I am currently in the process of gathering the parts to build a 338-06 Improved. i have a Remington 700 BDL & a just aquired a wood stock. I am looking at a Hart barrel.I just thought I would throw this out & get a few opinions & suggestions.

quote:

Originally posted by hvy barrel:
I am currently in the process of gathering the parts to build a 338-06 Improved. i have a Remington 700 BDL & a just aquired a wood stock. I am looking at a Hart barrel.I just thought I would throw this out & get a few opinions & suggestions.

Hart makes really nice barrels. Other’s I have and use are Shilin, Scheinder, and Kreiger. You can’t go wrong with any of these brands and their barrels are all pretty close in price... I think Shilin might have a slight edge in availability of in stock barrels, chamberings, and contours, if getting it in a hurry is important to you.

I’ve never used the Lother Walther barrels...but I’ve heard good things about them.

I have had excellent luck with Hart .338 barrels. If I were to build a .338-06 Improved, I'd likely order a #3 contour Hart for a finish length of 22", a McMillan stock (Sako 'Hunter' pattern works great with the M700), possibly Sunny Hill steel bottommetal with new hex-head screws from B-Square, Talley bases and rings, plus I'd replace the factory trigger with a Timney that'll work with the original safety. Get the action, scopemounts, bottommetal and screws hard-chromed or treated with NP-3 by Robar and you've got yourself a RIFLE!

AD

The Remington design does not please me for a heavy bullet thumper. Use it as is or if you must barrel it for a small bore.

Get a CRF action for the .338. Keep in mind that if you handload now that the .338 WM can be loaded down to 338/06 ballistics but the opposite will never happen.

quote:

Keep in mind that if you handload now that the .338 WM can be loaded down to 338/06 ballistics but the opposite will never happen.

While that may seem a perfectly logical take to some folks, others among us realize that the 338 WM will NEVER be as efficent as a 338-06 and will still require sometimes as much as 10 grains more powder than the 06 variant to produce EQUAL velocity. Hence higher recoil for the same results.

So in that light, the "bigger can be loaded down" take holds no water for those who know they dont want that much case capacity in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
I have had excellent luck with Hart .338 barrels. If I were to build a .338-06 Improved, I'd likely order a #3 contour Hart for a finish length of 22", a McMillan stock (Sako 'Hunter' pattern works great with the M700), possibly Sunny Hill steel bottommetal with new hex-head screws from B-Square, Talley bases and rings, plus I'd replace the factory trigger with a Timney that'll work with the original safety. Get the action, scopemounts, bottommetal and screws hard-chromed or treated with NP-3 by Robar and you've got yourself a RIFLE!

AD

Alan,

I have four 700’s with Rogard finish on the outside and NP3 on the innards...and that stuff is Great!! The self lubricating qualities are a real help in dusty and dirty conditions and water will bead up and roll off on any of the metal parts. About the only lube I use on the action is a very small dab of MilTech grease on the cocking cam.

quote:

While that may seem a perfectly logical take to some folks, others among us realize that the 338 WM will NEVER be as efficent as a 338-06 and will still require sometimes as much as 10 grains more powder than the 06 variant to produce EQUAL velocity. Hence higher recoil for the same results.

So in that light, the "bigger can be loaded down" take holds no water for those who know they dont want that much case capacity in the first place.

Oh sure like this plan is so efficient. Just run the cost of a Hart on a push feed with a new wood stock and put that factor into your computer. Then figure the cost of the six extra grains of 4350 to produce the same velocity in the 338 WM. I will do the powder cost for you.

It's at $ 20 lb. 20/7000X6 = two cents a shot. Also 58 grs of 4064 in a 338 WM will produce the same exact velocity as 58 grs of 4350 will in a 338/06 ai

Having hunted with reduced loads, cast bullet loads and just about everything I will take the big cartridge every day.

If this were some military application where carrying 250 rounds of ammo mattered then the word efficiency might be used but in this story it's just the wrong term.

The recoil spread using the same powder, which is of course not necessary, is 1.5 ft lbs! Thats my two cents.

Ya know.....I've always been curious about threads like this.

hvy barrel described his project as a 338-06 Improved on a Remington 700 BDL. He asked for some opinions and suggestions on barrels.

Why can't we go with that? Allen Day did, and he probably doesn't rank a 338-06 and a Remington 700 action high on his personal list of favorites. But he provided useful and non-contradictory suggestions on the project.

