Anschutz 1:14 twist rate

J

Jarikeen

Guest
Why would Anschutz produce a 1:14 twist barrel on a 64 action BR rifle - so that it wouldnt perform anywhere near as good as their 1:16 on a 54 action BR rifle costing 3X as much?

I have noticed too that the barrels intended for the 64 action tend to have a longer chamber than those for the 54 action - another deliberate act?
 
The review was in the Sporting Shooter, which is a monthly publication from the SSAA (Australia) by their technical adviser Brendan Atkinson who is a well respected benchrest shooter. The rifle under review was the 64 SBR which apparently has a 1:14 twist barrel, unlike the 64 MSR which has the 1:16
 
Sure - June 2008, page 28. Whilst I know that the 63 action doesnt have the highest regard with the benchrest shooters - I'm looking more the Australian situation for hunterclass benchrest. With a little modification I believe I could modify this rifle (I have noticed that the chamber [length] and possibly the headspacing on this grade has been delibrately slackened) to produce a rifle that could compete in this division for the aussie situation, at minimal cost (the joys of being a family man). The 1:14 barrel is a bit of a consern. It just s me that manufactures have the easy ability to produce truely accurate rifles, but dont do it so that they can promote there top end products.

Take for instance the Savage BV mark II - Not a bad varmint rifle - but with a sloppy sports chamber, and the rifling comes no were near the bullets seating - almost suitable for a .22 magnum, by comparison.
 
Tuck Shephard used to shoot a 40x with a 14 twist barrel matter of fact he had 2 of them and they shot awfully well, factory barrels at that. I think a barrel that is truely round and drilled straight is more important than the twist?? And Vickie Alber shot a 64 action at the ara nationals several years back and did well also. It just goes to show you that anything can win with the right driver and luck. Jerry
 
Back
Top