Criterion No.4 barrel testing

I finally had some range time with the test rifle. I went through proper barrel break in procedure several weeks ago when I completed it so this was the second time on the range. I fired all of the five shot groups at 100 yards off sandbags. The rifle is a 1943 Savage No.4Mk.1* I built to MoD specification. I added an AJP 8/53 back sight attachment with an adjustable camera iris eye piece which helped me a lot. I managed one exceptional group under 2" with 1971 FNM Mk.7z and groups averaging 2.5"-3" with both FNM 71, 1969 and 1977 HXP Mk.7z. I also handloaded a great match load as worked up by the best precision rifle shooter I know with the 174 gr Sierra MK projectile. I managed a couple of four shot groups under 1" but always managed a trusty flyer opening it up to 2"-2.5". I can't blame the machinery for that. Just the nut behind the bolt. All in all: I'd say these new barrels will shoot 1 moa with the right shooter and 2-3 moa easily with average shooters like myself on a good day! The factory are making the final tweaks and the barrels will be available soon. The tatty old Savage rifle shoots so well, I'll eventually break it down and refinish the metal to MoD specification and spiff up the wood a little bit too.

I had no doubt the Criterion would work well.

One is here in NZ apparently being tested. One comment i recall is that the rifling is not as deep? In which case they may like boat tails more? I am looking forward to 1 or 2 new barrels as soon as I can. What it does now mean is the price of No4s will I suspect climb here in NZ as ppl can re-barrel (most guns I see have shot out or corroded barrels) and are worthless. Hoping I can find another 1 or 2 decent guns soon needing only new barrels at a reasonable price.

I'm a little behind, Brian, but having a good time with test barrel #3. At least I got one bullet down the spout yesterday.

I didn't have any rifles that I wanted to rebarrel only, so dug out an old BSA Mk1 action. Barrel fitting was almost too easy. The rest was almost too much challenge for a lazy old fellow like me. The wood used was a real collection. The forestock is beautiful birdseye. The remainder is vertical and horizontal laminate. I wondered how this odd collection would look when together, but it seems to be a pleasing mismatch. The Canadian target shooters were allowed the creation of such wonderful wood for their No 4 rifles.

Now to digging up some of the good old Canadian ammo and to handloading .303. Wow, a few years since that happened!

That's a much prettier rifle than the one I cobbled up. However, I will make this one pretty as time progresses. Now that the hot months are here, it'll be added to a pile of projects getting the phosphate and paint treatment. The production barrels are going to have raised chamber areas and short chambers so they will entail more work to install and set up properly. The sample barrel shot very well. Much better than I can!

Well....

Now I am not trying to be contrary, but as a competitive shooter who had an eleven year obsession with tuning and shooting No4 and No 1 MK III rifles, I very much doubt any of the .303 rifles would shoot MOA, at the shorts or the longs. By that I mean 10 shot groups fired from a position or a rest with target sights from a skilled shooter who knows his stuff. That is with good MK VII cordite loads or with VIIZ equivalent in any bullet from 150 to 175 grain. Regardless of velocity tuning range from 2150 to 2450 fps.

Now I am only a Yank, but I would say an No 4 that can put 10 shots in to less than 5.5 inches at 300 yards is shooting quite well indeed. Any No 1 MK III that is doing less that 7.0 inches for ten shots at the same range is, once again, shooting very well (sling or supported, Parker sights, good eye sight, no shots called out of group).

On equivalent US weapons, using 168 grain to 175 grain .308 bullets, I would say a well tuned M14 is capable of 4.5 inch groups at the range , again from a skilled shooter prone sling supported or a rest, an M16 NM variant with float tube an associated gizmos being more like 3.5 inches at that range. I have reasons to believe the latter figure is limited by eyesight.

Further, it has been my observation that with either the No4 or the No 1, the groups you see at the shorts are even worse. so a No 4 that shoots better than 2 MOA @ 100 yards would win any match it was entered in against other No 4 rifles, and a No1 MK III that would shoot a 10 shot groups of under 3 MOA at that distance would pretty much beat all other No 1 comers, if using full power ammunition. If the velocity of the loads for the No1 Mk III is dropped to between 2150 and 2250, the troublesome vertical wild shots seem to disappear with powders in the region of IMR 4064 speeds. In those cases a No1 MK III that can produce groups of 2.5 MOA at that range will beat all other No21 rifles on the line.

