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
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
McGowen vs. Others
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="Bang4theBuck" data-source="post: 2741088" data-attributes="member: 73596"><p>I really struggle with things like this and I think that we do not do ourselves any justice when we either ask questions without definition of what makes a barrel (or any component) better and what makes it worse, or we answer the question in a way that is not directly correlated to the qualification of good, better, best. </p><p></p><p>I didn't get to read through the whole thread, but, there should be a spec/guarantee that a barrel is plus/minus .xxx" in straightness, .xxxx" in bore dimension, Air gauged or not, or whatever else the qualifies/quantifies a good barrel. </p><p></p><p>My example of why would be with savage barrels. I have owned a number of savage rifles that shot sub 1/2moa out of the box. And I have never even owned one or their target models. If you ever have a chance to stick a bore scope in a savage rifle, they look like crap....scratches, chatters, voids, etc, etc. but most of them shoot lights out! If someone were qualifying quality of the barrel based on how it shot, that would be a very poor qualification. </p><p></p><p>I am not one of those haters or thread busters, but this group is very steeped in technical experience and I would hope to hear from gunsmiths/premium rifle builders that have used certain brands, and can speak to the part of the quality of a barrel, in technical terms with technical data. </p><p></p><p>Just my personal feeling on it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bang4theBuck, post: 2741088, member: 73596"] I really struggle with things like this and I think that we do not do ourselves any justice when we either ask questions without definition of what makes a barrel (or any component) better and what makes it worse, or we answer the question in a way that is not directly correlated to the qualification of good, better, best. I didn't get to read through the whole thread, but, there should be a spec/guarantee that a barrel is plus/minus .xxx" in straightness, .xxxx" in bore dimension, Air gauged or not, or whatever else the qualifies/quantifies a good barrel. My example of why would be with savage barrels. I have owned a number of savage rifles that shot sub 1/2moa out of the box. And I have never even owned one or their target models. If you ever have a chance to stick a bore scope in a savage rifle, they look like crap....scratches, chatters, voids, etc, etc. but most of them shoot lights out! If someone were qualifying quality of the barrel based on how it shot, that would be a very poor qualification. I am not one of those haters or thread busters, but this group is very steeped in technical experience and I would hope to hear from gunsmiths/premium rifle builders that have used certain brands, and can speak to the part of the quality of a barrel, in technical terms with technical data. Just my personal feeling on it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
McGowen vs. Others
Top