Is this guy doing it right? Action truing

[MFG_BOP]

hey guys, not trying to bash / advertise this guy or anything, but I just want to know if his way to true up a receiver is "acceptable", if I can say that. i just feel it is not the correct way. don't know...

you can skip to 9:40

send me a PM if you dont want to write in here.

regards
MFG

 

[boltfluter]

No, he is most likely making it worse than if he left the bolt and receiver alone. To many things being done incorrectly as to know where to start!!

Paul

 

[urbanrifleman]

I challenge anyone to show that a "trued" Rem 700 receiver (unless it is a TOTAL basket case) actually shoots better. Maybe lap the lugs if they are horrible. If not, leave it.

I think trueing can cause more problems than it fixes.

Of course, there are always the obligatory responses that it must shoot better. No one has ever done a comparison or before and after test and published it. Of course, that "would be a waste of time" right? Trueing is a waste of time from my experience. I talk customers out of it all the time. No one has ever came back and said it didnt shoot and I trued it and now its fixed. Not one.

 

[jelenko]

I challenge anyone to show that a "trued" Rem 700 receiver (unless it is a TOTAL basket case) actually shoots better. Maybe lap the lugs if they are horrible. If not, leave it.

I think trueing can cause more problems than it fixes.

Of course, there are always the obligatory responses that it must shoot better. No one has ever done a comparison or before and after test and published it. Of course, that "would be a waste of time" right? Trueing is a waste of time from my experience.

Data is king.

 

[LHSmith]

A graduate of Larry Potters school of smithing?

 

[urbanrifleman]

Data is king.

Correct.

I have find it very interesting no one has ever done a before and after, even just for fun or bragging rights

 

[jelenko]

Correct.

I have find it very interesting no one has ever done a before and after, even just for fun or bragging rights

In these kinds of situations, I've found it means the testing has been done but not published because the results are underwhelming.

 

[rgc54]

It would be very interesting to see a bore scope video of the throat on this chamber...and how does he know the firing pin hole is in the center of the boltface??

 

[urbanrifleman]

In these kinds of situations, I've found it means the testing has been done but not published because the results are underwhelming.

I know at least one guy who did the testing and said it did nothing. Pretty serious guy too.

 

[urbanrifleman]

The only thing that shrunk groups was going to a tighter bolt fit over the trigger.

 

[rijndael]

I challenge anyone to show that a "trued" Rem 700 receiver (unless it is a TOTAL basket case) actually shoots better. Maybe lap the lugs if they are horrible. If not, leave it.

How do you propose removing the barrel/chamber part from the accuracy testing?

Wouldn't you need to chop off the barrel threads and re-do it once the receiver threads are opened up and made concentric?

 

[LHSmith]

I challenge anyone to show that a "trued" Rem 700 receiver (unless it is a TOTAL basket case) actually shoots better. Maybe lap the lugs if they are horrible. If not, leave it.

I think trueing can cause more problems than it fixes.

Of course, there are always the obligatory responses that it must shoot better. No one has ever done a comparison or before and after test and published it. Of course, that "would be a waste of time" right? Trueing is a waste of time from my experience. I talk customers out of it all the time. No one has ever came back and said it didnt shoot and I trued it and now its fixed. Not one.

Totally disagree. To achieve the ultimate in a rifles accuracy, one must eliminate as many variables as possible. The action is the foundation from where it starts- the launching platform. Mass produced arms are loaded with variables.
If you can find some old PS magazines, a number of writers have done such testing. Why, in the early days of Hunter BR( before allowing custom actions), were the competitive rifles campaigned most always trued?
,

 

[butchlambert]

I have done it step by step and saw very little difference.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Correct.

I have find it very interesting no one has ever done a before and after, even just for fun or bragging rights

I do it all the time, its part of my living. Not Remingtons but customs. I am sent rifles that are not competitive quite often to fix accuracy issues. I get the feed back on them. I have plenty of before and after data on what I did and how it effected the rifles performance. In fact I make sure they get back to me so I can learn from it. Some very small things can completely turn around a rifles performance. So far as truing a Remington, I agree that most setups you see are making them worse. Due to cost, my advice to guys is use them as is or invest in a custom. The custom may still need some work but it will be a lot less and will hold its value.

 

[butchlambert]

How do you propose removing the barrel/chamber part from the accuracy testing?

Wouldn't you need to chop off the barrel threads and re-do it once the receiver threads are opened up and made concentric?

Not necessarily.

 

[LHSmith]

"Truing" can involve many different operations. Some just go through the motions and then there are others who can turn them into matching the accuracy potential of the customs. These guys are a rare breed. The 700 will never operate as smooth as a custom and you most likely will actually get more $$ into it than a custom, and the much lower resale value is a real deal killer.

 

[urbanrifleman]

I do it all the time, its part of my living. Not Remingtons but customs. I am sent rifles that are not competitive quite often to fix accuracy issues. I get the feed back on them. I have plenty of before and after data on what I did and how it effected the rifles performance. In fact I make sure they get back to me so I can learn from it. Some very small things can completely turn around a rifles performance. So far as truing a Remington, I agree that most setups you see are making them worse. Due to cost, my advice to guys is use them as is or invest in a custom. The custom may still need some work but it will be a lot less and will hold its value.

This is my advice. The Remington is great for what it is, and it is best simply left alone as the "improvements" are dubious.

If one wants tighter tolerances simply go to one of the many higher grade alternatives. Probably save money in the long run.

Good either way.

 

[urbanrifleman]

Totally disagree. To achieve the ultimate in a rifles accuracy, one must eliminate as many variables as possible. The action is the foundation from where it starts- the launching platform. Mass produced arms are loaded with variables.
If you can find some old PS magazines, a number of writers have done such testing. Why, in the early days of Hunter BR( before allowing custom actions), were the competitive rifles campaigned most always trued?
,

Modified is the correct term.

Mostly sleeved actions and tight bolts.

That is a whole other thing.

 

[LHSmith]

Modified is the correct term.

Mostly sleeved actions and tight bolts.

That is a whole other thing.

Difficult to make 10# (Hunter Class) weight with a sleeved action. You are thinking group or VFS rifles which can go to 13.5 #.
Whole other thing? How? You are contending that truing can cause more problems than it fixes. This is not my experience. You are basing your conclusions on a limited number of anecdotal evidence. There are heaps of records of thousands of Registered Benchrest match results that can verify what I have seen and gleaned from talking with the pioneers (old timers) in BR comp through my 20 years of competition. I am talking true aggregate accuracy -25 record shots fired in a single day of competition through variable conditions- A huge data base.

 

[paperpuncher]

Looking at the video I would say that his methods are not based in good machining fundamentals.