Why is a suggestion that denigrates the action and chambering chosen even relevant? Particularly when it includes mind-numbing decimal equations that are practically meaningless without knowing why hvy barrel started down this road.

GV

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:
Ya know.....I've always been curious about threads like this.

hvy barrel described his project as a 338-06 Improved on a Remington 700 BDL. He asked for some opinions and suggestions on barrels.

Why can't we go with that? Allen Day did, and he probably doesn't rank a 338-06 and a Remington 700 action high on his personal list of favorites. But he provided useful and non-contradictory suggestions on the project.

Why is a suggestion that denigrates the action and chambering chosen even relevant? Particularly when it includes mind-numbing decimal equations that are practically meaningless without knowing why hvy barrel started down this road.

GV

The project does not make any sense. That's why.

Now it does not have to make sense. But if it did one would get more for their money.

He asked for opinions and got mine. Then he got an opinion on my opinion from you and Westrnhtr.

This particular part of a debate might be called the dev·il's advocate (dvlz)
n.
"One who argues against a cause or position, not as a committed opponent but simply for the sake of argument or to determine the validity of the cause or position."

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:

The project does not make any sense. That's why.

Correction. The project doesn't make sense to you.

This isn't a zero-sum game. There isn't any "universal truth" to be attained.

GV

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:

The project does not make any sense. That's why.

Correction. The project doesn't make sense to you.

This isn't a zero-sum game. There isn't any "universal truth" to be attained.

GV

Correction GV, nobody has made any sense of the original project. Not one benefit has been offered that was not rebutted. Thus so far it makes no sense in any context offered.

One of the local dealers here had a nice pre 64 M70 for sale in 338 WM. He was asking $600 for it about ten years ago. Now if you load a rifle down like that it will be a pleasant woods rifle if a mite heavy. I carry reduced and full power loads for many rifles.

One could have a reduced load for woods use and carry a full power load for long ranges. Why not. I only takes the thinking.

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:
......nobody has made any sense of the original project. Not one benefit has been offered that was not rebutted. Thus so far it makes no sense in any context offered.

There's no debating people like yourself who intend to be intentionally obtuse. And there shouldn't even be a debate.......particularly when tidbits like this are offered as proof.

"The Remington design does not please me for a heavy bullet thumper.

Yeah.....that's "Universal Truth".

GV

Here is a M70 Classic Super. Only an hour left.

Buy now!

On second thought I like this stock better. He did want a wood stock. Maybe he does not like a lot of figure in the butt!It's only $700.

I am currently in the process of gathering the parts to build a 338-06 Improved. i have a Remington 700 BDL & a just aquired a wood stock. I am looking at a Hart barrel.I just thought I would throw this out & get a few opinions & suggestions.

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:
Here is a M70 Classic Super. Only an hour left.

Well done.

GV

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:
On second thought I like this stock better.

Wow. That's certainly good news. What a relief.

quote:

He did want a wood stock.

Ya think?

"......& just aquired a wood stock." - hvy barrel

quote:

Maybe he does not like a lot of figure in the butt!

Maybe he doesn't like ham and eggs.

GV

Maybe I missed something but I could have sworn that the starter of this thread just ask for some opinions on brands of “barrels.â€

I didn’t see anything about asking for opinions of the virtues, or lack of, of any particular action or stock...he just wanted some input on different brands of barrels.

It’s his damned rifle, what the hell does he care what kind of action that “we†think he should be using or what particular action pleases “us.â€

quote:

Originally posted by hvy barrel:
I am currently in the process of gathering the parts to build a 338-06 Improved. i have a Remington 700 BDL & a just aquired a wood stock. I am looking at a Hart barrel.I just thought I would throw this out & get a few opinions & suggestions.

I can see nothing whatever wrong with what you're doing...have a ball....

quote:

It’s his damned rifle, what the hell does he care what kind of action that “we†think he should be using or what particular action pleases “us.â€

It's quite possible that the new member does not appreciate the benefits of a CRF action.

Keep in mind that by the time Allen Day got done with it the trigger, bottom metal, wood stock and finish were changed. Not that I disagree with Allen one bit on his suggestions.

My orginal suggestion, and quite a positive and fun one it is, only was to chamber it for a small bore! "The Remington design does not please me for a heavy bullet thumper. Use it as is or if you must barrel it for a small bore.

