My " Re-Bore " is back from JES.

Brother_Love

Well-Known Member
Ben,
Have you been able to shoot the rifle yet? I know since we have been in the monsoon season it is difficult.

BTW, why did you choose 1-12 over 1-14 twist, just curious as I approach another re-bore.

Thanks, Malcolm
 

Pistolero

Well-Known Member
Ben,

Did you HP that mold for hunting or for accuracy improvement....or both. I know many
report accy with HPs is better than without, same bullet.

Bill
 

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
Ben,
Have you been able to shoot the rifle yet? I know since we have been in the monsoon season it is difficult.

BTW, why did you choose 1-12 over 1-14 twist, just curious as I approach another re-bore.

Thanks, Malcolm


Yes,

I've shot the rifle.
It is a nail driver.
JES suggested the 1-12.
He has rebored a " bazillion " rifles.
I felt that if anyone should know, it should be JES.
No equations, calculus , Trig.
Just everyday feedback from hundreds of customers.

Good enough for me..........

Ben
 

Ben

Moderator
Staff member
To be honest, the scope is a good bit higher than needed right now. Those rings were bought to clear a 30 mm tube Leupold 50 mm front objective bell. My Leupold scope that is on the rifle right now also has a 30 mm tube but only has a 40 mm bell.

I need to order another set of rings and lower the scope.

Ben
 

oscarflytyer

Well-Known Member
ok. reason I asked is... Ruger Am and getting a Leupold scope and rings... And had Mausers with scopes. I feel like it is always a crap shoot getting the right height rings...
 

Ian

Notorious member
What's tough is finding 30mm rings that even resemble "low". Most of them are medium and up, with some of the more expensive ones being only occasionally available in low mount. One of the few advantages of 1" scopes over 30mm is the naturally lower center line, and also a much wider range of available, in-stock low, extra low, sorta low, etc. mounts.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
i know the feeling my last scope purchase should have been a simple take home and swap out for the one on the rifle.
umm,,, no.
three trips into the parts closet an hour and a half of rummaging and finally another trip to the store with the rifle in hand I got it done.
I was kind of okay with the higher set up since it kept my 100 yd and 300 yd poi simple enough.
but I like shooting with a consistent cheek weld and not a 'kind of hold my head here[ish] and look for the scope to be clear' then find the target and focus for the shot.
 

Intheshop

Banned
Low rings are a problem here.....they all are based on some kind of,over tube diameter objectives.My favorite scope/s don't have enlarged "bell" objectives.So even in some manufacture lines,extra low....ain't.

I love the classic Weaver rings....one rifle,two scopes.Practically no re-zero.Have almost given up on finding anything lower,still ruminating on it.....just not worth the shop time making them for the last 1/8" lower.
 

Intheshop

Banned
I hate to name drop (other forums) unless it's funny or somehow makes a point but....

There's a 25 page thread on Accurate Shooting on scope testing.It's centered (ha) on shifting reticals within some pretty $$$ scopes.Nightforce,March,Leupold.The test is being carried out "about" as scientific as you could ask for.It entails using a "frozen" scope as the control,mounted on a dbl base,along with the scope you're testing.

The "problem" is making repetitive clicks.A little different from the normal 4 corner "box" test of running the clicks say,10 left,10 up,10R,finishing 10 down....and hopefully being back where we started.

Also,different from drawing a straight line on a 3' tall target,hung "plumb"....and running the vertical clicks from bttm to top.Both of these examples are,IMO...tracking.

The test they're getting jiggy about is;dial in say,4 clicks in a direction and......the scope is taking several shots to settle,and hold that point.I've fixed enough junky,cheap scopes internals....and externals(bent scope tubes) to "sort" of know what the problem is.But have a hard time explaining it....when if you were to see it,the issue is easily recognizable.That's cheap scopes with a capital "C" however.No one wants to void the warranty or bubba a $2k scope.Which quickly crosses into...."I paid ___ $$ for this scope,it better hold zero".

The deal is like buying several rifles,or handguns? ....shooting them,keeping the one that came from the factory,"right"....passing the goobers on.If say,you were competing in a "stock" class.Or don't have the resources to fix the factory setup.The deal with scope co.s is,IMO they aren't testing on rifles.Instead tap and bump the scopes on padded fixtures,and check through their collimator.It's not the same recoil impulse.So you send your $$$ scope in complaining of not holding zero,they smack it around again,send it back.

Rifle/ammo accuracy has outpaced scope "design".Also marketing,in the form of larger,and larger objectives is where we're "at".It's like having a Mustang with too much HP,not enough traction.The heavy objectives are a help in light transfer but hurt in,lense alignment (which,along with seal accuracy isn't being considered) and recoils effects on the internals which are being leveraged....for lack of better term.
 
Last edited:

Elric

Well-Known Member
I got an unused 30-30 Contender barrel, it would look mighty fine as a .414 SM. Or... the old retrobate has a .264 Mag Encore barrel.. Though the belted cartride bollixes up things.... Wow. .532 belt, .517 body, case 2.500 long...

http://35caliber.com/2.html

Bore & Groove Dimensions
405 Cal 402 Bore-412 Groove

$250 for 4 or 5 groove
 
Last edited:

fiver

Well-Known Member
a 350 rem mag might be a decent alternative.
it has the belt so would clean up the rim for the head space issue and a simple 35 cal re-bore would be easy enough.
you'd have to run the numbers to make sure everything would work but it could be a feasible alternative.
 

Elric

Well-Known Member
a 350 rem mag might be a decent alternative.
it has the belt so would clean up the rim for the head space issue and a simple 35 cal re-bore would be easy enough.

Rain on your parade (and mine too)... A barrel for a 336 could be set back and rechambered, but the Encore cannot....

.264 Win Mag - 2.500 case length
.350 Rem Mag - 2.194 case length

The shoulder would not clean up. Lot of case capacity to contend with...Though a .458 Win Mag might clean things up.... Not.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
I have shot a contender in pistol guise chambered for the 458 win.......once... and the round count will stay right about there.