User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/7/2012 7:01:41 PM EDT
[#1]
I could do a better job with a drill bit held in my hand...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 2:08:25 PM EDT
[#2]
Update2 in OP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 4:21:34 PM EDT
[#3]
read the update
really surprised they did not send you a new barrel. I would be embarrassed to send out a barrel that looked like that if I were them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 5:42:16 PM EDT
[#4]
Next stop ADCO to be crowned correctly?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 5:58:13 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Next stop ADCO to be crowned correctly? THIS If I was you and I had the money to do it... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 6:01:42 PM EDT
[#6]
Complain to the Ruger CEO and tell him you want a free upgrade to a .44 Redhawk
We had a threaded barrel version of the 22/45 come into the shop last month. Brand new from the vendor, customer bought it, then came right back saying the gun misfired more than it fired. I looked over the gun and t appeared as if the bolt couldn't close all the way unless everything just happened to align. Sent it back to Ruger for repair, a week or so later we got a call from Ruger. The upper receiver on our pistol was so bad that Ruger scrapped it and had to put a new upper assembly on ou pistol. They just wanted us to know so when we got the pistol back we would know to check the SN and log it into our books correctly. I think the amount of orders Ruger is trying to push thru is hurting their QC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 6:23:58 PM EDT
[#7]
Let me understand. They tested the OP's pistol and it's shooting roughly dime sized groups at 10 yds. The crown clearly isn't the issue so other than a cosmetic factor it's a non issue as far as accuracy goes. You guys can rightly bitch that it shouldn't leave the factory looking like that but bottom line is that the gun is shooting just fine. Now the OP feels that they didn't do what he wanted ( which was FIX the accuracy) but they proved the crown wasn't the problem with accuracy. And in fact, there IS no problem with accuracy so why the hell should Ruger fix a non-existant problem?
Oops. My mistake. Quarter sized groups. Still don't see a big heartburn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 6:45:12 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Let me understand. They tested the OP's pistol and it's shooting roughly dime sized groups at 10 yds. The crown clearly isn't the issue so other than a cosmetic factor it's a non issue as far as accuracy goes. You guys can rightly bitch that it shouldn't leave the factory looking like that but bottom line is that the gun is shooting just fine. Now the OP feels that they didn't do what he wanted ( which was FIX the accuracy) but they proved the crown wasn't the problem with accuracy. And in fact, there IS no problem with accuracy so why the hell should Ruger fix a non-existant problem? Oops. My mistake. Quarter sized groups. Still don't see a big heartburn. I don't buy new cars with dents in them or garden tools covered in rust at full price. Sometimes things are about more than functionality. It is hard to believe they didn't clean that up just to satisfy the customer. Like I posted earlier, Ruger is having some serious QC problems on their MKIII line when it comes to tool chatter and rust on the stainless guns. They send terrible looking stuff out the door lately. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 6:50:03 PM EDT
[#9]
it appears in the update photo that they did touch up the part of the crown that affects the bullet leaving the barrel, but it still looks like dog balls.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 6:54:17 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
it appears in the update photo that they did touch up the part of the crown that affects the bullet leaving the barrel, but it still looks like dog balls. This. From the photos, it appears that the critical portion of the crown was polished. I agree it looks like crap, but at least it functions properly. OP... did they put that slight radius on the inner edge? It appears different from your old photos. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 6:54:38 PM EDT
[#11]
They did shoot the group off hand.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 8:20:14 PM EDT
[#12]
lets see,ruger gave you adjustable sights for free,showed you your gun shot quarter sized groups and you say meh
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 9:56:34 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
lets see,ruger gave you adjustable sights for free,showed you your gun shot quarter sized groups and you say meh You must have missed the part about them failing to return his magazine. Not a biggie but enough to be a PITA. I'd say meh as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2012 10:27:54 PM EDT
[#14]