Get a CRF action for the .338. Keep in mind that if you handload now that the .338 WM can be loaded down to 338/06 ballistics but the opposite will never happen."

Remember that? Then I showed 338's for sale and mentioned that the author might download one of those.

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:

quote:

It’s his damned rifle, what the hell does he care what kind of action that “we†think he should be using or what particular action pleases “us.â€

It's quite possible that the new member does not appreciate the benefits of a CRF action.

Keep in mind that by the time Allen Day got done with it the trigger, bottom metal, wood stock and finish were changed. Not that I disagree with Allen one bit on his suggestions.

My orginal suggestion would only was to chamber it for a small bore! Remember that? Then I showed 338's for sale and mentioned that the author might download one of those.

Just because he is a “new†member on this site doesn’t necessarily mean he is “new†to rifles and shooting,or knowing what kind of rifle he wants to build that will “please†him...NOT you or me!

I don’t recall him asking for opinions on building the rifle from the start. He already has an action, stock, and has decided what caliber he wants... and he just wanted info on different brands of barrels.

I am certainly with Rick on this one. The man did not ask our opinions on what he should be shooting in terms of cartridge....to wit:

"I am currently in the process of gathering the parts to build a 338-06 Improved. i have a Remington 700 BDL & a just aquired a wood stock. I am looking at a Hart barrel.I just thought I would throw this out & get a few opinions & suggestions."

My answer is: Hart makes a danged fine barrel. For the money you likely won't get any better. Savage 99 is correct in that you MAY get a Shilen more quickly...you can probably order it out from shelf stock from either Shilen or Brownell's. On the other hand, a phone call to Hart may show you can do the same there.

The .338-06 is a danged fine cartridge too. I have several friends with whom I shoot regularly who have them, and they all love them. One in particular, who spends almost all his free time hunting bears, dotes on his with the Barnes TSX bullets. It also seems to be one of those cartridges that are sufficiently "balanced" that really accurate loads are pretty easy to come up with using a large variety of modern powders.

For most purposes, you will do fine with your Remington action, especially as you are not trying to modify it to feed some other basically different cartridge size and shape. Four of the ones I have shot locally ARE built on Remington BDL actions and all perform just fine. I probably wouldn't select a Remington for hunting lions or other VERY dangerous game, but then I wouldn't select a bolt gun for that in the first place as long as I have access to doubles.

A wood stock should hand you no problems, so long as you won't feel ill-done by if it loses a little finish in the field now & then. That does not bother me at all, personally. I consider them "character marks".

Have fun. I have wanted hat exact rifle for some time (like 30 years) too, but keep getting diverted by other projects and rifles.


Posts: 4 | Registered: 14 April 2005

quote:

Just because he is a “new†member on this site doesn’t necessarily mean he is “new†to rifles and shooting,or knowing what kind of rifle he wants to build that will “please†him...NOT you or me!

I don’t recall him asking for opinions on building the rifle from the start. He already has an action, stock, and has decided what caliber he wants... and he just wanted info on different brands of barrels.

Rick,

The project is not really as perfect as it might be. There are better actions for a 338 and the Remington is not a good idea for a rifle that could be considered suitable for dangerous game.

The cartridge is a so called improved version of a obscure and unpopular round. The ballistics of the 338-06 can be duplicated with ease by the standard 338 WM or for that matter by other similar cartridges.

Another thing is the use of a Hart barrel, which many consider to be the best of the best, for a medium bore hunting rifle. The Hart barrels are only made in SS so that's why Allen chose some sort of coating for it and the action as the Remington is CRS.

I see no problem with suggesting a different use for the Remington rifle. It would be a better use for the Hart barrel as well to be used with a cartridge that had some particular accuracy or performance demands on it.

Finally I see all of my comments as positive and constructive. Such commentary is the usual turn of events in forum topics.

If it's not too late I wish hvy barrel a warm welcome to the forum and good luck with his project.

Quote by Savage 99:

"There are better actions for a 338 and the Remingting is not a good idea for a rifle that could be considered suitable for dangerous game."

Who said it was gonna be used for dangerous game? Not making a case for the PF's or the CRF's, but lots of "dangerous game" has been taken with PF's.

I'll never figure out why people get their shorts in a knot like Savage99 is in this one.

