OzFclass

Wal86 wrote:IMO if the barrel is that bad you have to index it, you don't put the f@#king reamer in..

There are more important issues to get right that are detrimental to accuracy, indexing isn't one of em.

Guess I should have thrown all those Queens winning barrels in the bin, my bad !!!
Matt P

MattP,

I was only giving my opinion about bore indexing as some here think it's the holy grail to accuracy.

My post was not directed at you or your workmanship, i never even mentioned your name, I was commenting about the topic only "bore indexing". I hope you understand my post was not too offend..

You have my number if you feel the need to talk..

Regards,
Alan F

Wal, the likelihood of this topic becoming a worthwhile discussion gets pretty much destroyed when someone throws in a comment that flies in the face of what a bunch of gun-plumbers worldwide consider is the current best way to go about fitting a barrel.

Of course it may not be the best way. Of course we can’t easily know how many curves there actually are in the bore. Of course there will be measurement variables and subtle differences between how different smiths actually do it. But it is a clear and sensible ( so say many ) method to use.

It takes longer to do though as it’s an “honest attempt” to pay very particular attention to dial the barrel in to ensure the bullet starts it’s journey headed directly down the bores axis, which is not straight and of course varies by degree. Plus the barrel gets indexed, which is a separate part. Both parts make a lot of common sense to many.

Perhaps it’s controversial. Who cares. So is annealing and ……

Wal86 wrote:MattP,

I was only giving my opinion about bore indexing as some here think it's the holy grail to accuracy.

My post was not directed at you or your workmanship, i never even mentioned your name, I was commenting about the topic only "bore indexing". I hope you understand my post was not too offend..

You have my number if you feel the need to talk..

Regards,
Alan F

Mate no offence all, it was meant with smile, but if canned every barrel that didn't look perfect or wasn't dead straight I wouldn't fit many.
Matt P

Also “not straight “ does not mean a barrel of snakes, obviously perfectly straight is desirable, but at what point would you ask for your money back, if your dialing to a tenth of one thousandth of an inch internally as these guys are, ANY curve (not bend) is noticeable and measurable, and I believe that if the entry and exit is straight, happy days

I would expect Matt to agree that there is no such animal as a “ perfectly straight barrel”!
Even gravity has a say in that!
Indexing works as do tuners
Whoooo? Did I just throw another spinner into the conversation!

ShaneG wrote:I would expect Matt to agree that there is no such animal as a “ perfectly straight barrel”!
Even gravity has a say in that!
Indexing works as do tuners
Whoooo? Did I just throw another spinner into the conversation!

The big heavy tuners control how much barrel bend you want

I think there maybe room for experimenting with a 'muzzle weight such that it exactly cancels a naturally bent bore when indexed to 12 OClock. It is not hard to calculate a weight depending on amount of bore bend.

I am fairly neutral when it comes to both. Anyway, in my present state of health I cannot do justice to any of my older good barrels anymore - none of which seemed to need these refinement.

I sometimes wonder just how many barrels are badly fitted which could explain many of the barrel problems we aim to fix. I would think a barrel fitted indexed would always have been handled with more care than many lazy Gunsmiths do.

Peter Smith.

pjifl wrote:I think there maybe room for experimenting with a 'muzzle weight such that it exactly cancels a naturally bent bore when indexed to 12 OClock. It is not hard to calculate a weight depending on amount of bore bend.

I am fairly neutral when it comes to both. Anyway, in my present state of health I cannot do justice to any of my older good barrels anymore - none of which seemed to need these refinement.

I sometimes wonder just how many barrels are badly fitted which could explain many of the barrel problems we aim to fix. I would think a barrel fitted indexed would always have been handled with more care than many lazy Gunsmiths do.

Peter Smith.

Your last paragraph perhaps says it all Peter ... guarantee some 'Smiths' work is not good ! But then so is the work of many tradesmen so nothing new there. Caveat emptor.

Just hang a big fixed weight off your current barrel. Make sure it has a pure magnesium core ( Mg has VERY high damping properties ) and a heavy outer skin, finishes 1" forward of the muzzle and is bloody big. Works for me.

tradesmen and surgeons too.
bruce.

Matt P wrote:

Wal86 wrote:MattP,

I was only giving my opinion about bore indexing as some here think it's the holy grail to accuracy.

My post was not directed at you or your workmanship, i never even mentioned your name, I was commenting about the topic only "bore indexing". I hope you understand my post was not too offend..

You have my number if you feel the need to talk..

Regards,
Alan F

Mate no offence all, it was meant with smile, but if canned every barrel that didn't look perfect or wasn't dead straight I wouldn't fit many.
Matt P

But you'd sell a hell of a lot of barrels! . I'd be happy to remove the duds from the scrap bin