Indexing Again

Opinions End, Fantasies Begin

One more point. I was not going to bring this up but after reading a post on Bill's forum, this needs to be said.

I understand that everyone has the right to their opinion. I understand that opinions can be like religion and politics, you will not change some peoples' minds. I also understand that in discussing these opinions, to attack the opinion is correct and attacking the person is wrong.

However, when does an opinion simply become a fantasy? I know a shooter with a 10/22. He loves this rifle. He brags about it constantly. He has dozens of targets that he will show as "proof", that it is "killer". It will shoot any group size he wants to pull out of his ass, "all day long". The problem is that those targets are shot at 12-15 yards and are typically documented as 50 yards. Now, to be fair, his 10/22 does shoot tiny little groups at 15 yards. However, he sees no problem with his "evidence" since he has stepped off the distance and is convinced it is 50 yards.

Some older men lose it between their legs and between their ears and will never recognize that it has happened to them. From now on, I am going to treat everyone on Bill's forum like I treat this 10/22 shooter. I am going to listen to the stories, over and over and over again, pat him on the back to congratulate him on his great rifle and him being a great shot and remember what he was like before. I'm done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First point, I have nothing against Bill Calfee the gunsmith, but serious problems with Bill Calfee the person. Many wonder why Bill has become so obsessed with the "indexing" issue and it has everything to do with the 6 o'clock firing pin position. A few years ago Mike Ross spent considerable time and effort to determine the effects of firing pin location and found and published his findings. A side note: Has anyone thought for a moment what procedure Bill C used to determine that a 6'oclock firing pin was beneficial? Was his conclusion based on a wrong assumption? Bill might have "discovered" indexing and not realized it. Mike Ross simply proved that the 6 o'clock firing pin did not show any benefit, while Bill Calfee says you can't have accuracy without it, thus an agenda was born. Bill writes of all the little things that are necessary to produce "killer" guns and I will not deny that most have some influence, but by far and away the biggest factor is his ability to take a good barrel and lap it to near perfection. By the way, Bill did not discover the secret to lapping, the Remington 37 barrel was his road map. There has not been any stone unturned in the search for getting the most accuracy from a smallbore rifle, from the days when smallbore prone was the king, Remington and Winchester spent a lot of money trying to best each other. Remington and Winchester both sold their, 37's and 52's at or near a loss, just to gain the honor and prestige of building the most accurate rifle. Both companies advertised extensively about the successes of their rifles and the shooters that used them, unfortunately that era is gone. Bill Calfee has gained a wide spread reputation as the "premier" smallbore gunsmith, I would like to challenge anyone to compare his record of achiements to that of Karl Kenyon. The biggest difference between these individuals was not really in the accomplishments, but in their character. I have never read or heard of one person who had anything but great words about Karl Kenyon, and I don't have to tell anyone here that the same cannot be said about Bill Calfee. Bill has used his "status" in unethical ways by belittling people, products and ideas, in my opinion, to build himself up. I freely admit that I consider Mike Ross a friend, but I have only met the man in person one time. He has done me and many others so many favors that I would hate to try and start listing them for fear of leaving something out. Mike never asked me "who I was and what my credentials were" before he built or worked on my rifles. His objective was and always has been to build the best rifle he is capable of, the same as he does for world class shooters. I am quite certain that a "nobody" has as much chance for Bill Calfee to build him a rifle as the proverbial snowball in hell. Mike Ross is a character and like all of us will suffer from flaws, but he sincerely wanted to share his findings with all of us, no charge, free to use or discard. I want to tell you one more fact, once a secret but now a just a fact, in Europe every world class air rifle position shooter has their barrel indexed to obtain the best accuracy, a world where accuarcy is measured literally in the 1/100's of an inch. Last, I do not know the full story behind "the missing barrel", and will only speak for myself, but the implications are awful and disgraceful.
 
well said rbs i agree, i brought up the point on the rings because of how fragile the setup
seemed, if you read the old posts on here the reasoning behind it is valid. the 6 o'clock
firing pin should actually make a difference as the ignition point is actually down in the powder, but whether it does make a difference doesn't seem to have been proven.
bill calfee is a great gunsmith, no doubt, and actually a pretty good entertainer too.
 
hulk said:
I swore I would never do this again but some people never learn. Again, I respect Bill Calfee, he has earned it. So to his bodyguards, if you don't like my "tone", you know where you can stick it.