I'm having a 338-06 built now. I went with a Lilja barrel on reccomendation of the smith. I've also heard several that like Lilja for larger caliber rifles. My only suggestion would be to ask yourself if the minimal gains of the AI in this cartridge is worth the extra work. I've always found loading a means to a end, not a enjoyable hobby.

quote:

Originally posted by dempsey:
I'll never figure out why people get their shorts in a knot like Savage99 is in this one.

I'm having a 338-06 built now. I went with a Lilja barrel on reccomendation of the smith. I've also heard several that like Lilja for larger caliber rifles. My only suggestion would be to ask yourself if the minimal gains of the AI in this cartridge is worth the extra work. I've always found loading a means to a end, not a enjoyable hobby.

I quite agree with you dempsey.

Far from being "obscure and unpopular", I think there's evidence that the 338-06 is more popular than ever. It's an eminently useful round. And ironically, it perhaps had a rebirth in popularity after the .338 Win Mag was introduced .......providing a greater variety of good .338 bullets.

I'm a .35 Whelen aficionado, but wouldn't necessarily take issue with the premise that the .338-06 is a slightly better option for necking up the 06.

I also decline the improved versions of the Whelen, but if you're an avid and conscientious reloader....that's maybe picking nits.

A few years ago I embarked on a 1903 Springfield project. Through a connection via my brother, a truly nice barrel with integral quarter rib, integral swivel base, and integral front ramp came available for an absolute song. The barrel was .338 unchambered. I decided on .338 Win Mag, but in retrospect I wish I'd chosen 338-06. The magnum functions and shoots beautifully, but the 338-06 would have done everything I wanted, and was more in keeping with the action.

GV

I like Lothar Walther Barrels and am using one for my .404 project.

I am sorry that I have not replied sooner, but I have been away from my computer. I am glad to see that did not slow things down bit. First & foremost I would like to thank each & everyone who has responded on my topic of discussion. Rick 0311 I will keep Shilin in mind if the Hart is not available at the time of purchase, thanks.
allen day that sounds like an impressive rifle indeed. I am not familiar with the NP-3 coating that you mentioned, but I am going to check that out.
Savege99 you have had many post on this thread but the first one seems to contain the gist of what you are trying to say. You are pretty clear that the 700 action would not be your first choice, but I don't see the reason given, unless I missed it somewhere. Could you tell me why you would not use the Remington & why you would use the "CRF" As far as the caliber selection, my choice was influenced by nostalgic & sentmental reasons, nothing technical. It will do just fine for my uses & if I ever need something in the magnum class there are plenty of off the shelf rifles out there that will do a fine job for around the same amount of money or maybe less. As you pointed out.
When I started this project I decided to see how cheaply I could build a rifle. So far I have an action, obviously a Rem. 700. I have a set of Burris or Redfield rings & bases, I can't remember which off hand. I have a Leupold scope. I have access to a 338-06 A.I. reamer. So far my initial investment is $410. Maybe $50 less, I would have to check my records to see how much I have in the scope. I may go with the 338-06 instead depending on my access to the reamer & gauges. The barrel will be the most expensive item I have to purchase. I expect to have around $700 to $800 in this project, from the looks of things. Since I figured I could buy an off the shelf rifle for the same money or maybe less, I decided to atleast build a rifle in a caliber that was not readily available. If I hade found a rifle with a 223 bolt face first the project would have been a 7mm TCU or something instead.
I wanted some insight on Hart & other barrel makers & possible suggestions for barrel length, Twist rates & "anything" else pertaining to such a project.
I wish I could respond to each post but I am about done with all this typing.
Thanks everyone for your insight & opinions & if anyone has anything to add I would appreciate it.

hvy barrel,

My choice of an action for a powerful medium bore like the 338/06 would be one that has control round feeding. The reason would be that such an action, if set up right, would be harder to jam if one short stroked the bolt.

Also you will note that some suggested replacing the trigger on the Remington. This still leaves off a safety that will lock the firing pin or even the bolt. Most Remington triggers just block the trigger although some of the old ones locked the bolt but never the firing pin.

The use of a Hart barrel is not consistant with the 338 cartridges in general and in particular when money is tight. Now I wish that every barrel that I had was a Hart. I wish it for all the other rifles out there that I might want to buy someday also! It's just that saving money, Hart barrels and the 338 in the same equation don't compute.

Now if you were to want a 6mm Rem or 25-06 or some other small bore for fine long range shooting then the Remington action and Hart barrel are ideal.

Of all the rifles that I have ever used my Remington 40X has earned the best memories of matches shot with it. So I am quite familar with the Remingtion product and a great value that it was in it's day.