Here is my MKll at 10 yards off hand with iron sights(groups are under the gun and NOT above the gun). Ruger normally makes some of the best barrels but yours is not one of them and I would ask for a new one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 8:53:54 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Here is my MKll at 10 yards off hand with iron sights(groups are under the gun and NOT above the gun). Ruger normally makes some of the best barrels but yours is not one of them and I would ask for a new one. http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i24/SkagSig40/100_2159.jpg Damn that's some nice shooting. Wish mine did that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 8:54:59 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Quoted: it appears in the update photo that they did touch up the part of the crown that affects the bullet leaving the barrel, but it still looks like dog balls. This. From the photos, it appears that the critical portion of the crown was polished. I agree it looks like crap, but at least it functions properly. OP... did they put that slight radius on the inner edge? It appears different from your old photos. Now that you mention it, it does look somewhat touched up. If that is indeed the case, I wonder what would have been so hard about removing those marks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:36:11 AM EDT
[#17]
I don't see the problem. There is nothing wrong with that crown. The last point of contact between the bore and the bullet looks good. The rest is cosmetic and frankly doesn't look that bad either. The proof is in the pudding (so to speak) and that test target is more than adequate for what a 22/45 should be expected to do. Plus, you got a free upgrade on the sights
Your Wife must be a Saint 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:40:01 AM EDT
[#18]
are know in the business as Hk customers.. We just love working with them..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:40:37 AM EDT
[#19]
You need to send that to a gunsmith to reface the barrel and recut the crown. That looks like shit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:41:25 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
it appears in the update photo that they did touch up the part of the crown that affects the bullet leaving the barrel, but it still looks like dog balls. This. From the photos, it appears that the critical portion of the crown was polished. I agree it looks like crap, but at least it functions properly. OP... did they put that slight radius on the inner edge? It appears different from your old photos. Now that you mention it, it does look somewhat touched up. If that is indeed the case, I wonder what would have been so hard about removing those marks. To me the second pic looks worst than the first. The rifling appears to be damaged(see uneven shiny marks)? But I know the end result is all that matters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:43:57 AM EDT
[#21]
That crown looks like crap and would be not acceptable on my firearm. Despite the group shot at spit ball range.
Visible cosmetic quality is indicative of the hidden functional quality. So is sloppy customer service, in this case failure to return a magazine. However, in Ruger's defense on that part, I'll bet they instructed you to send no magazines with the pistol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:45:57 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
That crown looks like crap and would be not acceptable on my firearm. Despite the group shot at spit ball range. Visible cosmetic quality is indicative of the hidden functional quality. So is sloppy customer service, in this case failure to return a magazine. However, in Ruger's defense on that part, I'll bet they instructed you to send no magazines with the pistol. this... that crown is horrid... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:48:49 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
it appears in the update photo that they did touch up the part of the crown that affects the bullet leaving the barrel, but it still looks like dog balls. This. From the photos, it appears that the critical portion of the crown was polished. I agree it looks like crap, but at least it functions properly. OP... did they put that slight radius on the inner edge? It appears different from your old photos. Now that you mention it, it does look somewhat touched up. If that is indeed the case, I wonder what would have been so hard about removing those marks. After looking hard at both pictures it does appear they polished out the very inside edge of the crown. If so it should be good to go. What I would do it take several different types os ammo and shoot groups at 7-10 yards from a nice solid bench rest and see if it will shoot tight one hole groups like my MKll does. Some ammo shoots like crap in my MKll and the groups looks like the one you posted and some are supper tight so try several kinds to be sure it is not the gun. Remington Golden bullets actually shoot the best in my gun and CCI also. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:49:22 AM EDT
[#24]
