Drop in barrel for Stiller 2500X

[46490]

Does anyone make a barrel for a 2500X that could just be screwed into the action without a gunsmith?

 

[linekin]

I think the actions when threaded are all indexed the same. You could potentially get a used barrel that would line up the extractors. I do not know though, never owned one. Maybe someone with experience will chime in.
Keith

 

[doclu60]

To answer the OP's question......no one making a true drop in that I know of. I do have actions that will interchange barrels, but almost all his actions I have were matched by Stiller if he had the dimensions in his data base. From what I understand, he does not have all of his actions documented though. I did have a barrel that was fitted to a Trident and switched it to a 2500X and bolt close was harder than I liked. Possible too tight on headspace. I have owned about 8 of his actions, still own 6, They are a combination of variants.....Trident, 2500X, and 2500XS. My most recent actions were purchased in the same dimension range to facilitate barrel swapping. I have friends that have changed barrels, with no issues. I have also read on another board a few years ago, some guys had issues with extractor line up with certain barrel/action swaps.

Best advise I have, get the barrel fitted by a competent smith.

Scott

 

[ELR Researcher]

Ask Stiller - (214) 773-9010

As far as extractor cuts - avoid the issue with a cone breech.

 

[doclu60]

Ask Stiller - (214) 773-9010

As far as extractor cuts - avoid the issue with a cone breech.

And please tell us how a cone breech alleviates proper headspace when not fitted by a competent smith, or an end user that knows how to fit a barrel and has the equipment to do it? My personal experience with true cone breeches is, they suck, and I am pretty sure I have a bit more experience shooting big time RFBR than you do.

It's not just about the extractor alignment. For someone who labels himself a 'researcher' with all his credentials posted, you didn't do any research in your answer to the OP's question. Nor have you on others boards.

Scott

 

[kevin nevius]

And please tell us how a cone breech alleviates proper headspace when not fitted by a competent smith, or an end user that knows how to fit a barrel and has the equipment to do it? My personal experience with true cone breeches is, they suck, and I am pretty sure I have a bit more experience shooting big time RFBR than you do.

It's not just about the extractor alignment. For someone who labels himself a 'researcher' with all his credentials posted, you didn't do any research in your answer to the OP's question. Nor have you on others boards.

Scott

Good morning Scott:

Just a few thoughts after barreling many of these actions:
- They are exceptionally well made, and although I mic them for headspace every time they rarely (never) vary more that .001", which in the grand scheme of things is never going to cause an issue. Headspace IMHO is not a major factor regarding accuracy - it needs to be correct for consistent ignition, but really anything .0430" to .0450" is acceptable (again, in my opinion). Barrel tightness can vary headspace almost .001" with these small shoulders anyways.
- The one weakness of these actions is their extraction. I would NEVER recommend the use of a cone breech with them. Nothing against the cone breech - I use it on many other actions that have the extractors and purchase from the springs to handle it. I layout my cone breeches as a compromise - they need to thin enough to provide purchase for the extractors, but need to be thick enough to sufficiently back the rim at the firing pin strike for proper ignition. Stiller actions require a cone thickness far too thin for ignition to properly extract (again, in my humble opinion).
- And of course there's the issue of timing the extractor cuts (so they come into alignment as the proper seating torque is achieved. I am not sure if the action threads are clocked in the same position in each new action, so I cannot comment. Next time I have one in the shop, I will seat a few barrels and let you know.

Hope this helps, hope you have a great Christmas,

kev

 

[doclu60]

Kevin,
I appreciate your reply. As far as Stiller actions go, I have spent a bit of time when purchasing actions from Jerry going through the actions he does have specs on to determine which S/N's have the closest specs to other actions in my inventory. He did not have specs on Tridents, and the action I did have an issue with as far as a harder than 'normal' bolt close (2500X) was a barrel originally fitted by a nationally respected smith on a Trident. The extractor slots did line up though.

Jerry also explained that the 2500XS actions, of which I have 3, ran a little shorter than his current production actions. He has not made 2500XS actions for sometime now. After going through the specs he has data on, my actions will accept and function with barrel swaps between my 2500X's and my 2500XS's. The 'originally' Trident fitted barrel I still have (that action was sold) will be tried on another Trident I previously owned and bought back this last summer. Same smith did both of those actions.

I understand the issues with a true cone breech on Stiller actions. I have had a couple and they would occasionally have extraction issues, especially with certain lots. All my newer barrels have been done by Jerry, who uses what I would call a 'modified' cone. Some call it a 'bat wing cone', and have had no issues in extraction compared to a true cone breech.

Again, I appreciate your reply, as you have a wonderful track record and an excellent reputation for doing quality work. I only have my experience with, and working relationship with Jerry in regards to his actions.

I too, wish a great Christmas to you and yours!

Scott

 

[striperfisher]

There is no point to ever use a cone breach in any rfbr build....make your Smith cut extractor slots....or find a new Smith!

 

[Hozzie]

Cone's were popular at one point and I have one gun that still has one. To be fair, I have never had a single issue out of it. A little care either way goes a long way. I also do slots now, but wouldn't shy away from a barrel that had a cone just because of that.