However to try to save money and create a wood stocked rifle with a Hart barrel in a limited use caliber why not choose an action that would make it ideal as a hunting rifle also?

Now if you respond that your going to put a 26" or longer Hart barrel on it and use the 338 for very long range target shooting or even game then I can understand the Hart barrel.

A final personal comment. A year or so ago the WSM's were the hot topic and were being wildcatted. I thought of getting a 338 WSM made up on a Montana 1999 SS SA and I had the action. I did not select the 338 bore in the end due to the smaller choice of bullets and even the high cost of them along with the greater recoil that heavier bullets bring.

If I felt the need for a .338, and I don't, I would just buy a factory crf rifle and hunt with it. I see it as too hard a kicker to be fun.

In any case I am pleased by your careful and considered response. Good luck.

A 26" barrel is kind of what I had in mindm but I was not sure if that would be too long for such a round as the 338-06. This rifle would probably be used to punch paper more than it would be used hunting. I spend most of my time at the range. When hunting season is here my work schedule picks up & have to hunt when I can. What can I say, it supports my hobbies & keeps the lights on. I realize now what you meant by CRF. I am still learing my computer language. Controlled feed vs Push feed "PF". Thank you for your input & I look forward to more sharing of opinions & ideas. I have really enjoyed participating in this forum. I have tried others & have not had the response that I have gotten here. Thanks guys!

Hvybarrel,

Glad to have you here!

The more time you spend here the more you will be convinced that if some of the people on here ran Baskin Robbins they would only sell one flavor of ice cream!

Since I don’t know you or what amount of experience you may have with 700’s I will add a few comments to the contrary of some statements that were made on here.

Remington safeties DO NOT block the trigger...they cam the sear off the trigger connector. This allows the trigger to move freely and to reset if it gets bumped or pulled while the safety is on.

Also, I have been shooting 700’s for allot of years and I have never experienced a problem with rounds not feeding and chambering. I learned along time ago how to operate a bolt so I have also never had a problem with “short stroking.â€

In an effort to prove/disprove for myself the famous CRF vs PF theory I have loaded up a mag full of dummys and have cycled the action with the rifle sideways, up side down and just about every position imaginable and have yet to have the rifle fail to chamber a round. I have also never had the occasion or the need to fire the rifle from any of these ridiculous positions even if they did cause a feeding problem.

Enjoy your rifle, it’s yours...not ours!

quote:

In an effort to prove/disprove for myself the famous CRF vs PF theory I have loaded up a mag full of dummys and have cycled the action with the rifle sideways, up side down and just about every position imaginable and have yet to have the rifle fail to chamber a round. I have also never had the occasion or the need to fire the rifle from any of these ridiculous positions even if they did cause a feeding problem.

Did you try short stroking the bolt? The brown bear guide in AK who was called the best of them short stroked his 416R Sako and the bear ate his hand and feet. That happened last year.

Perhaps the title of “best of them†might have been better applied to someone else?

OK, here are my opinions. I think your project will do well. As I see it, it is mainly choice. In the situation you described as your shooting/hunting the CRF vs. PF is irrelavent. The paper does not care. I have personally short stroked the bolt exactly twice. Once was with a Savage 308 when they still built them on a long action. Cost me a nice non-typical deer. When you short stroke, the round will typically fail to eject and the second one will not be picked up. When I did this, the Savage simply put the spent case back in the chamber where it was ejected the second time I worked the bolt properly. The second time was with a mauser which was simply ugly. When I short stroked it, the round got as far as coming off the ejector but not ejecting from the action. When I pushed the bolt closed, it push fed the empty back and would not allow the extractor to ride over the rim again. Not knowing what was wrong, I worked the bolt again, picking up a new round that promptly jammed into the first one creating a double problem. This one only cost me a stage in a local 3-gun match. After that, the local SWAT captain came to me and said, "Son, there is a reason we use Remingtons and you found it. If you f*&k up a REM, work the bolt again, if you f*&k up Mauser, you really F*&KED UP."

As to barrel, I have had very good luck with both Lilja and Douglas. I had a very bad experience with Shilen and will never do business with them again. I do not know whether you will need the extra 2" of barrel length from 24" to 26" as the powders you will most likely be using will be on the faster burning side.

I also prefer wood stocks. I have finished several and like the looks of my own stuff, I don't do complete inletting, but I do my own bedding. I know my limitations.