Hulk
I have written you off forum and I hope you don't mind me getting in on your thread.

A crooked barrel in a slave action, shoots "killer". Move it to a different slave action, in a different rotational position since the extractor slots are no longer in alignment, still shoots 'killer". Once more, different rotational position, still shoots "killer".

If you read Bill's responses you already know that a crooked barrel from Bill is straighter than most straight barrels correct?


Now from a gentlemen that has come a long way in using a computer, posting his own messages on his forum and even posting his own pictures,

Actually if you go to Wallaces new website you'll find Wallace is asked to post most of Bill's pictures then Bill continues on with the thread.Am I wrong on this?

I find it odd that Bill did not photograph any targets, any groups, any crayon drawings, nothing. This is exactly what he neglected to do before when he did his indexing experiments and announced that indexing did not work. His opinion or theory, it may be, however, not the smallest bit of hard evidence has been offered.

Now Hulk this is just plain silly.I will let others answer this for you.On pages 420,422,423,424,425,426,427 and 428 how many people see 5 pictures of targets and 6 pictures of Bills testing equipment all with very detailed descriptions?
And clocking positions?

Moving forward, Mike Ross posts some messages on Bill's forum. Now, everyone, with half a brain, knew that the powers that be would never allow Mike to compete with Bill for the spotlight for very long. Things were civil for a short time but two old guys that cannot remember whether letters were written and sent leads to one having his character brought into question, and you know which one that was. Again, I find it odd that "dirty laundry" is exposed, at least one side of it, to the light of day,

Hulk
I think Mike Ross said Bill calfee contacted him and Bill confirmed that.There is/was no arguement that Bill Calfee wrote to Mike Ross about barrel indexing as both parties are in agreement.
Mike went on to say he wrote to Bill Calfee and that is in dispute.

but when a barrel goes "missing", only the involved parties can talk about it.
I think the barrel has been talked about by everyone?

So much for open minds and fairness but it is Bill's forum, so Bill's rules apply.
Wallace asked Mike Ross for some proof because he made some claims and it was never produced.

Mike Ross has also earned my respect. This is not hero worship. The one difference is that when Mike has an opinion or theory, there is no shortage of photographs showing what his experiments demonstrate. Yes, those photographs could be "doctored" like our 10/22 shooter but I do not see any agendas here. In addition, several other gunsmiths have replicated the barrel indexing testing and produced the same results.

I think Bill has stated any times if you want your barrel indexed do it.I think what your missing here is that a Calfee barrel as set up by Bill won't show any accuracy improvement by inexing it differently.A barrel by Mike Ross will.

This is the other side of things that technology has spawned. Anyone can have a website, anyone with desktop publishing software can be an author and fools like me can attempt to set the record straight.
Click to expand...

Hulk I actually think you are not reading things right in your attempt to set the record straight.Maybe you could ask Mike Ross if his barrels get the same treatment as a Calfee barrel before he tries his indexing?
Not trying to make you mad again but if you actually want the record straight please point out my errors
Waterboy aka Lynn
 
One more time

Lynn,

First, we are going to be forced to agree to disagree on several points. I could highlight your "errors" but that would be pointless. I did set the record straight, it is quite clear to me.

I cannot speak for Mike Ross but I am comfortable in saying that Mike's treatment of a barrel follows more conventional gunsmithing practices. Barrel indexing is done early in the process of preparing a barrel. There are no preconceived "best" indexing positions. The favored position is the one that prints the best group, usually the lowest POI, and is random, any clock position may occur depending on the results and what position the testing started in. People that do the testing by rotating the entire rifle often find the favored position to be 3'oclock or 9'oclock by random chance but this is what lead to the questioning of Bill's "theory" on 6'oclock firing pins.

You have many of us at a disadvantage since you have Bill's book. Having never seen pages 420,422,423,424,425,426,427 and 428, I cannot comment on Bill's tests or results.
Again, so many reputable gunsmiths believe that barrel indexing is beneficial and many have done their own tests to replicate the results that Mike Ross, and others before him, have produced but only Bill's tests show no benefit.

You seem to account for this anomaly by saying that " a crooked barrel from Bill is straighter than most straight barrels". You go on to say " a Calfee barrel as set up by Bill won't show any accuracy improvement by inexing it differently.A barrel by Mike Ross will."

I challenge you or Bill to provide any hard, documented evidence that supports the first quote. As for the second quote, we will never truly know.
 
