""Quality" rifles work best floated."
Hmmm, kinda sounds like a bit of an absolute statement to me. Backpeddling now doesn't fix that.
5 round strings, repeated multiple times. A "cold test" regimen, allowing thorough cooling between strings....and a "hot test" regimen, with no cooling time taken. This for each barrel bedding condition. I can't tell you the exact total of test shots, or total for each bedding condition, but I do know that roughly 300 rounds were expended during the entire process. So, probably about 100 for each bedding condition.
Can't say what the avg. group sizes were for the free-floated and full length bedded conditions, as my notes are not around now, but the "pressure pad" avg. group size (now) is a bit larger than 1 moa, occasionally better than that. Doesn't matter really, because the best results came with the "pressure pad" system, simple as that. Of course, as I said before, this is one rifle. Results vary, as I also said before.
Now, I expect to hear a veritable litany of rationalizations regarding this matter - how my testing is garbage (because you don't approve) - or how I "obviously" don't have a "quality" barrel (by your definition). Blah, blah, blah. Again, so what ? I'm not in it for your approval. Sorry, but there it is.
My only point in all of this is that there are NO absolutes. Yes, many (probably all) custom built target rifles are set up with free-floated barrels. So what ? That DOES NOT mean that free-floating is ALWAYS the best system, especially not necessarily for a hunting rifle in a somewhat flexible plastic stock. THAT has been the consistent message proffered here by some (like you). T'ain't so, for the last time.
Making blanket or absolute statements is misleading - especially to beginners - and therefore does a disservice to them. Can you guys at least admit that there are NO absolutes here ? That's all I want.
Last edited by wpsdlrg; February 15, 2013 at 12:41 AM.