As much as one might say, "if it shoots fine, don't worry about it", the fact is that cosmetic issues effect the value of the gun. If you had accepted the damage and purchased the gun at below the normal price, I'd say shoot the hell out of it, but since you bought it in what you believed the be new condition, I'd bring it up with Ruger again.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 9:53:29 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: That crown looks like crap and would be not acceptable on my firearm. Despite the group shot at spit ball range. Visible cosmetic quality is indicative of the hidden functional quality. So is sloppy customer service, in this case failure to return a magazine. However, in Ruger's defense on that part, I'll bet they instructed you to send no magazines with the pistol. They gave no such instructions. Instead they told me to ship the gun with everything that came with it save for gun rugs, locks, safety keys, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 10:05:43 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
That crown looks like crap and would be not acceptable on my firearm. Despite the group shot at spit ball range. Visible cosmetic quality is indicative of the hidden functional quality. So is sloppy customer service, in this case failure to return a magazine. However, in Ruger's defense on that part, I'll bet they instructed you to send no magazines with the pistol. They gave no such instructions. Instead they told me to ship the gun with everything that came with it save for gun rugs, locks, safety keys, etc. That's unusual unless they need to check the magazines, too. Otherwise customer's stuff gets lost. They're used to be a nice lady at Ruger customer service that made sure customer's got great attention. I think her name is Melanie. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 10:08:14 AM EDT
[#27]
should have read thread first
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 3:02:51 PM EDT
[#28]
That minor amount of tool chatter wouldn't affect accuracy. I love how many "experts" are chiming in claiming that's the source of your accuracy woes. Do you have any idea how shallow those marks are? .0005"-001" at most. I can't imagine how awful it must be for gun manufacturers to have to put up with satisfying customers who are obsessed with such trivial imperfections.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 3:06:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
That minor amount of tool chatter wouldn't affect accuracy. I love how many "experts" are chiming in claiming that's the source of your accuracy woes. Do you have any idea how shallow those marks are? .0005"-001" at most. I can't imagine how awful it must be for gun manufacturers to have to put up with satisfying customers who are obsessed with such trivial imperfections. I'm not sure how many firearms I have, and I surely have no idea how many I've handled in my life, but I have NEVER seen an abortion like that at the muzzle of any firearm. Your standards and mine are very different. "Trivial imperfections?"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 3:10:19 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
That minor amount of tool chatter wouldn't affect accuracy. I love how many "experts" are chiming in claiming that's the source of your accuracy woes. Do you have any idea how shallow those marks are? .0005"-001" at most. I can't imagine how awful it must be for gun manufacturers to have to put up with satisfying customers who are obsessed with such trivial imperfections. Is that representative of your work? If so, please tell us the name of your business to help us make intelligent decisions about where to send machine work. Although I didn't make any claim about the effect of that crappy crown in this case, I am certain that the nonuniform surface would affect the release of the bullet on a precision firearm. With this particular gun, maybe, I'd have to shoot it to see for myself. It might make no difference. I would test at a longer distance, too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 3:58:47 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
That minor amount of tool chatter wouldn't affect accuracy. I love how many "experts" are chiming in claiming that's the source of your accuracy woes. Do you have any idea how shallow those marks are? .0005"-001" at most. I can't imagine how awful it must be for gun manufacturers to have to put up with satisfying customers who are obsessed with such trivial imperfections. Is that representative of your work? If so, please tell us the name of your business to help us make intelligent decisions about where to send machine work. Although I didn't make any claim about the effect of that crappy crown in this case, I am certain that the nonuniform surface would affect the release of the bullet on a precision firearm. With this particular gun, maybe, I'd have to shoot it to see for myself. It might make no difference. I would test at a longer distance, too. I'm a machinist, not a gunsmith. There's a difference between sending something out for custom threading and crowning versus the crown of a production firearm, but I see nothing wrong with that chamfer. No, it isn't pretty. The visible imperfections are so minute that they wouldn't affect accuracy. That chatter wouldn't make a difference if it were on the crown of a 6mmBR bolt gun shooting for .300" groups at 100 yards. It's less deep than the width of a human hair. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 4:31:55 PM EDT
[#32]
Well I tried it out today at 25 yards.
