Does action stiffness nessicarily mean accuracy?

[danebrewer10 6]

hi all, just wondering what peoples thoughts are on this.

there seems to be a trend for "targetised" rifles for use in the field, with super stiff actions and heavy barrels. I understand the reason to be that a heavier barrel and action will vibrate less and group more tightly, so actions like the RPA quadlock & quadlite, barnard, and other "tube" type actions would be theoretically more accurate... right?

 

well here's something to upset that. as you might have read, there have been a couple of tests of kimber rifles in Shooting Sports, the Kimber 84M Classic select grade weighing in at about 5lb 120z with a super skinny bolt, action and barrel, grouping at under 1/2" at 100m in .243 win, and the 84L long action montana variant in .30-06 also grouping similarly, so what's happening here?

 

surely action stiffness shouldn't make much difference as the bolt lock up occurs at the front of the receiver, where the barrel joins on, so the back half of the action can wobble around as much as it likes without affecting accuracy..?

 

I'd welcome any thoughts on this if anyone can clear things up....!

 

Cheers

DB

 

gotta say, personal preference would be for the light rifle anyday! also they seem much better value than a Sako- as they're pillar and glass bedded...

Edited April 17, 2010 by danebrewer10

[Night Hunter 109]

Hi mate, I had a Remington 700vs that was a tack driver delivering very tight groups Sub 1/2" and the action was very slack ,I now own a sako 85 Hunter the action is tighter and also groups sub 1/2",I think that matching the rifle with an ammo that suits it is very important,my sako would not group bellow 1" with factory ammo and I was assited by a friend off this site who helped me develop a round that performed well in my rifle.

[waidmann 105]

most m98's are very loose but shoot well.

 

waidmann

[Treacle Trackpad 6]

Once the bolt has closed on a round it won't be slack; if it is, there is a problem. Howas seem to have quite a slack action, or at least the ones I have looked at do, but people swear by them.

[danebrewer10 6]

Hi all, cheers for the interest, I know mausers tend to have a wobbly bolt, but i'm talking about the stiffness of the action itself, the idea being that the little metal you remove from the action the stiffer it is and hence, more accurate plus a heavy barrel to vibrate less, but this dosen't always seem to hold true, as can be seen from the performance of the Kimber...

 

DB

[danw 1,748]

I think it all depends on if you are chasing a screamer on the range or are happy with 1/2"groups for a hunting rifle where first shot cold bore accuracy is needed then I don't think you gain anything from lugging a 16lb rifle around .

However if static sniping at range is your poison then a heavy barrel and action may gain you the edge.

[RicW 67]

'Course if it's arthritis making your action stiff your accuracy might suffer! Not that I'd know, creak, creak, groan . . .

 

Ric

[flytie 1]

From what I have read I thought the amount of metal left on the actions of rifles like the RPA was to provide strength against the pressures of the firing of the rifle, not that it has anything to do with accuracy?

 

I can understand your point with rifle barrels, there is a modern tendancy towards stiffer, thicker barrels and there is no doubt if you are firing many rounds down range they do help with grouping. As target rifle shooters will vouch for!

 

But the average sporter, designed for occassional shots at deer or fox, can produce ourstanding first shot accuracy or 3 shot goups. The kimbers seem to be an outstanding example of this. They certainly get good write up's, but I always wonder if that's because the importers spend a lot of money on advertising with the magazines? Perhaps I am just a cynic

 

ft

Edited April 17, 2010 by flytie

[sage 0]

hi all, just wondering what peoples thoughts are on this.

there seems to be a trend for "targetised" rifles for use in the field, with super stiff actions and heavy barrels. I understand the reason to be that a heavier barrel and action will vibrate less and group more tightly, so actions like the RPA quadlock & quadlite, barnard, and other "tube" type actions would be theoretically more accurate... right?

 

well here's something to upset that. as you might have read, there have been a couple of tests of kimber rifles in Shooting Sports, the Kimber 84M Classic select grade weighing in at about 5lb 120z with a super skinny bolt, action and barrel, grouping at under 1/2" at 100m in .243 win, and the 84L long action montana variant in .30-06 also grouping similarly, so what's happening here?

