Pete, no offense, but why not pay someone to shoot your rifle for you at a match too? There are no shortcuts in this game. Any gunsmith that tests his rifles for accuracy before shipping them out will twist the tuner and find a good spot. It may not be the absolute best spot, but I betcha it's close, real close. Tuning a rifle is not some magic trick. Don't be afraid to twist on that thing, but do it systematicallly. Jot down notes. If you twist it out and your groups open up, then twist it in. So long as it's getting better keep going. YOU need to put in the time and don't use your age as an excuse. By putting in your time you will be learning lots. Do you know how to properly set up your bags? Are you consistant with it? Do you shoot enough to know how to read your flags? I've seen shooters who really don't get this game and don't put the time or effort into learn it. They think there is nothing more to it then having great equipment and you'll win. Well you sure won't win consistantly without great equipment, but some shooters (not saying you are, or, are not one of them) have not developed the skills to properly evaluate their equipment. Lots of great rifles have been sold by poor shooters who think it is their rifle that stinks. But on another post you stated your rifle doesn't shoot well in the calm. If it never shoots well in the calm, this indicates to me your rifle is in fact not in tune. If it sometimes does not shoot well in the calm, you or your set-up may be the problem.
Technical series?
- Thread starter edgerat
- Start date
Now we're dealing in 2nd hand hearsay. I have no idea who your friend might have called but to stretch that into what "most" smiths do, friend Pete is wrong as was your initial supposition. As far as getting useful information from most smiths, I honestly cannot say I or anybody I know has talked to most but I've never failed to have even a single one go into a fair amount of detail once it was understood I was eager to learn from them.
Pete Wass
Well-known member
Friend Bill B,
I have been shooting organized Benchrest for around 18 years. Over that time I have collected 89 Agg patches in IBS competition. Do I need to go on? I began shooting RF Benchrest some 18 years ago. I gave it up for about 15 to compete in IBS Score shooting. I picked up the RF rifles again last winter. I know there is a huge difference in Rifles, having owned some real good ones and some that were not real good. I know that I have two good RF rifles but I don't believe either of them are capable of shooting competatively with the top rifles in America. I want nothing less than the best rifles I can buy. If I can be assuerd that I can buy the best ones I will buy them. If there is someone out there who can properly evaluate my rifles and tell me if they are cometative at the highest level,and or make them so, I am willing to pay a fair price for that service. I am not interested in learning how to tune my rifles to be competative with the top rifles in America. I realize I am not be best shooter in America nor will I ever be. I simply don't want to waste any more time groping around trying to find something to make my rifles more competative and I am not interested in putting in the time and effort to do it. I don't beleve it shoud be a requirement to learn how to tune a rife. I have no interest in paying someone to shoot my rifle in matches. It is a rediculous suggestion, IMHO and unfair for you to suggest it.
Friend Pete
Pete
Friend Pete,
You're last post is rather illustrative. Everybody has been trying to tell you the same thing...the fundemental problem with your .22 efforts is you. I don't mean to flame you here, I really don't, but you consistantly ask questions on a forum, many of them probably the wrong ones. You refuse to listen ...... to anyone, and very knowledgable folks have frankly given up trying. You are unquestionably an accomplished CF shooter and as you have painfully learned, much does'nt translate. Something you may wish to ponder.
You're last post is rather illustrative. Everybody has been trying to tell you the same thing...the fundemental problem with your .22 efforts is you. I don't mean to flame you here, I really don't, but you consistantly ask questions on a forum, many of them probably the wrong ones. You refuse to listen ...... to anyone, and very knowledgable folks have frankly given up trying. You are unquestionably an accomplished CF shooter and as you have painfully learned, much does'nt translate. Something you may wish to ponder.
Sure we can respectfully dissagree. Remember, as you stated you're just starting out but to have a sense of history, who could forget that classy string of telephone auctions? The long string of endorsements about "guaranteed investment" results, etc. etc. Public forums preclude taking issues past a certain point but there's ample history posted.
P.S. good luck with the shooting.