After zeroing I could bounce around an empty ammo box with pretty good regularity. So it's practically accurate. I suppose if I want tackdriving accurate I'll get it properly crowned in the future. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 4:58:33 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Well I tried it out today at 25 yards. After zeroing I could bounce around an empty ammo box with pretty good regularity. So it's practically accurate. I suppose if I want tackdriving accurate I'll get it properly crowned in the future. Or, get an unfired 9mm FMJ bullet, chuck it up in your hand drill, apply some lapping compound, and do it yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 5:21:02 PM EDT
[#34]
The functional part of the crown is the intersection of the crown (what looks like a 45 degree chamfer on your barrel), and the bore. As long as that intersection is "clean" and consistent, all the way around, it'll be accurate regardless of the ugly cosmetics.
When I make AR15 barrels, I use a JGS 11 degree crowning reamer, with a floating pilot. It does a nice job, but from time to time, I'll get a "line-y" finish, with a circular lay pattern. Even though I know this has absolutely nothing to do with the accuracy of the barrel, I would often polish away those lines, because they indicate to the customer that I don't pay attention to things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 5:39:42 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: Quoted: Well I tried it out today at 25 yards. After zeroing I could bounce around an empty ammo box with pretty good regularity. So it's practically accurate. I suppose if I want tackdriving accurate I'll get it properly crowned in the future. Or, get an unfired 9mm FMJ bullet, chuck it up in your hand drill, apply some lapping compound, and do it yourself. Interesting...do you think that would work better than the brass screw? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 6:03:25 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
That minor amount of tool chatter wouldn't affect accuracy. I love how many "experts" are chiming in claiming that's the source of your accuracy woes. Do you have any idea how shallow those marks are? .0005"-001" at most. I can't imagine how awful it must be for gun manufacturers to have to put up with satisfying customers who are obsessed with such trivial imperfections. dude, I would NEVER let something that shitty leave my shop. And yes, a thousandth of an inch imperfection can have a drastic effect on accuracy. First of all, that crown is WAY over sized. Secondly, it was done at way too high of a speed. Last, it's a matter of professional pride. This is how a crown is supposed to look. Just kiss the the edge gently is all that is needed. You don't need to look like you're raping the muzzle with a cactus.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 6:12:42 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well I tried it out today at 25 yards. After zeroing I could bounce around an empty ammo box with pretty good regularity. So it's practically accurate. I suppose if I want tackdriving accurate I'll get it properly crowned in the future. Or, get an unfired 9mm FMJ bullet, chuck it up in your hand drill, apply some lapping compound, and do it yourself. Interesting...do you think that would work better than the brass screw? If your lapping tool is rounded, like a 9mm bullet, it will probably only polish the intersection point of the bore and the crown (a circular line contact), not the chattery angled surface. You'll be lapping a very long time to clean that up, and it's possible you can screw things up. To do this right, you'd need a piloted crowning reamer. In your case, one with a 45 degree cutting angle to match what it already has. If it shoots fine, I'd probably just grit my teeth and live with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 6:33:35 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Let me understand. They tested the OP's pistol and it's shooting roughly dime sized groups at 10 yds. The crown clearly isn't the issue so other than a cosmetic factor it's a non issue as far as accuracy goes. You guys can rightly bitch that it shouldn't leave the factory looking like that but bottom line is that the gun is shooting just fine. Now the OP feels that they didn't do what he wanted ( which was FIX the accuracy) but they proved the crown wasn't the problem with accuracy. And in fact, there IS no problem with accuracy so why the hell should Ruger fix a non-existant problem? Oops. My mistake. Quarter sized groups. Still don't see a big heartburn. My mkII and mkIII shoot 3/8" groups at 30 yds off a rest. I would be pissed if it wouldn't drive tacks at 10 yds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 6:40:15 PM EDT
[#39]