I suspect the No3 rifle would do better, I simply do not have enough experience with these rifles to make a definitive statement.

I am curious if folks who have shot the rifles from position and in matches would say they will do better than that on a regular basis.

Would it be worth using a bolt on scope mount and scope to really test the set up out?

Well…

Now I'm not trying to be contrary but maybe you wasted a lot of time and effort tuning and tweaking when you should have just made sure the forends were properly fitted to MoD specification. I'm firmly in the camp of: "if it's good enough for a sniper rifle, it's good enough for me". I was only shooting 5 shot groups as instructed by Criterion and I did have flyers but I'm convinced this old rifle with it's new, properly broken in sample barrel WILL shoot 1 MOA with the match load concocted by my friend in Florida and assembled by myself. It'll definitely shoot 2 MOA with Portuguese FNM 1971 Mk.7z ball which is some of the best late manufacture surplus .303 I've ever found. I'll be glad to send you the targets just exactly as I did to Criterion if you don't believe me. Got them right here on my IMac. Send me an email to bdlltd@bellsouth.net and I'll scan them to you. My bench can be seen on Criterion's Facebook page along with my poor old cobbled up Savage if anyone's interested. Facts are stranger than science!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frederick303

Well....

Now I am not trying to be contrary, but as a competitive shooter who had an eleven year obsession with tuning and shooting No4 and No 1 MK III rifles, I very much doubt any of the .303 rifles would shoot MOA, at the shorts or the longs. By that I mean 10 shot groups fired from a position or a rest with target sights from a skilled shooter who knows his stuff. That is with good MK VII cordite loads or with VIIZ equivalent in any bullet from 150 to 175 grain. Regardless of velocity tuning range from 2150 to 2450 fps.

Now I am only a Yank, but I would say an No 4 that can put 10 shots in to less than 5.5 inches at 300 yards is shooting quite well indeed. Any No 1 MK III that is doing less that 7.0 inches for ten shots at the same range is, once again, shooting very well (sling or supported, Parker sights, good eye sight, no shots called out of group).

On equivalent US weapons, using 168 grain to 175 grain .308 bullets, I would say a well tuned M14 is capable of 4.5 inch groups at the range , again from a skilled shooter prone sling supported or a rest, an M16 NM variant with float tube an associated gizmos being more like 3.5 inches at that range. I have reasons to believe the latter figure is limited by eyesight.

Further, it has been my observation that with either the No4 or the No 1, the groups you see at the shorts are even worse. so a No 4 that shoots better than 2 MOA @ 100 yards would win any match it was entered in against other No 4 rifles, and a No1 MK III that would shoot a 10 shot groups of under 3 MOA at that distance would pretty much beat all other No 1 comers, if using full power ammunition. If the velocity of the loads for the No1 Mk III is dropped to between 2150 and 2250, the troublesome vertical wild shots seem to disappear with powders in the region of IMR 4064 speeds. In those cases a No1 MK III that can produce groups of 2.5 MOA at that range will beat all other No21 rifles on the line.

I suspect the No3 rifle would do better, I simply do not have enough experience with these rifles to make a definitive statement.

I am curious if folks who have shot the rifles from position and in matches would say they will do better than that on a regular basis.

---

I remember scoring for guys using the No1 Mk3s who regularly shot the spotters to pieces. The peg supply had to be replenished regularly. But then they were Australian team members or had been.

I think one only has to check the winning scores at Bisley, among other places, over the last century or so to see what a well set up No1 or No4 is capable of.

Regarding the Bisley targets.

They were 2.5 MOA for a 5, from short to long from 1949 to 1968.

Nothing better, all shot prone slow fire.

