Two items:10/22 barrel band, 788 in .44 magnum

P

Plainsman

New member
I have a question about accuracy in the Ruger 10/22 with and without the barrel band. Does it affect accuracy one way or the other? Most rifles you don't want something like that on there, yet, Ruger uses it all the time!?!?

Secondly, I found an old reloading digest that had an article on the Remington Model 788 in .44 magnum. It was the first commercially made bolt action in .44 magnum. Has anybody owned one or even seen one for that matter? How was the accuracy/reliability? Thanks much!
Plainsman :-)

------------------
 
Hi Plainsman,

About everything I've read warns that putting any tension on the barrel will change both the harmonics and shift the point of impact. That's why when most folks put that heavy barrel on the 10/22, they not only have the barrel free floated, but happily leave the barrel band off.

Harold Vaughn (Rifle Accuracy Facts) is the only scientist/shooter/writer who disputes the merits of free floating. He points out the O'Connor method with its two shims at the tip of the forearm reduces barrel vibration by a factor of two over the free floating barrel. Per Vaughn, barrel vibration is one of the largest contributors to a rifle's inaccuracy.
Remington adopted the O'Connor method for the 40X by imbedding two tuning screws in the forearm. Remington's abandonment in 1965 was due to the swelling of the wood stock which, in field condtions, was outside factory control. With the newer synthetic stocks today, if Vaughn is correct, it may be feasible today.

I can't verify the validity of Vaughn's claims but would love to see research on this matter. While Vaughn is interesting, his book raises a lot of questions in my simple non-scientific mind.

Sorry for straying so far.

4v50 Gary
 
I havent tried, (dunno why) but I have heard that you can chuck it. I has no effect on accuracy whatsoever. Seems to me it may actualy be detrimental for accuracy, and now that I am thinking about it I wonder why I havent taken mine off.

------------------

Mouse Assassins inc.
 
The 788s were (are) a great rifle. The .44 mag version was very rare, and now worth some $$$. If it were anything like the .22-250s, the .308, and the .223 I have owned, they would be extremely accurate.
 
4V50Gary: My accuracy trick is 1. Free float, but at the fore end, just barely. 2. Shim with wax paper such that about a 5-lb pull will allow the shim to move. (I cut a 3/4" or so strip of kitchen wax paper, and fold it back and forth until the shim is barely too thick to slide between the free-loated barrel and the fore end.)

My uncle done tole me, in 19 and 50, that this shim dampens the barrel vibrations UNIFORMLY! and makes everything the same from shot to shot. Dunno nuthin' 'bout Vaughn, but I'm glad to see young folks agreeing with us ol' farts.

I've used that high-tech approach on probably 20-30 rifles since 1950, and it always works. I just gotta brag on one: A little Sako Forrester in .243--I've put three shots into a group you can totally hide with a dime. 85-gr Sierra HPBT, with 37.5 gr. of 3031 and most any old large-rifle primer...New, it shot five-inch vertical strings, 1/2" wide. I got rid of Mr. Sako's front piece of wood from his fake Mannlicher stock, floated it, shimmed it, and it's been a sweetheart ever since.

Later, Art
 
Art,

I'm going to try that on my Remington 700 Varminter in .223. I was able to get 1/2" 5 shot groups at 100 yards with factory ammo. I'm curious to see whether it'll shoot any better with the shims.

BTW, Harold Vaughn use to be a fighter jock. But that was back in the days when fighter aircraft were propeller driven and the USAAC and USN/USMC pilots were chasing red meatballs over the Pacific.

thanks,

Gary
 
4V50Gary: Is your rifle already free-floating? I'm always curious about "before" conditions...

Most of the stuff I've worked on had wood touching sorta "any old where" along the stock. And I've seen some which only had wood touching at the fore end tip, but with a hellacious force--I've removed as much as 1/16 to 3/32 of an inch of wood before I could slide any paper through! Imagine how any change in moisture in the wood would move the group-center.

I think a part of some rifles' problems stems from the difference in change in length or shape with the heating from firing a string of shots. This is particularly true of rifles with barrel bands, like my Sako originally had--one at the joint of the two pieces of wood of the stock, and then at the muzzle. The barrel would heat up, and its expansion would change the pressure or stress on it from the wood...Yuck.

As a generality, a vertical string (small horizontal dispersion) is from stock problems. A horizontal string (small vertical dispersion) is often from canting the rifle left and right during the string.

A three-inch or greater "group" (mob?) means "Arrrgghhhhh!" Ammo, shooter, scope, stock, barrel--they're all in it together: Against you!
 
Actually I've had two 788 44 mags. Still have one, You could really put some pep into the 44. There were loads that were only safe in the 788. I got a 222 and a 30-30 also. The 44 would shoot 1.5 inches at 100 yards. better than my ruger 44 auto. Bought my 44 at the rod & gun club in Vicenza italy in 68. Want one of the new ruger bolt 44 mags.

------------------
Vinny


[This message has been edited by olegunftr (edited 01-18-99).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top