Not broken in properly

Status
Not open for further replies.
Snyper, how did your accuracy testing work? Your customers bring in test targets? Did yall take the rifles off the rack out back and group them? Did the customers come in and say "man this rifle shoots good."? Good to me is 3/8 moa. Good to a lot of people is sub minute of deer. I do not know what you saw, but I know how much steel has to fly when the average Browning action goes in the lathe.;)
 
Stag Panther, not being disrespectful, but it appears that the O.P. rifle shoots like most of the other Browning BAR rifles. Short of going in the machine shop and sinking a fortune in time, there is more than likely little help. A guy I shoot with has one that will not shoot 3 minute. This is a beautiful gold inlayed rifle he bought to take Elk hunting. Can not figure out his logic behind the choice, but that is what he chose. He has done everything he can do to it and it will not shoot. He has tried to talk several of us into doing machine work on it, and he gets the same "I would not touch it with a 10 foot pole." You can literally sink 40 to 80 hours into one and it still not shoot. It is real easy to scratch it etc. and lose a ton of money on the project. I have not and probably will not ever work on one, but I have heard the horror stories.
 
Last edited:
The first time I fired one of my SIG SHR 970s-with a scope I mounted myself-I was getting 1.25" groups at 100 yards, Remington .270 Winchester 130 grains-and I am far from an experienced long range rifle shooter and I suspect the rifle was unfired. So I suspect a properly fitting stock, smoothly operating trigger and properly mounted and functioning scope are things that should be looked at more closely. I have been in the shooting game more or less since 1967 and it's only in the last 10 years or so that I have heard about barrel break in.
 
You guys are busy trashing Browning and BAR rifles, and I just can't agree with you. My BAR in 270 shot pretty darn well. Granted, it won't shoot as well as my bolt guns, but I got 5 shot groups into an inch with handloads (IMR4064). I'd probably still be hunting with it, but I got into reloading and wanted more accuracy and case life. And it was pretty heavy. Dad had one in 308 and it shot very well also with factory ammo, and gun weight finally got to him too.

Like I said earlier, if I was the OP I'd swap out scopes and check the mounts in the process. And, check to make sure that none of the screws in the mounts are protruding slightly into the action. If it protrudes too much, it'll keep the action from cycling once in a while. If it rubs the bolt just a little, but not enough to prevent the action from cycling, it could possibly be the cause of accuracy problems.

Browning makes a very high quality product, and I'd much rather have a Browning than anything Savage produces. Maybe if I shot F Class I'd feel different about Browning, but I'd still avoid Savage. To me, they are unattractive and rough. There probably aren't many Sako's in F Class, but who among you will swap your Sako for a Savage. Not me.

I am not saying that Savage isn't a good rifle. I just have no use for one.
 
Browning makes a very high quality product, and I'd much rather have a Browning than anything Savage produces. Maybe if I shot F Class I'd feel different about Browning, but I'd still avoid Savage. To me, they are unattractive and rough. There probably aren't many Sako's in F Class, but who among you will swap your Sako for a Savage. Not me.

I am not saying that Savage isn't a good rifle. I just have no use for one.
Click to expand...

I don't have experience with Browning rifles so I can't comment one way or the other--though I always break my rifles in simply because they almost always have "hidden crud" that shakes loose in the first week or two of use. No matter what any manufacturer or retailer says--I automatically assume it's going to need rigorous attention upon first uses.

My experience with Savages is that for the money you can't buy a better "mass-production" barrel on a rifle and the action is generally very robust--even if not as silky smooth as many more expensive rifles are. Even their bottom of the barrel Axis which I bought for $275 and did minimal stock and trigger work on can do this with the right hand-load at 100 yds:

 
I do not know what you saw, but I know how much steel has to fly when the average Browning action goes in the lathe.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what that has to do with comparing off the shelf accuracy. any more than trying to compare them to the "purpose-built" F-Class Savage rifles
 
It has to do with the fact that their actions are not square to their centerline. When actions are not square, they string when they heat up.
 