Last edited:
Tim, you've lost me, but it's OK. BTW, like Pete, I have 20 years experience shooting benchrest, and have the long-range equivalent of the IBS "Precision Rifleman" jacket. (For some reason, we're not "precision riflemen" but "long-range marksmen." The name sounds like a newbie in the NRA classification system . . .)
I haven't shot rimfire since the 1960s, and that was NRA 4-position. But until proven otherwise, I'm going to believe the same laws of physics apply to RF as CF. The only thing different I've seen in this thread, on ignition, is the shape of the firing pin tip. All the other problems CF has to address.
The cut-rifle barrel controversy is interesting from a historical perspective, too. The point-blank guys have adopted them as holy objects. I know a guy building his first rifle who is willing to wait an extra two months to get a Kreiger. I told him he could have a Shilen in 5 days (I was teasing, of course, you can order a Kreiger from Brunos, too). No, he said, I've gotta have a cut rifle barrel. But in long range, 3-4-5 years ago, they got a bad name for causing bullets to blow up. Something about the rifling being "sharper." Now, what usually causes a bullet to blow in a clean bore, is heat. Where the bullet lets go is a bit forward of the beginning of the ogive, where rifling does not touch the bullet. It's a physical load put on the bullet. Rate of twist is a factor, as is bullet length, and even barrel diameter. The tight-bore Palma guys, with their .298 bores, sometimes blew them in a .308. Finally, when Berger spent some time analyzing things, it pretty much turned out that there was no real verifiable difference between cut-rifled & button-rifled barrels. Berger just started making bullets with a bit thicker jackets. I'm not aware of what the problem with cut-rifled barrels in RF is suppose to be, but I suspect that whatever is being written will turn out to be swamp gas.
* * *
I'd almost sure I'd bet Calfee $100,000 that I could take benchrest-quality components he doesn't like (e.g., cut-rifle barrels & a Kelbly RF action) & build a rifle capable of competing at a national level, with a national-level shooter doing the driving. I'm also sure Calfee would not take the bet, as with that much money available, you could make things work. My complaint about him, aside from the self-promotion & terrible prose, is he tends to suggest that only the things that work for him are capable of working, period.
I haven't shot rimfire since the 1960s, and that was NRA 4-position. But until proven otherwise, I'm going to believe the same laws of physics apply to RF as CF. The only thing different I've seen in this thread, on ignition, is the shape of the firing pin tip. All the other problems CF has to address.
The cut-rifle barrel controversy is interesting from a historical perspective, too. The point-blank guys have adopted them as holy objects. I know a guy building his first rifle who is willing to wait an extra two months to get a Kreiger. I told him he could have a Shilen in 5 days (I was teasing, of course, you can order a Kreiger from Brunos, too). No, he said, I've gotta have a cut rifle barrel. But in long range, 3-4-5 years ago, they got a bad name for causing bullets to blow up. Something about the rifling being "sharper." Now, what usually causes a bullet to blow in a clean bore, is heat. Where the bullet lets go is a bit forward of the beginning of the ogive, where rifling does not touch the bullet. It's a physical load put on the bullet. Rate of twist is a factor, as is bullet length, and even barrel diameter. The tight-bore Palma guys, with their .298 bores, sometimes blew them in a .308. Finally, when Berger spent some time analyzing things, it pretty much turned out that there was no real verifiable difference between cut-rifled & button-rifled barrels. Berger just started making bullets with a bit thicker jackets. I'm not aware of what the problem with cut-rifled barrels in RF is suppose to be, but I suspect that whatever is being written will turn out to be swamp gas.
* * *
I'd almost sure I'd bet Calfee $100,000 that I could take benchrest-quality components he doesn't like (e.g., cut-rifle barrels & a Kelbly RF action) & build a rifle capable of competing at a national level, with a national-level shooter doing the driving. I'm also sure Calfee would not take the bet, as with that much money available, you could make things work. My complaint about him, aside from the self-promotion & terrible prose, is he tends to suggest that only the things that work for him are capable of working, period.
Pete Wass
Well-known member
I most often hear Lawyers telling people they are asking the wrong questions, Are you a lawyer Tim? Lawyers can be some of the most arrogant people in the world. Friend Tim, please listen to me. I know my rifles can shoot better than they do. I know I still have things to learn but I want to eliminate the problems that are most obvious to me. This is what I want to do. I didn't ask you personally for anything so why do you feel obligated to give me advice and try to ridicule me? I don't want your advice Friend Tim. Didn't ask for it and don't want to hear it.