J Pappas said:
Calfee designed the round nose bullet that was first packaged in the Semi Auto boxes.
Click to expand...

I have been shooting round nose rimfire bullets for 50 years, how can they be an Invention? That's like saying Bill invented the rectanguar box! Jack C
 
I can believe he invented that box, it sucks.. he suggested some change in the driveing band possition in the sa bullet
 
I don't know Mr. Ross. I do however know a couple ARA shooters that shot his guns (they are now retired John and Linda Rupert). I also know that he has built many guns for either position or prone shooters that have and are competitive. I also say this...evaluating barrels and slugging and finding the little mishaps in the construction are not just one persons (or gunsmiths) revelation or common practice. All GOOD or GREAT gunsmiths do it. They evaluate and slug and find the little bends and problems with the concentricity of the bore to the O.D. of the barrel and point the bent portion in a direction of their own choosing (DOWN!). Too many of you think that there is just one who spends time with the barrel. I can say this for a fact.......Lynn is wrong, at least for the rest of the gunsmith world, reputable gunsmiths treat every barrel the same. They use the measurements they find to optimize the accuracy for their customers. Otherwise they would never have return business. I'm sure Mr. Ross does too. If he found that indexing works then let him use it without argument. If Mr. Calfee did not then let him be. But otherwise if you're not a gunsmith what is it your business how one does things differently than another? They build guns for TWO completely different sports for the most part. It's apples to oranges. I'll leave it at this, until you've tried a completely tuned gun from either of the two with identical capability of the barrels (cannot be done) with the best ammo for that particular barrel (cannot be done) with the best rimfire shooter in the world (cannot be done) on the same day at the same time (cannot be done) then and only then you can finitely or definately determine who is right or who is wrong. Many other gunsmiths are doing all the needed things to make these guns shoot. They work hard at it. They love their work. Too many are either dead or close to retirement. It's a shame that this argument has made them look like they don't know what they are doing.

John M. Carper
 
Hulk
Its a shame you don't have his book but basically Bill has the pictures of his groups and targets shot at the various clock positions like you asked for.They look similar to those by Mike Ross.
If you go to Wallaces website and re-read Mikes posts I think he says that he doesn't contour the barrel to the bore like Bill Calfee does and that is why he is seeing an improvement.
If you have a barrel and caliper handy measure the distance between the grooves and outside edge at the muzzle.It is common to see a decent amount of variation at this point if the barrel isn't contoured in direct relation to where the crown will eventually get cut.
Picture a water pipe with alot of wall thickness variation.

Carp
This thread is about discussing wether barrel indexing works or doesn't work so naturally everyone viewing this thread wants to use a gunsmith whose ideas are correct.I have never said Bill Calfee is the only gunsmith who evaluates his barrels and you can't show us a thread that shows differently.
As to why its any of our business I am assuming that question was your attempt at a joke?
Waterboy
 
Lynn,

Whether or not Mike Ross contours the OD of a barrel to be concentric to the bore, still fails to explain why so many gunsmiths, even those before Mike, that do prepare barrels like Bill, seem to produce results that show barrel indexing has benefit. Also, it is not a shame that I do not have a Calfee book, if I had wanted one, I would have ordered a copy. I recall his article on this subject in PS. In this case, I was disappointed in his test set-up and lack of isolating variables, the barrel, therefore, there was a lack of credibility in his results.

I do want to clarify a point.

You said " I don' read anybodies articles who isn't actually a shooter in the discipline I am interested in.That isn't a slight on you rather I don't want to read hearsay or second hand information." Now Bill is not a rimfire shooter but you read his articles, his book and agree with his "theories", without much in the way of hard evidence. On the other hand, you go on to call this gunsmith, of some repute, a "storyteller". Care to comment?