 

[linekin]

I've been using cone breech's on my barrels for several years & never had a problem with extraction. Never needed a chamber iron either. This is with Turbo's, 10x's, & a Hall. Never owned a Stiller action so can't speak to those. What makes them different than what I've dealt with?
Other than the issues I've mentioned whats the downside? Just curious.
Keith

 

[kevin nevius]

I've been using cone breech's on my barrels for several years & never had a problem with extraction. Never needed a chamber iron either. This is with Turbo's, 10x's, & a Hall. Never owned a Stiller action so can't speak to those. What makes them different than what I've dealt with?
Other than the issues I've mentioned whats the downside? Just curious.
Keith

Good morning Keith:

Just to clarify, I am not disparaging these exceptional actions - Jerry makes great products.

IMHO (as a smith), I think its the spring clip powering the extractors. Extractor slots can be cut much deeper (without compromising ignition, because you maintain the full tennon surface at the strike location). The additional extractor engagement seems to be key.

I think the clip doesn't provide the resistance needed if the purchase of the rim is marginal (as with a cone breech). I hope that makes sense.

All the best,

kev

 

[wk4036]

Good morning Keith:

Just to clarify, I am not disparaging these exceptional actions - Jerry makes great products.

IMHO (as a smith), I think its the spring clip powering the extractors. Extractor slots can be cut much deeper (without compromising ignition, because you maintain the full tennon surface at the strike location). The additional extractor engagement seems to be key.

I think the clip doesn't provide the resistance needed if the purchase of the rim is marginal (as with a cone breech). I hope that makes sense.

All the best,

kev

Well said

 

[doclu60]

Well said

Yes, well said indeed. The spring is the culprit, as well as the minimal support of the rim. Jerry's modified cone gives more support to the rim and it does help. Don't get me wrong either, I love Stiller actions or I wouldn't have as many as I do. The old spring that was used in earlier actions was stiffer. For a nicer bolt close the spring was later made lighter. It also effects ejection as well. I was given a few of the old springs, but was told I may not like the bolt close. As it turned out, I didn't like the close and reinstalled the lighter spring. When ejection becomes an issue, I simply pop the spring out and 'adjust' it with a pair of pliers. IMO, the true cone breech does nothing to improve accuracy over a flat breech with extractor slots, or the modified cone, so I do not recommend them.

Scott

 

[JMayo]

Call killioughs, Jerry is ARA big. Richard Gorham cuts them for 2500x's all the time.
Cone barrels is all i have never used and most I've ever known use them in ARA.
If you're close to NC blake gann is another good one to fit a barrel.

Rimfire Accuracy Forum

This is a discussion forum powered by vBulletin. To find out about vBulletin, go to http://www.vbulletin.com/ .

www.rimfireaccuracy.com

Stiller own this site

 

[linekin]

Thanks for the responses Kevin & Scott. A spring on an action I don't use isn't a good enough reason for me to stop doing cones. Should I ever get a Stiller action I'll be sure to cut the extractor slots.
Had it been inconsistent ignition or some other fundamental reason I'd consider the change.
As I said I've never had any issues with them.
Keith

 

[ELR Researcher]

Does anyone make a barrel for a 2500X that could just be screwed into the action without a gunsmith?And please tell us how a cone breech alleviates proper headspace when not fitted by a competent smith, or an end user that knows how to fit a barrel and has the equipment to do it? My personal experience with true cone breeches is, they suck, and I am pretty sure I have a bit more experience shooting big time RFBR than you do.

It's not just about the extractor alignment. For someone who labels himself a 'researcher' with all his credentials posted, you didn't do any research in your answer to the OP's question. Nor have you on others boards.

Scott

The OP's #1 post reads, in its entirety, "Does anyone make a barrel for a 2500X that could just be screwed into the action without a gunsmith?" Subsequently you posted, "...I have also read on another board a few years ago, some guys had issues with extractor line up with certain barrel/action swaps." - to which I replied about using a cone breech (simply to deal with extractor-cut alignment). As I understand it, the majority of the top RFBR shooters use cone breech rifles. I have five Gorham-smithed Shilens and R&R them myself using Go and No-Go gauges, no issues whatsoever. That noted, seems long time smiths (like Gorham) say to just slap the barrel into place (barrels he chambered to my action). [I come from centerfire and have always used gauges.] I did not understand the OP asking for a pre-fit, seems you did. I know of no one that offers a pre-fit for the 2500X.

 

[grauhanen]

As I understand it, the majority of the top RFBR shooters use cone breech rifles.

While many individual shooters may use a cone breech, it may be an overstatement to suggest the majority of BR custom rigs use them. For them, the cone breech isn't always necessary. Jerry Stiller, for example, offered this explanation: "The only reason to have a cone is if you have different actions that index at different spots you are swapping barrels on."
See post #4, http://www.rimfireaccuracy.com/Forums/showthread.php/13220-Cone-chamber

Cone breeches are also more at risk to be damaged by the firing pin should there be pin-to-chamber contact.. As Stiller notes, "Ideally it won't happen. Also, I don't ever test fate either."
See post #5, http://www.rimfireaccuracy.com/Foru...dry-firing?s=dfb2b52e43a0ade3b1daee3f3f3ec7ce