Printable View
Nope......... Much simpler than that big Duke. The PROBLEM won't be the new barrels but with knackered bodies or bodies with worn out locking shoulders.
The most important criteria with the new barrels will be this.
If you cannot CHS your rifle with the OLD barrel, you won't be able to CHS it CORRECTLY with the new one. It's as simple as that.
The next thing to remember is that the new barrel is only a cure for a shot/worn out existing barrel
chs??Quote:
Originally Posted by peter laidler
CHS = Cartridge Head Space
Cartridge Head SpaceQuote:
Originally Posted by Rwsgunsmithing
This will be an interesting project.
It already is. Cleaning SAAMI specifications and such from folks working on service Lees has been a lifetime endeavor for me! Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration since I shot rifles of my own for many years without knowing any of this or even owning a gauge. Never had a problem either. It's the last 20 years where I learned WTF was going on! I was told recently that I work Lees the exact opposite of all common sense training to thousands of gunsmiths graduated from the Colorado School of Gunsmithing. That's a real scary thought. I'll be real disappointed if the engineers at Criterion deviate from basic MoD specifications on these things and make them way more complicated than they have to be. I think if they stick to the KISS theory, all will be well. I reckon we'll see.
Brian
My suspicion is that with the deep interest in this project and the involvement of people like Brian and Peter, I'm very confident that Criterion will get this "right".
I also understand that the next barrel in line will be for a No.1. Hopefully they can also be convinced to consider a "heavy barrel" as well (I did drop off a barrel taken from a MLE with the early knox form).
If they don't deviate some from the MOD specification there will be some rifles the barrels cannot be fitted to. Then people will be back to using rings to take up the space at the shoulder when the metal on the shoulder could have been left long.
With the exhaustion of British military ammo the only ammo close to fitting the huge chambers well is the stuff made by PPU. The #4 barrels would benefit from having smaller diameter chambers unless you just want everything as mud proof as an original. With the large chamber case life will be shortened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Dick
what do you mean get it right? two or three other manufacturers produce barrels for these rifles. have not heard any complaints about barrel installations re: their product, other than price and importation limitations. so whats to get right? I've been following this for over a year and at this point the only thing left to "get right" is the time line for putting a barrel in the hands of the customer. Before Christmas I wanted 3 of them. Now...? If somebody needs a barrel to take some measurements from I will gladly contribute that.
I do agree that saami specs take president over british chamber specs. I don't get more than 3 reloads from any brass. but that's an easy fix and cant possibly justify they ongoing wait.
3 reloads? what are you running at? 38~40gr ADI 2208 should see 10+ reloads. 43gr+ adi2208 and yes 3 or less but I wouldnt bet a re-barrel will fix it, its the action stretching at excessive loads. Now the gun in question has a tight chamber in a Lithgow aftermarket H barrel. I also have "milspec" barrels, cant say I have seen any difference in case life between them. In terms of problems, going back 50 years here in NZ target shooters would re-barrel their no4s every 1 or 2 years but had buckets of heads to fix any chs issue. These days a 2 or a 3 head for a no4 is very hard to get, hence finishing the chamber to suit the head you have makes sense, that means more cost. if we can get back to a "simple" bolt up that will take Hundreds of $s off the cost of a re-barrel.
---------- Post added at 11:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:33 AM ----------
"With the exhaustion of British military ammo the only ammo close to fitting the huge chambers well is the stuff made by PPU" I dont agree with you here. The military ammo is disposable, hence the fit didnt really matter how much it expanded one time, it was never going to be reloaded. I do agree on PPU being good brass, Im finding it lasts better than 1943 stamped brass reloaded for the same gun(s) and its quite cheap.
I run 46.5gr ADI 2209 with RP (Remington) brass and Lee collet dies - I am up to about 8 reloads in my No.4 with a standard chamber. The 2209 feels softer and is slightly lower pressure than 2208. Worth a try for case life problems.