Still waiting on that challenge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hulk
If I am reading your post correctly all it would take to verify Mikes results is someone with a Calfee rifle to have Mike index the barrel?
Maybe someone will volunteer a Calfeerifle for testing?
Onto your last question.
Bill is a gunsmith and as a shooter I read all of the gunsmithing articles regardless of the discipline.I would also read an article on what you should eat before a match regardless of the discipline talked about but would probaly not worry too much about it.
When I read something that makes sense to myself I try it out to see if I get the same results as the person writing the article.In the case of Bill Calfee he has sent me his testing procedures and so far he is batting 100% on everything he has said.That is my hard evidence or atleast as close as I can come to it.
I am in no way trying to discredit Mike Ross.I keep reading these posts to see if I can convince myself that I should index my own barrels.I was going to give it a try about a year or so back whenever the last big indexing wave was on and Bill let me know my testing rig was not the correct set-up to use and why.I ran the test anyway and everything he said would happen did happen except I ruined a trigger in the process.
In the post you are referring to the poster is a highpower shooter claiming HIS reamer design is the end all of all creation and is what is winning all the trophies in longrange benchrest.I read on the reamer print where the reamer was less than 2 months old and simply pointed it out.That doesn't mean the reamer isn't a good one but rather that toolittle time has past in order to make the claims made.Interestingly enough Bob Crone the inventor of the chambering in question gave me a call at work yesterday morning at 6AM but my cell phone battery died and I was at work until 10PM so I never called him back.
Waterboy
 
Lynn,

My point with this example was to show how two people can view the same situation and have completely different perspectives.

To index a barrel, you must first isolate the variables, namely the barrel. Few testing procedures are perfect and Mike's is no exception. However, it is the best that is available. Threaded shanks make final assembly a mathematical exercise.

I sincerely doubt many shooters with Calfee rifles will volunteer for your test. Most are very successful competitors, unless you are referring to Wallace. A "killer" rifle, "killer" barrel, "killer" ammo and 40th place. Might be worth a try.
 
hulk said:
Lynn,

Whether or not Mike Ross contours the OD of a barrel to be concentric to the bore, still fails to explain why so many gunsmiths, even those before Mike, that do prepare barrels like Bill, seem to produce results that show barrel indexing has benefit. Also, it is not a shame that I do not have a Calfee book, if I had wanted one, I would have ordered a copy. I recall his article on this subject in PS. In this case, I was disappointed in his test set-up and lack of isolating variables, the barrel, therefore, there was a lack of credibility in his results.

I do want to clarify a point.

You said " I don' read anybodies articles who isn't actually a shooter in the discipline I am interested in.That isn't a slight on you rather I don't want to read hearsay or second hand information." Now Bill is not a rimfire shooter but you read his articles, his book and agree with his "theories", without much in the way of hard evidence. On the other hand, you go on to call this gunsmith, of some repute, a "storyteller". Care to comment?

Still waiting on that challenge.[/QUOTE

Bill Calfee is not a shooter or Bill Calfee is not a current competitor? Which do you mean? If he's not a shooter, I would like to know when his twin rode into town and started using bench 2 at WT almost everyday. And what is discipline, rimfire or one of the subs? Anyway, he shoots ARA, IR 50/50, RBA, and PSL targets, and most likely burns more ammo than the average shooter in either one of those games. Saying Bill Calfee is not a rimfire shooter is equivalent to saying Warren Buffet needs to borrow a quarter from Bill Gates. It's ridiculous.

Now if we want to say Bill Calfee is not a current competitor, then agreement would be in order. But I think that's mostly because of his health and nothing more. I'm sure if he could make the trips, he would still compete as he used to. But does that mean we ignore the larger part of his lifetime as a high school smallbore shooter, centerfire benchrest and silhouette competitor, an avid BR-50 competitor and even an ARA competitor and who knows what else? That would seem ridiculous too because really all we're referring to here is experience. I think Bill has more experience than most and he is a proven winner at everything he has shot. Don't believe it check the record. But don't, as some have done, try to compare Bill's early 1990's scores with today's scores. Compare apples to apples. Things have changed and Bill has helped change a lot of them. I wish he would compete. Livonia is still open and I would like to compete with him just to see. I doubt that I would win. The only time I ever had the chance was at Washington County probably five years ago. Bill brought a pistol but ended up letting someone else shoot it and he kinda coached him. For a first time shooter, the guy did pretty good.

So Bill Calfee is not a rimfire shooter? Man, that's almost a travesty to say something like that. To set the record straight on the ammo, Bill did not suggest a change of postion of a driving band on SA ammo. He suggested a wider band to allow more lube and it worked. It was quickly incorporated into the EPS bullet. Did it make the difference? Some say yes, and some say the EPS bullet was as good before the change as it was after. I personally don't know and I would say that only Eley knows for sure.

You people seem to make a study of Bill Calfee and still haven't caught some of the most important things he writes. Have you ever noticed that when Bill is critical about indexing a barrel he always says "indexing for accuracy". To me, that means Bill is not saying that he does not use some form of indexing, he's simply saying the accuracy potential of rotating a barrel to some point over a 360 degree circle is, as he sees it, not there. Now to be fair, Mike Ross indexes for accuracy and he says the improvement is there. Maybe it is; maybe it isn't.