I seem to recall putting up Percy Pavey's stats a little while ago he was pretty good with the Mk III

Brian,

Don't know what your take is on cleaning the Criterion barrel, but the one I have is a dream to clean. I gave my barrel a good normal cleaning and a dose of Sweet's to look for any copper collection this morning. Saw a very dim trace after 35 rounds. Just finished loading some Hornady 174s for further testing. Shot some of these bullets yesterday in pulled bullet ammo and felt good about the results. Felt pretty good about the 71 year old eyes too. They are one of the few things still working.:)

Attachment 62884Attachment 62885

Iron sights, 100 Yrds from a rest(factoring ME out). Rifle is MK V, with good amount of wear. Shooting a freshly cleaned barrel, that looked very rough before a lot of TLC.

Remington UMC 174 Grain, off the shelf ammo.


Sound Action, New Barrel, Good wood. Why not?

Green with envy for you guys.
I would like to know what the specs are for major and minor dia.
There are none on their web site for their P14 barrel and I am intrested to know whether they have let you guys know for the new barels?I have emailed the but as yet no reply.
thanks Sean

corben1, I'm truly impressed with the barrel I fitted up too. It cleaned up easily. The bore diameter must be right considering the performance with both Mk.7z and Sierra Matchkings. There was a little bit of copper fouling but I did break it in with 20 rounds cleaning between each shot which should make things stay cleaner. I'll admit to not cleaning the barrel absolutely spotless of copper after every session and I was only using good old Hoppes No.9 on it. I was sort of replicating the use/maintenance an average shooter would give it just so gauge performance. I will give it a good copper cleaning when time permits. Glad to read you're getting in some range time. Good quality domestic mfg. L.E. barrels have been a long time coming!

Another tidbit I forgot to mention to prove a point is that I set the rifle up originally on the loose side with the bolt almost closing on the .074 H.S. gauge. I fitted another bolt head to bring the H.S. on the tight side to try the match hand loads. Guess what, accuracy was exactly the same which dispells much of the back and forth we've been hearing about for years about accuracy vs headspace. Now I DO realize that tighter is better when you want maximum case life but the fact is a lot of shooters worry needlessly about headspace on these rifles. As long as it's in spec with .064 GO and .074 NO GO, these old girls will shoot just fine.

Brian-Got loose for a few more groups this morning. Tried some 75 Greek that I bought this past winter for the grandsons. They can have it! Shot ten rounds of 1951 DA 7z, which shot well with the exception of one shot and the remainder was 174 grain Hornady handloads. The Hornady bullets looked good, but the Illinois prairie winds were howling at the local range. It was so bad that I decided to let the elevations become the group. Nothing new to me, as I used to do it all the time in machine rest testing at extended range in rough conditions. Now I wish to go one step further. I'm now 71, and time has changed my abilities to a degree. I've got a no drill scope base somewhere and intend to use it. I'm having fun and after this experience intend to become more familiar with other Criterion products. I'm not just patting these people on the back either. I really like this barrel.

Criterion Barrels has become an Advertising Sponsor for our site. :thup:

All non-contributing members who view advertisements will now see Criterion's banner (amongst others) following every second post in each thread.

Note: the formal pre-order page for No.4 barrels, which you are directed to when you click on their banner, won't officially be live until this coming Thursday, May 28th.

Please join with me in welcoming Criterion Barrels to our site and thanking them for their support of our collecting hobby. :clap:

Regards,
Doug

:clap::clap::clap:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Dick

Another tidbit I forgot to mention to prove a point is that I set the rifle up originally on the loose side with the bolt almost closing on the .074 H.S. gauge. I fitted another bolt head to bring the H.S. on the tight side to try the match hand loads. Guess what, accuracy was exactly the same which dispells much of the back and forth we've been hearing about for years about accuracy vs headspace. Now I DO realize that tighter is better when you want maximum case life but the fact is a lot of shooters worry needlessly about headspace on these rifles. As long as it's in spec with .064 GO and .074 NO GO, these old girls will shoot just fine.

---

I think it may depend on the rifle, somehow they seem individuals. however I recently got one of my ones inspected to enter a competition and it was getting a bit close to closing on a field and no1 head, swapped in a no2 and it now wont close on a no go and I got no noticable difference in accuracy.