coldboreshot
Silver $$ Contributor
I'm guessing there's a valid reason why the technique has not changed since the 1800's.
The “ACE” Chamber System”......Anybody Tried It?
- Thread starter jackieschmidt
- Start date
I'm guessing there's a valid reason why the technique has not changed since the 1800's.
coldboreshot
Silver $$ Contributor
I tried reinventing the pillow once...failed miserably.
That might be what's going on here. But I think the total machining time with the ACE is greater, because you have to machine the barrel (leade and thread to accept ACE) still, plus you still have machine the ACE chamber single point on a lathe.
a guy did once, though. Now we have the perfect pillow!
in all seriousness, the creator knows how to make a rifle. I have one of his builds on a BAT action in .308 win. I think he was trying to be innovative and come up with a cool product. The part he missed was the why or need behind it.
I wanted to comment specifically on the "wandering bore" aspect of the video. The presenter is indeed correct that present practice of gun drilling and then reaming does inevitably produce some wander within the bore. The long and thin nature of a gun drill makes this all but inevitable, and it's frankly a modern miracle that the degree of wander is not much worse than it is.
And he is correct that the rifling tools (whether button or single point) will follow this because they locate themselves within the bore. The good news is that the rifling will be pretty consistent relative to its particular section of the bore.
But this "wander" is mostly inconsequential in the same way it doesn't matter which road you take to get to town if you get the same place in the same condition in the same amount of time with the same amount of fuel, etc.
We tend to speak of a "bore axis" as if that is a single thing. But what defines that bore axis? An axis is a line, and a line can only truly be defined by two points in the same way that three points define a plane. This forces us to ask the question: which two points on the bore will define the "bore axis"? This is critically important, because all of the assessment of how much "wander" there is depends on where that axis is, which means it depends on which two points we allow to define the true "bore axis."
For our purposes as shooters, we really only care about the bore axis twice-- once at the breech end because it defines the true center to which we want to chamber the rifle concentrically, and another time at the muzzle end because it defines the trajectory of the bullet.
Apart from those two functions, we don't really care if the bullet goes for a roller coaster ride inside the barrel before it gets to the end. All we care about is that the bullet entered the bore straight and true (to the bore) and that the bullet exits the barrel straight and true to some trajectory we've zeroed. Between those two points, the only consequence of "wander" is the effect on barrel harmonics due to sectional variations.
I'd propose then to think about the "bore axis" really as two separate axes. The muzzle end could be defined by the center of two circles at the end of the muzzle, one at the crown, the other ~ 3" upstream. We care about this because it determines the trajectory of the bullet.
The second axis could be defined the same way, but at the breech end. We care about the bore axis here because the bullet must enter the bore with a minimum of tilt (angular error) or shift (concentricity error) so that it has the optimal orientation in the bore as well as no induced error in the distribution of mass. (center of mass must be located at the bullet's diameter center and ideally centered within the bore as well).
This is why I think that the traditional reaming approach isn't a problem if it is done with due attention paid to proper indication and positioning.
And he is correct that the rifling tools (whether button or single point) will follow this because they locate themselves within the bore. The good news is that the rifling will be pretty consistent relative to its particular section of the bore.
But this "wander" is mostly inconsequential in the same way it doesn't matter which road you take to get to town if you get the same place in the same condition in the same amount of time with the same amount of fuel, etc.
We tend to speak of a "bore axis" as if that is a single thing. But what defines that bore axis? An axis is a line, and a line can only truly be defined by two points in the same way that three points define a plane. This forces us to ask the question: which two points on the bore will define the "bore axis"? This is critically important, because all of the assessment of how much "wander" there is depends on where that axis is, which means it depends on which two points we allow to define the true "bore axis."
For our purposes as shooters, we really only care about the bore axis twice-- once at the breech end because it defines the true center to which we want to chamber the rifle concentrically, and another time at the muzzle end because it defines the trajectory of the bullet.
Apart from those two functions, we don't really care if the bullet goes for a roller coaster ride inside the barrel before it gets to the end. All we care about is that the bullet entered the bore straight and true (to the bore) and that the bullet exits the barrel straight and true to some trajectory we've zeroed. Between those two points, the only consequence of "wander" is the effect on barrel harmonics due to sectional variations.
I'd propose then to think about the "bore axis" really as two separate axes. The muzzle end could be defined by the center of two circles at the end of the muzzle, one at the crown, the other ~ 3" upstream. We care about this because it determines the trajectory of the bullet.
The second axis could be defined the same way, but at the breech end. We care about the bore axis here because the bullet must enter the bore with a minimum of tilt (angular error) or shift (concentricity error) so that it has the optimal orientation in the bore as well as no induced error in the distribution of mass. (center of mass must be located at the bullet's diameter center and ideally centered within the bore as well).
This is why I think that the traditional reaming approach isn't a problem if it is done with due attention paid to proper indication and positioning.
Last edited:
butchlambert
Site $$ Sponsor
It is all about the "buck". Lots of folks on this forum could chamber a barrel as well or better. He is looking for a niche, but.
Concur. I wonder what the price would be? It has to be more.
DaveTooley
Gold $$ Contributor
Hohn
I agree with you to a point. This is all about bullet alignment. Entering and exiting the bore. That narrows the critical portion of the bore to the length of the bearing surface of the bullet.
I agree with you to a point. This is all about bullet alignment. Entering and exiting the bore. That narrows the critical portion of the bore to the length of the bearing surface of the bullet.
Bingo, the throat section should be concentric and parallel, everything behind can be straightened with a boring bar, everything forward can be timed.
