Quote:
WayneinMaine said:
This time, last year I took a rifle (1917 Enfield) to a gunsmith, the second time I had taken that rifle to a gunsmith, and different gunsmiths each time. I bought it for $100 and wanted a scope mounted on it. The first gunsmith did an awful job and the rear scope mount screw broke off. I took it to another guy to have the headspace checked, he removed the barrel cost me $100 and 2 months, and said it was excessive. I bought a field gauge (which he said it "swallowed"), screwed the barrel back in hand tight, and it's fine. He said he must have "accidentally fixed it" and I was "ahead of the game". I bought a lathe last summer and various tools and have been doing work I'm happy with and have a nice hobby to boot. It's not for everyone, but it's an option.
|
Quote:
4V50 Gary said:
Screwing in the bbl hand tight will not give a true reading of head spacing. The bbl must be tightened down all the way for an accurate reading.
|
“he removed the barrel cost me $100 and 2 months”, then, “I bought a field gauge (which he said it "swallowed"), screwed the barrel back in hand tight, and it's fine” The go-gage, the no go-gage and the field reject gage was/is not necessary for the smith and or the owner/shooter/ reloader. Then there is that part about “The bbl must be tightened down all the way for an accurate reading”
The M1917 barrel shank has 10 threads per inch (easy to keep up with) 1 turn = .100”. I have no clue why the barrel was removed, but, being separated was a good thing. Transfers, standards and verifying, the field reject gage is a standard, meaning the field reject gage could have been chambered before the barrel was secured by hand, after securing the barrel carefully by hand the length of the chamber could have been measured, I do not have enough ambition to convince anyone it could can be done. The go, no and beyond head space gage puts those working on and checking the length of the chamber into a rut, the length of the chamber can be measured from the bolt face to the shoulder in thousandths from minimum length to infinity. The go-gage length chamber for the 30/06 is .005” longer than minimum length or as it is said by reloaders ‘full length sized’.
Field reject gage: The field reject gage can be used to measure the length of the chamber from minimum length to go-gage length to field reject length in thousandths, that is 14 different length with one gage, meaning the smith that removed the barrel could have determined the length of the chamber from the bolt face to the shoulder of the chamber in thousandths with out removing the barrel. But, after the barrel was removed the length of the chamber could have been measured in thousandths (again) from the bolt face to the shoulder.
Installing the barrel on the 03 and M1917, both barrels have an extractor cut, meaning the barrel must be indexed. Hand tight? When metal bottoms out against a clean/square surface metal the the two mating surfaces will not get much closer unless the person securing the barrel chooses to pass the draw-to-line of pull the threads etc., etc.. There is no shortage of tools around here, there is no shortage of multipliers like 4 foot round and or square tubes used on the end of an action wrench, again, with all that leverage getting the receiver mating surface closer to the barrel seating surface is not as easy as it is described in this thread, after hand tight.
Once in my life: I was looking for parts at one of my favorite places, while waiting a proud owner of one very fine rifle wanted the head space checked, the smith/owner said he could not check the head space on the rifle because he did not have a head space gage for his chamber, the customer left. Then, I got involved, I informed the owner/smith I can check head space (length of the chamber from the bolt face to the shoulder) on any rifle with out a go, no or beyond gage. And, he ask “HOW?”
When the field reject gage would not allow the draw line to align the user knew the head space was less than .014” , on the M1917 it is possible to determine how much less as in thousandths.
F. Guffey