Re: ER Shaw barrels?

18 August 2004, 08:00

rick0311

Could you please direct me to the part where I called someone a "liar?"

Which part of that joke offended you... The small groups or the small penis?

Rick

18 August 2004, 07:50

sambubba

Rick, there are a lot of people that can and do shoot small groups. If you can't, I guess that is your problem. It is not a good idea to call people a liar when you don't know them or their track record...

18 August 2004, 10:36

rick0311

Craigster,

Not long enough I guess!

People do get the bowels in an uproar over silly little jokes though, don't they?

Rick

18 August 2004, 10:39

Tailgunner

Shaw barrels are only good for hunting if you hunt with Matchkings

18 August 2004, 09:50

craigster

Quote:

I too get a kick out of these sub MOA groups that people always talk about.

Rick, you ought'a know by now that all internet guns shoot "under an inch at a hunert". Dang boy, how long you been workin' here, anyway?

18 August 2004, 13:57

GrandView

Quote:

Originally posted by teal325.....
While you say your rifles are shooting that well- fine - but that type of track record would not go un-noticed by the shooting community at large.

I guess I've always been curious about this issue. And possibly it's a candidate for a new thread.

The poster detailed experience with 6 rounds using "economy" barrels.......ranging from 22-250 through 338-06. His experience was 5 of them shooting half-inch or better.....the 6th (338-06) half to three-quarters.

I'm not sure how the standard gets set, nor who is included in the "shooting community at large", but doubling, or even tripling the size of those groups would satisfy the egos and needs of thousands.

God bless the people who push the envelope, because their efforts typically spawn ancillary benefits to an industry in discovery or technology. Super-accurate rifles are an industry......and in some cases pretty far removed from the sport of hunting. There comes a time when you must decide if you're spending your time and money on game.....or the "game".

Either is perfectly acceptable, but they are on divergent paths.

GV

17 August 2004, 06:32

<allen day>

I think a few of these guys need to re-read some of the previous points that were made in this thread.

No, you don't need to hire Dave Miller or necessarily go with a Kreiger barrel in order to come up with an accurate rifle. Quite a few good professional gunsmiths can do a quality chambering and installation job with a barrel.

But the same skilled labor will be necessary no matter what make of barrel you go with. That part of the cost will be the same no matter what. The variable here, the real potential difference, is in the quality of barrel itself. The price difference between a Shaw or some similar low-end make with a checkered reputation simply isn't that much less than that of a make with a better reputation, such as Douglas, Hart, Shilen, Kreiger, etc., etc. -- maybe $150-$200 -- and in the real world, that's not enough difference to make or break anyone's custom rifle budget these days.

I agree that it's absolutely crazy to cut corners on a bedrock investment such as a barrel blank and quality metalwork (which is the true heart of the rifle), while spending big money on cosmetic fluff, unless all you plan to do is sit there and fondle that puppy when it's done. Cutting corners by going with a cheap barrel, while spending $1,000-$1,500 on a stockblank, plus more on inane stuff such as skeleton grip caps and so forth is the height of reverse-ecomony and general foolishness.

If I had to cut corners, I'd go with a $500 blank or a quality synthetic stock, and go with a top-notch barrel any day of the week............

AD

17 August 2004, 06:44

rick0311

Allen,

I agree.

Just for the Hell of it I went to ER Shaws web site to check their prices.

I'm sorry, I don't see where the actual cost of their barrels is that much cheaper than other brands.

Their labor costs for installing a barrel is quite a bit cheaper than most smiths charge...but that is labor not the cost of the barrel.

Rick

17 August 2004, 06:12

rick0311

Teal,

I agree, and cost is a pretty subjective term that means different things to different people.

I have seen guys on here talking about spending $800 to $1,000 bucks for a stock blank (that has absolutely nothing to do with accuracy) then bitching about the cost of the barrel!

I guess it's a case of priorities. Personally, I would rather spend my money on the barrel and have a stock with a bit less figure in it...but that's just me.

The difference in price between a really good barrel and an "okay" barrel is not that much...and the installation is a labor cost that has nothing to do with the cost or brand of the barrel being installed.

Rick