XP 100 Rebarrel (Full Length Tennon)

[dgeesaman]

Could you have used calipers to check the depth? Just curious.

I did but with the action and stock geometry I had it was difficult to measure using dial calipers.

I should have walked out to my tool shed and dug out a proper depth mic. Fortunately for me it was “only” $50 of my gunsmiths time and I still can use that barrel for fireforming and varmint hunting.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

I did but with the action and stock geometry I had it was difficult to measure using dial calipers.

I should have walked out to my tool shed and dug out a proper depth mic. Fortunately for me it was “only” $50 of my gunsmiths time and I still can use that barrel for fireforming and varmint hunting.

Do you just not have confidence in the barrel now? Plenty of barrels have way less threads than that- the 788 has a whole section of threads turned down all the way around where the screw comes in. Its in no way less strong or accurate now with that milled out spot- only 2-3 threads hold any barrel anyway even if it has a 2” long tenon

 

[dgeesaman]

Do you just not have confidence in the barrel now? Plenty of barrels have way less threads than that- the 788 has a whole section of threads turned down all the way around where the screw comes in. Its in no way less strong or accurate now with that milled out spot- only 2-3 threads hold any barrel anyway even if it has a 2” long tenon

No I shot it out first. The smith might have needed to cut it off and bore it out to avoid damage to the action threads. Given what’s at stake (pun intended) it seems sensible to always put a relief in the threads.

David

 

[SBS]

Several .22 target rifle actions have front action screw holes with shallow threads. Win. 52 barrels use a milling cut across the threads similar to Sniper338's pictures. Anschutz 54 barrels have a plunge cut with an endmill larger than the action screw. Both methods provide relief enabling you to utilize all the threads while still having a taper on the end of the action screw to make for easy starting and preventing cross threading. Remington's method didn't require a separate milling step (would be simple today with CNC machining center), so it made economic sense from a manufacturing cost point of view.