DaveTooley
Gold $$ Contributor
Also I would question why any manufacturer would want to 1. double the amount of setup/handling and machine time and 2. work to the tolerances required for the design to perform properly.
That certainly isn't Remington or any other manufacture I've done work for.
That certainly isn't Remington or any other manufacture I've done work for.
Lucky Shooter
Gold $$ Contributor
Thia is way, way beyond my machine skills----and probably the tolerance limits of my machine.
I'll applaud the ACE folks if they can make an economic success of this method.
I disagree with their premise that chambers can't be reamed to be concentric with the
bore at the throat and to some extent, forward of the throat. Hobbyists and professional
BR level smiths do it every day.
I'll enjoy being a spectator on this one and wish the ACE folks well.
A. Weldy
I'll applaud the ACE folks if they can make an economic success of this method.
I disagree with their premise that chambers can't be reamed to be concentric with the
bore at the throat and to some extent, forward of the throat. Hobbyists and professional
BR level smiths do it every day.
I'll enjoy being a spectator on this one and wish the ACE folks well.
A. Weldy
Kurz
Silver $$ Contributor
When I watched his video, I had to agree with your thinking as I couldn't see any manufacturer taking the time and extra effort to use this idea.
But and here is where I think he's really headed, he mentions the work he did to compare processes for the MILITARY and how much improvement his process measured when compared to the standard process. We are all aware of just how lucrative any military contract can be. Just ask FN, Barrett, Remington, Beretta, etc.!
The competition for most of these contracts is gigantic, involving 10's of millions of dollars. So if he can convince the military that they have to go with his process, even if it's just for a few hundred sniper rifles, he stands to profit incredibly. 
Reality is, in my opinion, that this is a nice exercise to stretch your mind and machining skills, nothing more, nothing less.
DaveTooley
Gold $$ Contributor
When I watched his video, I had to agree with your thinking as I couldn't see any manufacturer taking the time and extra effort to use this idea.
But and here is where I think he's really headed, he mentions the work he did to compare processes for the MILITARY and how much improvement his process measured when compared to the standard process. We are all aware of just how lucrative any military contract can be. Just ask FN, Barrett, Remington, Beretta, etc.!
Reality is, in my opinion, that this is a nice exercise to stretch your mind and machining skills, nothing more, nothing less.
For the last 11 years I've been intimately involved in the small batch military small arms business. Some of the large batch stuff also. Because of the cost to compete these solicitations the only money to be made is on the back end servicing these systems. Ask me how I know. The only money to be made on the front end is for the large, branch wide systems. Remington's M2010 is a good example. Even then the margins are slim for a long time until expenses are recovered.
I'll add everyone I know knows how to swap a barrel.
Dusty Stevens
Shiner
and youd think that would be easier than swapping a chamber on a barrel plus it would be way cheaper to ream a barrel and hand it to the installer in one piece
Dusty Stevens
Shiner
You just happened to quote the only guy on here i know of that actually has those military contracts you speak ofWhen I watched his video, I had to agree with your thinking as I couldn't see any manufacturer taking the time and extra effort to use this idea.
But and here is where I think he's really headed, he mentions the work he did to compare processes for the MILITARY and how much improvement his process measured when compared to the standard process. We are all aware of just how lucrative any military contract can be. Just ask FN, Barrett, Remington, Beretta, etc.!
Reality is, in my opinion, that this is a nice exercise to stretch your mind and machining skills, nothing more, nothing less.
The target will be the ultimate judge of this system. I believe this system is geared to economical barrel changes without a gunsmiths involvement for shooters that shoot many rounds that quickly toast the barrel.
If it is capable of .5 moa or less accuracy it would be great for PRS guys depending on the cost of a ace replacement barrel. If the cost of a new normal barrel say is $650 and a replacement ace barrel is around $400 then I think it would be a hot seller, again provided "IT SHOOTS".
Who knows maybe it will be benchrest accurate and all the frugal BR shooters will love it.
If it is capable of .5 moa or less accuracy it would be great for PRS guys depending on the cost of a ace replacement barrel. If the cost of a new normal barrel say is $650 and a replacement ace barrel is around $400 then I think it would be a hot seller, again provided "IT SHOOTS".
Who knows maybe it will be benchrest accurate and all the frugal BR shooters will love it.
Dusty Stevens
Shiner
This has been out for a number of years, even had this same discussion on this forum in pretty much the same words, and ive yet to see or hear of one live and in personThe target will be the ultimate judge of this system. I believe this system is geared to economical barrel changes without a gunsmiths involvement for shooters that shoot many rounds that quickly toast the barrel.
If it is capable of .5 moa or less accuracy it would be great for PRS guys depending on the cost of a ace replacement barrel. If the cost of a new normal barrel say is $650 and a replacement ace barrel is around $400 then I think it would be a hot seller, again provided "IT SHOOTS".
Who knows maybe it will be benchrest accurate and all the frugal BR shooters will love it.
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/th...-one-chamber-and-replaceable-barrels.3899483/
Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They’re making all the headlines.
Dusty Stevens
Shiner
Yes they are very nice
jackieschmidt
Gold $$ Contributor
thanks for that link, Dusty. That’s been four years ago. I guess I need to get out more since the thread on Benchrest.com is the first I had heard of it.
I did notice that the comments from 2016 just about mirror the comments being made now. In Post #36, Whatsupdoc inquired about the accuracy. The one I built and put on my HV Neuvo Action Rifle shot just like a Benchrest Rifle.
I think the remarks made by Kurz in his last sentence in post #32 of this thread kinda sums me up.
Last edited:
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.