly bear against the bridge. In the Enfield, the Bolt handle is designed to work as a "Safety Lug", and should not contact the bridge unless the two front lugs have failed, in which case your receiver is junk anyway. 3. The Winchester M70 receiver is holed for the front action screw in the "Lug Pocket". This area of the receiver is significantly stressed every time a round is fired. Winchester M70 receivers work for big magnum cartriges, and this big hole is not an issue.
I have some experience to relate and you be the judge. McGowen rechambered my M700 .338 Win Mag to .340 Wby a decade ago. This rifle never shot better than a 2 to 3 inch group at 100 yards. Most hovered around 6 inches. Now, to be fair, I did not shoot the rifle prior to its being rechambered, so I can't state with certainty that it was ever accurate. I had the thing rebarreled and accurized by Fred Zeglin and now it will produce 1 hole groups at 100 yards on occasion. I also replaced the stock with an H-S Precision rig. How much of the accuracy problem was barrel, rechambering eccentricity or stock shift I cannot say.
My second experience was an attempt to rebuild a Galil Hadar into a custom version of the heavy barreled Galil sniper weapon. McGowen built two barrels for this project. Neither could be used. The dimensions on the threads and the step for the gas port were incorrect. Now, again, I cannot say with certainty if this was the fault of McGowen or of my gunsmith, whom I finally ordered to send back all the remaining parts after a year of sitting on them doing nothing only to discover that he had taken that magnificent machined receiver and ruined it in his ham-handed attempt to pull the barrel. I have good reason to suspect that he (my smith) had some serious personal problems, though he talked a good game. When I spoke with McGowen, I was told that they built the barrel per instructions (probably true), although they claim to have the ability to copy a thread pitch and they did not. My smith told me that the old man was sick and couldn't do much of the work himself any more, depending on others. He (Harry) confirmed this and I think I recall him saying that he had recently sacked one of his shop guys. That was about 3 years ago.
Clearly, Harry McGowen enjoys a sterling reputation in some circles. I've seen too many examples of success to believe that he never did good work. Whether that still holds true today is something of an uncertainty to me. I don't want to be unfair, so I will not offer a judgment either way. Rechambering is dicey (not as dicey as reboring, but dicey nonetheless). My other project was well outside of their ordinary line of work. That's always a risk. I think you're safest if you stick with standard rebarreling jobs.
RogerR. Your 'gunsmith' is full of it.One could drill holes almost anywhere in an Enfield with no loss of safety. I have done extensive work with P-14 and P-17 actions for over 30 yr. and I can assure you that two 3/32 holes won't hurt anything. These holes are drilled into metal that has been soldered or welded in the rear sight cavity anyway.Mark
Posts: 109 | Location: Sask.Ca | Registered: 27 February 2001
