dellet
Gold $$ Contributor
The premise in the OP of the cost of the barrel being one of the “cheaper components” is kind of flawed. It’s based mostly on benchrest round counts and accuracy requirement drop off. If the accuracy requirement is not there, the round count goes up, the barrel actually becomes less of a cost factor.
Years ago I found that helping people hand load, using the term “benchrest technique” was met with resistance. “Those benchrest guys are anal, I don’t need to do all that stuff and buy all that fancy equipment” was a common response. What worked really well was simply saying “let’s tighten the tolerances up some”. Placing a beam scale where you can actually see the lines is free, and makes a noticeable difference on target. As does setting the die to fit the chamber.
Biggest thing I have noticed for myself is that most of this “benchrest stuff” that doesn’t seem to make a difference in my target size, is generally traced back to operator error. Good thing I don’t consider myself an operator.
Years ago I found that helping people hand load, using the term “benchrest technique” was met with resistance. “Those benchrest guys are anal, I don’t need to do all that stuff and buy all that fancy equipment” was a common response. What worked really well was simply saying “let’s tighten the tolerances up some”. Placing a beam scale where you can actually see the lines is free, and makes a noticeable difference on target. As does setting the die to fit the chamber.
Biggest thing I have noticed for myself is that most of this “benchrest stuff” that doesn’t seem to make a difference in my target size, is generally traced back to operator error. Good thing I don’t consider myself an operator.