 

surely action stiffness shouldn't make much difference as the bolt lock up occurs at the front of the receiver, where the barrel joins on, so the back half of the action can wobble around as much as it likes without affecting accuracy..?

 

I'd welcome any thoughts on this if anyone can clear things up....!

 

Cheers

DB

 

gotta say, personal preference would be for the light rifle anyday! also they seem much better value than a Sako- as they're pillar and glass bedded...

 

 

 

 

Hi guys

 

Can I have a crack a clearing up a few of these issues? My responses, I hasten to add, are my beliefs but beliefs that are shared by many professionals within the arms industry. That's not saying that they are 100% right, so here goes.

 

First,the argument between thin barrels and thick barrels. A good thin one, properly anchored, properly crowned will out perform a thick one which is not prepared properly. However, given that they are of the same quality and appropriately prepared and anchored, the thicker barrel will have the edge. As to actions, the reason why sloppy actions such as Mauser or Mauser-type shoot eceptionally well is when they lock up, the head spacing is historically excellent and, once locked, they are superb. Remy actions, for instance, are not confidence inspiring until they are in the locked position,and a good riflesmith can tune a Remington 700 and turn it into a tack driver, bedding blue printing and crowning, couple that with properly hand loaded amunition and you can take a relatively inexpensive rifle and compete against the very best.

 

Harmonics - think of harmonics like that of ringing a bell or a tuning fork, so the resonance is best suited to a round. If, in consequence, you cut a hole to allow for a box magazine, be it it behind the pillar mount, it still makes the process of the harmonic ring slightly harder to achieve, so a rifle action that is a single shot, no hole, theoretically muct give better harmonics. Please note, theoretically. Take the same rifle, bed it properly, ensure that all behind the pillar mount is solid and that only the barrel is free to allow true harmonics and you will achieve the best results. Most of you will have experienced interrupting barrel harmonics at some time by resting on a wing mirror or the barrel on a sandbag, away goes the accuracy amazingly. So a poorly bedded rifle, or one where the barrel comes into touch with the woodwork will not perform as it should.

 

May rifle owners will relatively inexpensive rifles, Remington Hower for instance, for a very small investment would be pleasantly surprised how wonderfully well they can shoot. I personally know of a good number of the aforementioned rifles that would hold their own against custom bench rest rifles, costing 8/9 times more than the ones mentioned.

 

As a final note I have got to say how impressed, for the money, with the Hower, and of course the trusty Remy, which is a bench rest rifle waiting to happen.

 

Trusting this is of some help

Good shooting

Sage

[danebrewer10 6]

cheers guys, I was wondering when our resident gunsmith was going to show! I think skinny barrels grouping 1/2 inch-1 inch are just right for normal hunting, where you'd probably want more thickness is in shooting matches or prairie dog/gopher shooting, and seeing as we don't have any of them here, that's hardly an issue! apart from that some guys just like the look!

 

Cheers

DB

[blackfox 9]

cheers guys, I was wondering when our resident gunsmith was going to show! I think skinny barrels grouping 1/2 inch-1 inch are just right for normal hunting, where you'd probably want more thickness is in shooting matches or prairie dog/gopher shooting, and seeing as we don't have any of them here, that's hardly an issue! apart from that some guys just like the look!

 

Cheers

DB

 

 

Ive got a .204 rem SPS Varmint, its a heavy barrel, its used for all my vermin shooting. i changed the stock on it (because it was like rubber) to a HS-Precision stock. Now when the stock was fitted it should have really tightened up the rifle, and it didnt, turns out that HS-precision stocks arnt really that precisie fit, ok it was better than the original, a hell of a lot stiffer but the "fit" was not great - there was still plenty of movement in the rifle . So i got it pillar bedded by our resident gunsmith, it has really "tightened up" the rifle, and i have noticed a difference in the shooting, the rifle is currently away being re-crowned as the factory crown was pretty shocking...... trouble will begin when the rifle gets back. Now im really starting to get a bit anal with my reloading to further improve accuracy, once thats done, i cant blame the gun anymore if i miss...............

 

Some may say that bedding or re-crowning might not make much of a difference, but if you want the best from your rifle, for sure it wont make it shoot any worse

Edited April 19, 2010 by blackfox