Floating Reamer Holder Madness

[INTJ]

If you are wondering about my background and skill level I refer you to my recent “Hack” thread. And before it’s mentioned, I have already searched all over the internet and in several books and haven’t found the exact discussion I’d like to see.

I have three different floating reamer holders: A Manson, an ebay model, and a JGS. I have used the first two, just got the JGS. I chamber through the headstock and am wondering which is best.

The ebay model was only $70ish and is made by a gunsmith who wanted a reamer holder that had radial AND angular movement. In theory this holder should correct for tailstock misalignment as well as barrel misalignment. It’s potential downside is that it does have a firm return to center. I think that when I had to re-indicate in my barrel this one would have follow the chamber better and perhaps avoided the .001” enlargement I wound up with as a consequence of putting the barrel back in the lathe.

The Manson model corrects only for tailstock misalignment. It has an aluminum “head” that moves quickly but can also hang up out in an out-of-alignment position. When you feed it in you need to keep your hand on the head and wiggle it. I didn’t really like using is as much as the ebay model.

The JGS I just got is used but in good condition. It only corrects radially (tailstock misalignment) but is very smooth and while it returns to zero it’s not as firm as the ebay model.

I am thinking of using the JGS—who has offered to go through it for me for free—for initial chamber jobs and then the ebay model for rechambers.

Thoughts/experiences on this?

 

[Dusty Stevens]

I wouldnt swap for different barrel jobs. Use the same one from now on. I have a old ptg model but use an old bald eagle pusher most times that solves all those issues. If youre going to use one of those holders i suggest the jgs and to actually sell the others so you get used to the same thing every time

 

[Doug Beach]

+1 for the JGS.

 

[INTJ]

So you guys don’t think having radial and angular movement is a better feature for when you have to put a barrel back in the lathe and you want to stay aligned with the chamber? I honestly don’t know, I am just speculating.

 

[Doug Beach]

Why would you have to put a barrel back in the lathe?

 

[INTJ]

http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/hack-gunsmith-wins-with-first-chamber-job.3983629/

 

[Dusty Stevens]

So you guys don’t think having radial and angular movement is a better feature for when you have to put a barrel back in the lathe and you want to stay aligned with the chamber? I honestly don’t know, I am just speculating.

I just know i like the jgs over the others you mentioned. I like the ebay one but would rather it just flop free. If you put it back in the lathe just indicate it back in and go for it. A floating reamer holder only accounts for gross misalignment. The reamer will follow that small of a difference if you dial it back in. If i have to put one back in ill dial it back in and cut at least half the tenon off to get it going in one operation again

 

[carlsbad]

a floating reamer holder will do nothing to deal with misalignment. It allows the reamer to follow the bore and the axis of the lathe (which hopefully are the same thing). --jerry

 

[INTJ]

a floating reamer holder will do nothing to deal with misalignment. It allows the reamer to follow the bore and the axis of the lathe (which hopefully are the same thing). --jerry

Dave Manson told me the purpose of his floating reamer holder was to correct for tailstock alignment. Of course, the end goal of correcting for tailstock alignment is to let the reamer follow the bore. Not sure Dave is really saying anything different than you?

Thinking about it, the only thing radial movement (Manson and JGS) can do it correct for misalignment up/down, left/right, and all the angles in between. Of the three I mentioned, only the ebay reamer would allow movement to correct in angular misalignment, which would be caused most likely by indicating error or machine runout.

It’s probably all moot anyway if you can get dialed in to a couple tenths............

 

[Tim Singleton]

Not that my opinion will matter much
I don’t like any of them
I’m in the drill then bore and then ream with a pusher camp

 

[carlsbad]

Tim,
A pusher is a floating holder.

INTJ,
Good point. I should have been more clear.

A floating reamer holder won't do anything for a barrel not aligned with the spindle. It will keep a misaligned tailstock from introducing error (within limits).

--Jerry

 

[Tim Singleton]

Tim,
A pusher is a floating holder.

INTJ,
Good point. I should have been more clear.

A floating reamer holder won't do anything for a barrel not aligned with the spindle. It will keep a misaligned tailstock from introducing error (within limits).

--Jerry

Should have been more clear I don’t like or use any of the reamer holders mentioned in the OP

 

[Bamban]

I have the JGS, the eBay offering, the home made pusher copied from Butch Lambert's design and my own version I called coupled pusher. When chambering, just like some people, I drill, indicate bore, bore, and finish. After chambering over a hundred twenty barrels the last 3 years (a lot of work for someone who is not in the business) using all four different reamer holders, I still like my homemade coupled pusher. My homemade one behaves much like the pusher, but instead of letting a tap holder of some sort to rest on something solid once the reamer starts cutting, it will have it its own mechanical stop, but it still allows the reamer to be pushed in.

Here are some pictures, pretty much tell the tale. It is my first internal threading project - Butch Lambert guided me through the process over email and phone calls. No formal drawing, just sketches. Finished the female threaded coupler first and used it for go gauge for the male coupler. The rod in the male coupler is pressed in. Ball bearing is 1/2 inch.

The piece that holds the reamer, when coupled to the piece that is held in the tailstock, has squared up end that moves about on a ball bearing. On the other side of the ball bearing is also a squared piece.

The pieces are now melonited.




Watch "DSC 4084" on YouTube

YMMV

 

[DaveTooley]

If your barrel isn't set up properly the rest is a compromise trying to compensate for a poor barrel alignment. If the barrel is setup properly anything but a rigid holder works on a manual machine. If you get any wobble of the reamer shank you have a problem.
Most know I use a pusher.

YMMV

 

[tobnpr]

It's pretty much impossible to "prove" which type of holder/method of holding is "best" as there are too many variables. Biggest ones being, barrels are like fingerprints (no two are exactly alike) and every manual lathe will have misalignment to some degree, but differing in type/amount.

Try different types (easy to make from an MT2 or MT3 arbor). I made one with a ball bearing on the reamer holder to ride the flat on the pusher, and one that was flat/flat. For some reason, I got a lot of chatter with the ball bearing one, and went back to flat-on-flat.

For me, a correctly fitted pilot (4-5 tenths clearance) and quality barrel are most important. HSS reamers don't bend, and if the pilot is fitted with correct minimal clearance the reamer can't do anything but follow the bore.

Don't be afraid to try between centers as well. Despite all the seeming "conventional" wisdom that you simply "must" chamber through the headstock- it ain't so. Kelbly's, McMillan, and many others chamber their rifles this way.
Skip to 1:48 into this..."old school", holding the reamer/tap wrench by hand for feel...

<iframe width="508" height="288" src="

" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>