Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Gunsmithing
M98 mauser sleeved action project
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bart B" data-source="post: 821318" data-attributes="member: 5302"><p>Eddie, a lot of those round Remmy's shot great scores winning matches and a few would have set records except for a bad shot or two caused by the shooter. Every one of them didn't have many rounds down the barrel and shot that way before barrel torque caused the problem. My first match rifle was a pin driver (more accurate than a tack driver) Rem. 700 in .308 Win. that performed so for about 200 rounds before accuracy degraded. After rebedding, it went back to pin-driving accuracy. . .for another 200 or so rounds.</p><p></p><p>I thought I made that clear earlier that starting out with a new epoxy bedding job, it took some number or shots fired before the accuracy degradation was noticed. How many rounds did Lt. Carl Kovalchik's .300 Win Mag barrel have through it when that 200-19X record was set back in '96? And was the receiver bare, or was it sleeved?</p><p></p><p>Gale McMillan sold the US Army team a handful of Rem. 700's with .300 Win. Mag. barrels made by his folks that may have been the most accurate magnums they ever had for long range matches. For several dozen shots, anyway.</p><p></p><p>One fact about rifle shooting records (group, score, whatever) is, they all happen when all the variables cancel each other out. All the other performances (group, score, whatever) are not as good. The lowest scores and biggest groups happen when all the variables add up gogether. And all the other instances of shooting by that rifle, its ammo and its shooter are not that good. Rarely, if ever does a record setting rifle-ammo-shooter system better the one(s) it already has. Records are at one extreme of performance; worst results are at the other end. Few, if any, benchrest aggregate record holders make public or even remember what the largest group size was in that string of several few-shot groups. But one can reasonably estimate that their largest one was about 50% larger than the agg's average; sometimes a lot bigger. Luck is a partner of group and score shooting; bad luck when performance is poor, good luck when it's record setting.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bart B, post: 821318, member: 5302"] Eddie, a lot of those round Remmy's shot great scores winning matches and a few would have set records except for a bad shot or two caused by the shooter. Every one of them didn't have many rounds down the barrel and shot that way before barrel torque caused the problem. My first match rifle was a pin driver (more accurate than a tack driver) Rem. 700 in .308 Win. that performed so for about 200 rounds before accuracy degraded. After rebedding, it went back to pin-driving accuracy. . .for another 200 or so rounds. I thought I made that clear earlier that starting out with a new epoxy bedding job, it took some number or shots fired before the accuracy degradation was noticed. How many rounds did Lt. Carl Kovalchik's .300 Win Mag barrel have through it when that 200-19X record was set back in '96? And was the receiver bare, or was it sleeved? Gale McMillan sold the US Army team a handful of Rem. 700's with .300 Win. Mag. barrels made by his folks that may have been the most accurate magnums they ever had for long range matches. For several dozen shots, anyway. One fact about rifle shooting records (group, score, whatever) is, they all happen when all the variables cancel each other out. All the other performances (group, score, whatever) are not as good. The lowest scores and biggest groups happen when all the variables add up gogether. And all the other instances of shooting by that rifle, its ammo and its shooter are not that good. Rarely, if ever does a record setting rifle-ammo-shooter system better the one(s) it already has. Records are at one extreme of performance; worst results are at the other end. Few, if any, benchrest aggregate record holders make public or even remember what the largest group size was in that string of several few-shot groups. But one can reasonably estimate that their largest one was about 50% larger than the agg's average; sometimes a lot bigger. Luck is a partner of group and score shooting; bad luck when performance is poor, good luck when it's record setting. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Gunsmithing
M98 mauser sleeved action project
Top