I think your project should come in at the $$$ you expect and be a good shooter. Let us know how it comes out.

quote:

posted May 4, 11:24 AM
Perhaps the title of “best of them†might have been better applied to someone else?

Rick 0311

The guide had an outstanding reputation. He kept his help and client out of harms way on a very difficult encounter.

The guide just did not know or appreciate CRF that's all. Now he does.

Savage99,

Brother, you go ahead and buy and use whatever kind of rifle you want to, that’s your business and no one elses.

I am, however, still trying to figure out what anything you have said so far has got to do with recommending a brand of barrel for a rifle a guy is building...which was the one and only question that started this thread.

I think by now we have all concluded that you don’t care for certain types of rifles...all right already, we heard you the first, second, third and fourth time!

I know a little about guns but obviously I missed at least one thing...

Tell me why short-stroking a CFR is more advantageous than short-stroking a PF? The gun may go into battery but I believe it goes "click" intead of "bang". Under the circumstances that isn't much of an improvement. If the argument is another chance to cycle without clearing a jam then one should be shamed for hunting charge-impared bruins.

Inquiring minds want to know.

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
I know a little about guns but obviously I missed at least one thing...

Tell me why short-stroking a CFR is more advantageous than short-stroking a PF? The gun may go into battery but I believe it goes "click" intead of "bang". Under the circumstances that isn't much of an improvement. If the argument is another chance to cycle without clearing a jam then one should be shamed for hunting charge-impared bruins.

Inquiring minds want to know.

tiggerate,

As you, and anyone else who has ever fired bolt action rifles, knows...THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

Old legends die hard though!

I agree with Rick, most of the time there is no difference...they go click instead of bang. I only related my experience to indicate what happened to me was the worst case in both instances and that was what happened after the short stroke. PF - stroke it again and it extracts and you are ready to fire again. CRF - if it doesn't eject the fired round and shoves it back in the chamber, the extractor will not ride over the rim to extract the spent case. In fact, it jammed it so hard into the chamber that I had to use my cleaning rod to get it out.

Just my experience. I have both and I honestly don't prefer one over the other, but the most dangerous game I hunt is hogs. The humans don't count, besides the M16 was push feed.

Back to the barrel issue. You can hardly go wrong today with any major maker. The principal difference is often limited to delivery times. Since confidence is the single most important contributor to accuracy, I never argue with anyone who has a choice that supports their personal confidence in a firearm. On the other hand, I don't mean to poo-poo what Savage99 had to say about a Hart barrel on a hunting rifle; it is as valid a point of view as others.

For example, one of my most accurate hunting rifles today is a 416 Rem Mag with an Adams and Bennett barrel that I fire-lapped. Surprised the h**l outta me.

hvy barrel-

At the risk of jumping into this dogfight, I'll be brave & offer an opinion or two.

I fully support your project idea.

I built a 338-06 ("basic" unimproved version) on a M700 action. It works wonderfully, and shoots even better.

As to barrels, I have a Hart on a 40-X in 222 Rem, and it is definitely something special. But I honestly believe that in a big game and informal paper puncher, it is maybe a bit more than needed. You will be paying a premium price for an "advantage" that you will probably never be able to see.

I have lots of Shilens and Douglas' on various rifles, and they all shoot well, at less cost. (If you're interested in a gunsmith recommendation, feel free to email me, just click on my name and you'll find the address...).

You mentioned something about wondering if a 26" barrel would be OK. That's what I have on mine, and like it alot.

I'm not sure what brand or style of wood stock you have, but mine is in a laminated stock. Again, I like the way it works.

If you have access to a reamer, and are set on an AI version, by all means, it's your rifle so go ahead. But personally, I've never been much of a fan of the AI stuff. My basic 338-06 does everything I need, and is a very easy one-step process to form cases. Something to think about.

Again, if you want some more info, feel free to drop me a note.

And have fun with your project, you're gonna love it!

quote:

Tell me why short-stroking a CFR is more advantageous than short-stroking a PF

Start a round out of a push feed. Now pull the bolt all the way back and push again! Now two rounds will be part way into the chamber. This is what the AK guide did.

A CRF will hold onto the round and if you pull all the way back it will eject it and feed another.

The M16 etc don't short stroke. Well at least M-1's don't short stroke. Calling a M16 reliable is a foolish enterprise. That's why autoloaders don't need to be CRF.