Accuracy is not that good, you did not even hit the quarter once.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 7:11:52 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Let me understand. They tested the OP's pistol and it's shooting roughly dime sized groups at 10 yds. The crown clearly isn't the issue so other than a cosmetic factor it's a non issue as far as accuracy goes. You guys can rightly bitch that it shouldn't leave the factory looking like that but bottom line is that the gun is shooting just fine. Now the OP feels that they didn't do what he wanted ( which was FIX the accuracy) but they proved the crown wasn't the problem with accuracy. And in fact, there IS no problem with accuracy so why the hell should Ruger fix a non-existant problem? Oops. My mistake. Quarter sized groups. Still don't see a big heartburn. There could be a problem though-the test firing was done with one particular variety of ammo and the accuracy may not be so hot with other varieties. Barrel crowns are generally designed to work for all ammo. This one may work for all ammo, but so far all we know is that it works for one specific load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 7:26:07 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well I tried it out today at 25 yards. After zeroing I could bounce around an empty ammo box with pretty good regularity. So it's practically accurate. I suppose if I want tackdriving accurate I'll get it properly crowned in the future. Or, get an unfired 9mm FMJ bullet, chuck it up in your hand drill, apply some lapping compound, and do it yourself. Interesting...do you think that would work better than the brass screw? If your lapping tool is rounded, like a 9mm bullet, it will probably only polish the intersection point of the bore and the crown (a circular line contact), not the chattery angled surface. You'll be lapping a very long time to clean that up, and it's possible you can screw things up. To do this right, you'd need a piloted crowning reamer. In your case, one with a 45 degree cutting angle to match what it already has. If it shoots fine, I'd probably just grit my teeth and live with it. Very true. OP, if you want to erase those chatter marks, your best bet is taking your pistola to a qualified smith, or sending it to somebody (qualified) who specializes in barrel work. There are numerous outfits that advertise here who can clean up that mess for a very nominal sum, since Ruger apparantly said WDGAF how it looks. On the other hand, if you want to try the drill lapping method, with either a bullet or, as you suggested, a brass screw, just enough to break the intersection of the existing crown and the bore, as hoss622 suggests, why not give it a shot? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2012 7:28:18 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let me understand. They tested the OP's pistol and it's shooting roughly dime sized groups at 10 yds. The crown clearly isn't the issue so other than a cosmetic factor it's a non issue as far as accuracy goes. You guys can rightly bitch that it shouldn't leave the factory looking like that but bottom line is that the gun is shooting just fine. Now the OP feels that they didn't do what he wanted ( which was FIX the accuracy) but they proved the crown wasn't the problem with accuracy. And in fact, there IS no problem with accuracy so why the hell should Ruger fix a non-existant problem? Oops. My mistake. Quarter sized groups. Still don't see a big heartburn. There could be a problem though-the test firing was done with one particular variety of ammo and the accuracy may not be so hot with other varieties. Barrel crowns are generally designed to work for all ammo. This one may work for all ammo, but so far all we know is that it works for one specific load. I could be wrong but barrel crowns have nothing to do with specific types of ammo. It's the chamber throat where ammo 'preferance' will show. The job of the crown is just to release gas evenly at the same time, the shape of the bullet will have no coorelation to that job. The bottom line is Ruger put out a shit crown job then lacked the customer service to correct it. It would take a shop like thiers maybe 15 minutes to make the crown look perfect. instead they lapped the very inner edge, which yes will ven the gasses evenly, but does a piss poor job when it comes to satisfying a customer. It's not like he asked them to refinish the entire gun, just make the crown presentable. If I was a manager there I would make someone re-crown it on a lathe and make it 200% perfect. You aren't known for the 50 good guns you put out, but the one bad one that some guy will show his buddies and you lose sales over. No gun ever, except maybe a hi-point, should leave a factory with chatter marks on the crown. Period. And even my hi-point carbine has a perfect looking crown. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 3:16:29 AM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let me understand. They tested the OP's pistol and it's shooting roughly dime sized groups at 10 yds. The crown clearly isn't the issue so other than a cosmetic factor it's a non issue as far as accuracy goes. You guys can rightly bitch that it shouldn't leave the factory looking like that but bottom line is that the gun is shooting just fine. Now the OP feels that they didn't do what he wanted ( which was FIX the accuracy) but they proved the crown wasn't the problem with accuracy. And in fact, there IS no problem with accuracy so why the hell should Ruger fix a non-existant problem? Oops. My mistake. Quarter sized groups. Still don't see a big heartburn. There could be a problem though-the test firing was done with one particular variety of ammo and the accuracy may not be so hot with other varieties. Barrel crowns are generally designed to work for all ammo. This one may work for all ammo, but so far all we know is that it works for one specific load.