Beyond that, I have been given the name of a good Tuner Person to work with, this very evening. I don't need to ask any more questions now friend Tim. I will ask you once again to please ignore my posts and keep your opinions of me and other things dircted at me to yourself. You only make yourself look bad by doing what you do.
Thanks,
Friend pete
Last edited:
Charles, well I'll tell you, since I'm an IBS group shooter for quite a while as well I think I can make some comparisons.There have been a few CF smiths that have been frustrated with the .22's, there's enough difference. The biggest one, in my opinion, is that .22's to truly shoot well, require some special traits as to barrel, mostly with dimension/taper and good, really good chambers seem to be a bigger challange as far as getting them finished to a high standard. The .22's seem to be very intolerant of less than proper chambers.
Last edited:
Pete, my suggestion to pay someone to shoot your rifle was meant to be ridiculous, to get your attention and to make a point. To learn, some things you gotta do it yourself. Tuning a rifle is a necessary skill IMO. In my experience, shooters looking to take shortcuts to success, usually don't achieve it. I gave you the best advice I can. Whether to take it or leave it, is up to you.
Last edited:
Good luck. All I'd tell you is make darned sure that leade is dead nuts even around it's circumference and there is not even the hint of a burr left on the chamber, it will not be removed through shooting.
Thanks,
BTW, I am aware that experience in one benchrest venue does not guarantee success in another. For example, as 1,000 yard BR became more fashionable, a number of point-blank guys gave it a try. Sight in, just fine, you get feeedback on where your shot went. First record shot. Of course, you can't see a bullet hole at 1K, now what do you do? You shoot fast. You can read the wind over that distance only in if is big enough to cause 1 MOA + dispersion. But most shooters will shoot groups under 1 MOA. Hmmm. So some generally experienced newcomers say success is all luck, and quit. Now, getting a good barrel is a matter of luck. But it is only a part of the equation. The rest is in preparing ammunition. All kinds of things matter at 1K that don't matter at 100-200-300 yard BR.
I'm sure rimfire will offer similar lessons -- staying within the known laws of physics, of course.
BTW, I am aware that experience in one benchrest venue does not guarantee success in another. For example, as 1,000 yard BR became more fashionable, a number of point-blank guys gave it a try. Sight in, just fine, you get feeedback on where your shot went. First record shot. Of course, you can't see a bullet hole at 1K, now what do you do? You shoot fast. You can read the wind over that distance only in if is big enough to cause 1 MOA + dispersion. But most shooters will shoot groups under 1 MOA. Hmmm. So some generally experienced newcomers say success is all luck, and quit. Now, getting a good barrel is a matter of luck. But it is only a part of the equation. The rest is in preparing ammunition. All kinds of things matter at 1K that don't matter at 100-200-300 yard BR.
I'm sure rimfire will offer similar lessons -- staying within the known laws of physics, of course.
H
Hambone
Guest
Nail hit firmly on head there Charles
If I had 100k I might take that bet. Don't take too much away from BC, he is still one of the greatest of all time and has done a lot to advance this game. These days the poetry is more prevalent. I know my way around a lathe and I am confident that I could assemble a rimfire rifle, could it be the same quality as what Calfee and Eck and Gorham are producing? No way. Finishing the chamber and leade on a rimfire barrel is a feel and an art game. If you have the know how to do that part, I would be you could build something that would compete.
Isaac
Isaac
You guys seem to make everything personal. The "bet" was really about success with the components, not my skills as a gunsmith.
I've never been good at politics, but that seems at least as big a part of rimfire as shooting. I'll shut up now & stay away from the forum. Still going to shoot, though.
Charles Ellertson
I've never been good at politics, but that seems at least as big a part of rimfire as shooting. I'll shut up now & stay away from the forum. Still going to shoot, though.
Charles Ellertson
H
Hambone
Guest
Really..................?
I would say it was more a case of machining competency. Something any skilled tool maker use to working to fine tolerances could accomplish.