It has to do with the fact that their actions are not square to their centerline. When actions are not square, they string when they heat up.
Click to expand...
Again, that is totally irrelevant to any comparison to other off the shelf rifles.
I get that you don't like Brownings, but that doesn't change what I observed
 
Snyper. You make many assumptions. One of your assumptions is that I dislike Browning. I like Browning just fine. My safe is well equipped with their shotguns. I used to have some of their rifles. Someone who likes Browning more than I do took them off my hands because of their beautiful wood.

Having said that. Brownings as a whole do not outshoot the rifles I named. I asked you to quantify how you drew your conclusions. I am sorry that without some sort of quantitative testing that I am not convinced of your claim.
My guess would be that Most people who buy Brownings also buy high quality scopes and ammo. Browning appeals to a slightly higher price point shopper than some of the other brands.
Jo Bob saying "my Remington shoots awful," and then Jim Bob coming in and saying "my Browning shoots wonderful," is less than compelling evidence to me.

Did you test the rifles? Do you know the proficiency of the people shooting the rifles?

I buy rifles all the time dirt cheap because "they wont shoot." 9 out of 10 of them shoot wonderfully whenever I fix whatever problem the past owner of the rifle created. Most of them do not even need fixed. The person behind the trigger was the problem.
 
Reynolds, out of square actions with their bolt way axis not aligned with the bore axis is not what causes shot stringing when barrels heat up. It's the receiver face that has to be square with the receiver's barrel thread axis so shots won't walk away from point of aim as the barrel heats up.

All of my actions' bolt way axes are a bit out of alignment with and a slight angle to the barrel bore axis; not enough to matter.
 
Bart, I am glad you told me that. I have heard it argued both ways, but I trust your opinion on the matter. I have always done both. It will be much more simple to only do one. I will try it with one of my personal builds. Save money on custom bolts and save a pile of time.
 
Last edited:
Having said that. Brownings as a whole do not outshoot the rifles I named. I asked you to quantify how you drew your conclusions. I am sorry that without some sort of quantitative testing that I am not convinced of your claim.
Click to expand...

I know what I observed over a period of years, and it's not dependent on anyone being "convinced".

No need to be "sorry" because what I saw is true either way

What I saw was a comparison of factory rifles, all used under various conditions, with Browning being the most likey to produce the smallest groups without any modifications to any of the guns, and mostly using factory ammo.
 
Last edited:
It would be nice if you could describe to us what exactly "you saw."
As it seems now it is most confusing. You state "comparison." How exactly was that comparison done?
You saw no test targets?
You did not shoot the rifles?
You did not SEE them shot?
I guess I am just confused as to what you "saw."

You remember the Boss?
Remember why Browning came out with it?
 
It is years of memories, reynolds, nothing that he can just summarize in a manner to convince you.

For lack of a better explanation, it is what he believes to be true and has no evidence to support. There is nothing wrong with such information. We all have it and we all make decisions on such information, though we can't prove it.

You can't prove him wrong and he can't substantiate himself as right. You are at an impasse.
 
Hmmm--I see a very practical solution to this. Challenge bet! Take equivalent stock rifles and have a shoot off--the loser has to pay for the winner's rifle.
 
the blur wrote:

I have a BAR that was not broken in properly.
Click to expand...

blur,

With all this other discussions going on, I'll try to help you with that barrel break-in.

1) Did you clean the barrel before you shot it?
2) Please explain - What you think you did or didn't do that was improper.
 
I have quite a few Savages that are up for the shoot off. 1000 yard?

DNS, I am forming my opinion (And that is what it is an opinion) on targets shot over the years, targets observed over the years, and the actual machine quality of the rifles. I would not make a statement that brand X is the most accurate brand rifle made. The only way to prove such a claim would be to conduct testing that would be astronomical in cost. What I can tell you is that the average Browning is NOTHING SPECIAL in the accuracy department.
 
Last edited:
Gotta be fair--you two have to square off with new off-the shelf rifles; same caliber, price-niche, barrel length and type (sporter, bull etc), scope magnification etc. and no after-purchase enhancing--after all we're establishing what is factory-made junk and what isn't, right? ; )

We can even set up a betting pool with proceeds to support the forum or some other worthy cause (maybe a founder's fee would go to me since it was my idea lol)..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top