I don't know where to start...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 3:37:25 AM EDT
[#44]
As far as a current production gun goes, such a thing does not surprise me.
What does surprise me is them sending it back with the same chatter marks, regardless of what they did at the point of intersection, and regardless of how the gun actually performs. If that had been given to me to 'fix' at the repair bench, my boss would have had a foot up my ass for not polishing that shit off before giving it back to the customer. Functional or no, it looks like shit, so much so that the customer complained. So you fix it, and everyone is happy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 4:17:59 AM EDT
[#45]
Personally I don't see how chatter on a chamfer can make a gun less accurate. Perhaps I don't get it... I though the crown was where the bore meets the bottom of the chamfer.. And as long as the chamfer is square with the both then it's a proper crown..
If the chamfer was a seal surface then this finish would be out of spec. But it's just a chamfer. Regardless If it works or not, still is poor craftsmanship. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 6:19:41 AM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Personally I don't see how chatter on a chamfer can make a gun less accurate. Perhaps I don't get it... I though the crown was where the bore meets the bottom of the chamfer.. And as long as the chamfer is square with the both then it's a proper crown.. If the chamfer was a seal surface then this finish would be out of spec. But it's just a chamfer. Regardless If it works or not, still is poor craftsmanship. It doesn't necessarily have to be a part of the crown that touches the bullet. There is gas escaping around the bullet as it passes through the muzzle. If the path that the gas takes is not uniform it will disturb the flight of the round. The difference with a pistol at 50 feet doesn't make that much bigger of a group, but it can make the difference between a 10x and an 8, or a not so great shot becoming a complete miss. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 7:38:52 AM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Personally I don't see how chatter on a chamfer can make a gun less accurate. Perhaps I don't get it... I though the crown was where the bore meets the bottom of the chamfer.. And as long as the chamfer is square with the both then it's a proper crown.. If the chamfer was a seal surface then this finish would be out of spec. But it's just a chamfer. Regardless If it works or not, still is poor craftsmanship. It doesn't necessarily have to be a part of the crown that touches the bullet. There is gas escaping around the bullet as it passes through the muzzle. If the path that the gas takes is not uniform it will disturb the flight of the round. The difference with a pistol at 50 feet doesn't make that much bigger of a group, but it can make the difference between a 10x and an 8, or a not so great shot becoming a complete miss. I can see the logic in that. Good point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 8:58:52 AM EDT
[#48]
I would pay Ruger for the sights they gave me if it meant them fixing my crown up. Like I said I had been willing to pay for them.
What's funny is that putting on new sights probably took a lot more effort than it would to properly crown the gun; go figure. Now I'm looking for a machinist or gunsmith in the Austin area that isn't backlogged like hell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2012 9:01:24 AM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: Quoted: That minor amount of tool chatter wouldn't affect accuracy. I love how many "experts" are chiming in claiming that's the source of your accuracy woes. Do you have any idea how shallow those marks are? .0005"-001" at most. I can't imagine how awful it must be for gun manufacturers to have to put up with satisfying customers who are obsessed with such trivial imperfections. I'm not sure how many firearms I have, and I surely have no idea how many I've handled in my life, but I have NEVER seen an abortion like that at the muzzle of any firearm. Your standards and mine are very different. "Trivial imperfections?" this right here |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