Whichever it is, it is; most people either don't care or long ago made up their mind about indexing. But, don't question Bill Calfee's experience as a shooter. It just shows your own lack of knowledge.
Click to expand...
 
Justathought,

Again, my point was something completely different than making light of Bill's career as a competitive shooter. Most gunsmiths shoot more rounds downrange than the average shooter, Bill included.

Thank you for correcting my errors.

As far as noticing how Bill says things, I am sorry but my license for clairvoyance has expired. Bill is going to need to be much more clear on his opinions. Without visual cues and not knowing Bill, it is quite easy to become confused by what he says or doesn't say.
 
Yeah, I understand the clairvoyance. It can be confusing, But I wasn't directing that at you specifically. It just strikes me as odd that even though several people seem to make a career out of trying to figure out Bill Calfee, nobody ever called that phrase into question. To me it's obvious. Bill does some sort or indexing I'm pretty sure. Most gunsmiths do. But he does not "index for accuracy" although I guess that could be arguable because there would be no other real reason to do it unless it's wear. But he doesn't run it around the clock. Anyway, just thinking and rambling. Bill has a great following both good and bad. Both are testament to what he has accomplished.
 
Justawallythought,
It's a very, very small rimfire benchrest shooting world. I've been to WT twice.....count it 2 times. It ain't hard to see that Bill shoots off of bench 2. It's like a fresh grave in an old, old cemetery. Anytime some gunsmith is evaluating a barrel they are in essence indexing it. They find those little problems and use what they can from it to make it be as accurate as possible. If it weren't true then I'd never see a lands at 6 o'clock on any of my custom barrels.......they would be put on any old dam^ place they wanted to put them and my extractor cuts would be like 10 times the size or coned (LAZY). Wood Township could be alive if their 14 members could get along and understand that an "exclusive" membership is completely contrary to gun ownership and just plain being a good human being. Bill could be a match director. Most anyone would help if he needed it. I would. I would be more likely to go to WT than Livonia because I can leave early in the morning and get home before dark to see my family. No pokes at Steve T but what are the other 13 (bad luck number) doing? I suppose they are sitting in the $hithou$e from 1935 and trying to find out what went wrong. Bill is in the "CENTER" of rimfire shooting....pun intended, but no matches 3 miles from home.

John M. Carper

p.s. Lynn what do you think?
 
Firing Pin Position

It has been a tough few days and expensive, too.

We had to find a 100 yard long, environmentally controlled building, very state of the art.

Then we constructed 3 benches using 6 x 4 lumber, legs, stringers and spacers, all dadoed, bolted and glued together. The master carpenters involved did a great job.

These benches had to hold 3 custom return-to-battery rail rests that turned out to weigh 46 pounds each.. The rests are set up to have a square Anschutz action bolted to the main platform. This platform is designed to rotate through 360 degrees on roller bearings. This system was used so no clamping force would be applied to any section of the barrels.

Next, 9 barrels were acquired, all 4 groove, 1-16 twist and hand lapped, to be as typical to benchrest standards as possible. 3 barrels were designated to each of the 3 rests.

Each barrel was mounted in a random position and shot for a 10 shot group and then the main platform was rotated 180 degrees to the 6'oclock position and another 10 shot group was fired. Additional 10 shot groups were fired at 3'oclock and 9'oclock as control groups. A full rotation for a barrel consisted of 40 shots. Each 40 shot cycle was dedicated to one target. Each of the targets was secretly coded to indicate the rest, the barrel and the actual firing position. This item would become critical in the evaluation phase to maintain triple blind study protocols. This was repeated 10 times for each barrel. 400 shots per barrel times 9 barrels equals 3,600 shots on 90 targets. All shooting was done in free recoil style, attempting to reduce human variables.

The targets were delivered by bonded and certified carrier to a well known university mathematics department. Each of 3 graduate students were assigned 30 targets to do the statistical analysis. Again, no student knew which targets they were evaluating so that preconceived preferences would be eliminated.

Conclusion, the 6'oclock firing pin shows no benefit "for accuracy". All the targets will be photographed and published as soon as I piece them back together, the dog ate them.

P.S. Thanks to RBS for the inspiration.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No sense of humor. I refer you to the instructions in the first post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top