Leupold Banner

Input on damaged rifling

What do you think of this one? Had it not been for the dreaded bore scope, I would never have been able to figure out that Wayne York had bored it with a rat tail file and a hammer. It wouldn't give an 8" group with proven ammo.

 
What do you think of this one? Had it not been for the dreaded bore scope, I would never have been able to figure out that Wayne York had bored it with a rat tail file and a hammer. It wouldn't give an 8" group with proven ammo.

Looks like a multi-grooved micro-maxi groove bore.
 
What do you think of this one? Had it not been for the dreaded bore scope, I would never have been able to figure out that Wayne York had bored it with a rat tail file and a hammer. It wouldn't give an 8" group with proven ammo.

I dont understand what you're upset about, the last 1-2" near the muzzle look decent. 🤣
 
The real question is not what we expect as a barrel for accuracy but what do manufacturers accept for accuracy in their mass produced rifles?

Tupperware stocks
Zero bedding
Triggers from hell
Tired reamers beyond their quality cycle
Friday afternoon builds
All for $600 or less

And we expect what? This is like buying a Prius expecting 0-60 in 4.5 seconds.

Most bottom tier rifles have a 1.5 MOA general accuracy expectation. Some make it, some do not.

Easy button, run a patch down barrel. If the cleaning rod response is not a smooth and consistent pressure down barrel, you are probably are not going to like what a borescope will show.

Hunting Barrels from barrel manufacturers have imperfections as well. Some are aesthetic and some are butt ugly. They still shoot fine for the price we pay for them.

Match barrels are entirely different category for expectation and of course their costs.

I'd be curious to hear a really honest opinion from rifle manufacturers on their level of QC that is acceptable to leave their factory. Is it based upon model levels? Really? All built on same line? Do they have a structured tool PM that flags tools for replacement based upon their QC timeline findings? Is there a general consensus "GE"? Good Enough? Do they even give a rats ass on what we think?
 
What do you think of this one? Had it not been for the dreaded bore scope, I would never have been able to figure out that Wayne York had bored it with a rat tail file and a hammer. It wouldn't give an 8" group with proven ammo.

Wow, that's a LOT of fouling right there. Has it been taken back to bare steel to see what's under all of that?
 
To be honest, I would have been pretty skeptical that it would shoot. I have seen some bad barrels, this one is in the top 5 for sure. But, and this is the gods honest truth, I tell my customers to go shoot it before making any decisions. That applies to throating chambers, glass bedding actions, swapping out parts. Sometimes the ugly just does not impact accuracy, Savage barrels can be rougher than a corn cob, but 90% of the time, they shoot great.
Interesting you mention Savage. Years ago I bought some Rock River products from a Camp Perry shooter who scoped barrels and he mentioned how ruff Savage barrels look and marveled how well they shoot. He showed me some CZ rifles and said they are the cleanest looking production barrels he has seen.
 
That's not fouling. That is the bare steel after having it bored and rifled in 6.5 Creedmoor from 22-250. Wayne York does hatchet w
Oh crap, that is NOT good. Not to sound like captain obvious or sounding like I am questioning you intelligence, but can I ask why you would have a centerfire barrel re bored instead of just replacing the barrel? I can understand boring and re-lining a rimfire barrel, but having a barrel re bored and then rifled is just not very common.
 
Interesting you mention Savage. Years ago I bought some Rock River products from a Camp Perry shooter who scoped barrels and he mentioned how ruff Savage barrels look and marveled how well they shoot. He showed me some CZ rifles and said they are the cleanest looking production barrels he has seen.
My shooting team mate has a Savage model 12 in .308, barrel is dark, rough as hell but will clean a 1000 yard F class target with boring regularity if he does his job right. Pisses off a lot of guys he beats that have $7K sunk into their rifles, they just cant see how a rack grade Savage can shoot that good.
 
Oh crap, that is NOT good. Not to sound like captain obvious or sounding like I am questioning you intelligence, but can I ask why you would have a centerfire barrel re bored instead of just replacing the barrel? I can understand boring and re-lining a rimfire barrel, but having a barrel re bored and then rifled is just not very common.
If you had seen my other thread on this it would fill in some blanks. First off having another stainless barrel for my Ruger #1 was cost prohibitive for me. I was given a lead to Wayne York at Oregunsmithing. He has a reputation for reboring and even has a can do list on his website. After talking with him, I decided to have it done. There's a lot to it but that's the short story. Now I'll shit talk that guy on every chance I get on every forum I can until he quits screwing guy out of their hard earned money.
 
If you had seen my other thread on this it would fill in some blanks. First off having another stainless barrel for my Ruger #1 was cost prohibitive for me. I was given a lead to Wayne York at Oregunsmithing. He has a reputation for reboring and even has a can do list on his website. After talking with him, I decided to have it done. There's a lot to it but that's the short story. Now I'll shit talk that guy on every chance I get on every forum I can until he quits screwing guy out of their hard earned money
OK, understand now. Ruger #1's are great rifles, but re barreling one can be challenging (that's machinist code for "this is going to cost you a LOT of money") for sure. Well, that sucks that it went south like that. I am floored, yet not really surprised by what others would let out of their shop. I mean, any rifle that has my name on it better damned well shoot and be right, before I let my customer have it. No pride in workmanship anymore.
 
OK, understand now. Ruger #1's are great rifles, but re barreling one can be challenging (that's machinist code for "this is going to cost you a LOT of money") for sure. Well, that sucks that it went south like that. I am floored, yet not really surprised by what others would let out of their shop. I mean, any rifle that has my name on it better damned well shoot and be right, before I let my customer have it. No pride in workmanship anymore.
Yes. I gave him the opportunity to refund my money and I wouldn't hold him liable for the barrel replacement. His reply was that he would TRY and rebored it to a .284. I told him I had use for a .284 and he went dead air.
 
Probably the single largest source of questions we get is from customers who get a bore scope and think that every barrel is supposed to be mirror shiny and perfect from chamber to bore. Just not the case, especially in factory production rifles.

My scope has been invaluable in showing me differences in the quality of the rifling and overall quality of the factory barrels that I own. While they all (Remington, Marlin, Browning, Winchester, Howa, and Savage) shoot great, the scope makes it easy to see differences in quality. And just as a spark plug can be very telling as to what's happening inside a combustion engine, a bore scope will make it easy to see what's been happening inside the bore of a firearm.
 
Back
Top