|
Post by savagebarrels on Feb 3, 2011 21:36:34 GMT -5
Question to the masses. Someone asked me today about a "QLA" Quick Load Accurizer. Basically from the crown back 1" the barrel has no rifling. Said that it makes it easier for muzzle loader shooters to load. Is this something we should think about and if so should we offer this? Seems like a simple process of drilling out the rifling to the finished bore dimension on a lathe. Just curious.
|
|
|
Post by savagebarrels on Feb 3, 2011 21:39:56 GMT -5
Thank you kindly sir, we will be in touch. Any word on 8 L/G 1:22 twist? McGowen said that because we requested it and are doing a number of barrels with them that they will order the tooling. They did say that it normally takes about 6 weeks to receive the rifling button. We'll keep everyone abreast of this and as soon as it is available we'll let everyone know.
|
|
|
Post by savagebarrels on Feb 3, 2011 21:44:11 GMT -5
I'd go with the SMI style plug but with a longer vent linner,,,, hate that stubby little critter pposey, Are you any good at drawing? I have a friend that is a machinist that can make just about anything if he has a drawing. If everyone can get together and put your ideas on paper, I will forward it to him and have him design it on Mastercam and then we'll go from there. We'll even call it the DMB plug (Doug's Message Board). Email your drawing to me at support@savage-barrels.com and I'll care of the rest.
|
|
|
Post by pposey on Feb 3, 2011 22:05:02 GMT -5
Now on the drawing I'm not the man for that but there are machinist here that are! Edge, Dave and others know more about the pressure related and machinist issues as well,,, I think that a longer SMI diameter plug with a savage vent liner would be the way to go for a bolt action rifle with barrel threads,, for a single shot like my encore the SMI plug is fine but I wish it had a longer vent liner, I may send mine back for that modification.
The barrel that I'm interested in is either a 300/375 ruger, or a 300WM for a Savage bolt action,, slightly shorter throated than the normal 300WM,,, I have a 300WM that If I can't get better results out of it's getting a new barrel!
|
|
|
Post by pposey on Feb 3, 2011 22:06:04 GMT -5
Personally I do notlike the QLA on a barrel,,, I took just a little bit off of the inside edge of my encore and it now works like the cats meow
|
|
|
Post by Dave W on Feb 3, 2011 22:09:29 GMT -5
I agree with Posey. No need for a QLA as long as the crown has a slight bevel so that sabots do not get damaged when starting into the barrel. Thanks to Savagebarrels for their interest!
|
|
|
Post by alphaburnt on Feb 3, 2011 22:15:05 GMT -5
I personally have never had a QLA type muzzle, but, I have heard a number of complaints on TCs version as they were sometimes not machined concentric to the bore and experienced acccuracy problems.
|
|
|
Post by 12ptdroptine on Feb 3, 2011 22:23:36 GMT -5
Mt T/C Encore has it and I like it... But with the smokeless pressure I wonder how it would effect bullet flight with those gasses blowing out around the sabot at the muzzle? Dont have one on my PacNor... dont seem to need one.... Loads with the sabot ok. Drop
|
|
|
Post by pposey on Feb 3, 2011 22:26:25 GMT -5
My pacnor loaded fine as well,,,
|
|
|
Post by dannoboone on Feb 3, 2011 23:05:59 GMT -5
I have heard a number of complaints on TCs version as they were sometimes not machined concentric to the bore and experienced acccuracy problems. Yes, I had one of those which was not concentric to the bore. Pretty bad when you can easily see it with the naked eye. Had it cut off and recrowned. I've never had a problem without a QLA, since the base of the sabots slides right into the barrel.....it just takes a good, short starter to get a bullet started straight.
|
|
|
Post by ET on Feb 3, 2011 23:06:03 GMT -5
I never liked the long QLA either but went with a short one only .090” deep. Originally when I had my crown machined to 11-degrees and having a tight bore my sabots were being shaved when loading. By adding a small chamfer of 15-degrees from bore line it worked like a charm. The small chamfer now compresses the sabot as it enters the bore and no ill affects on accuracy. I do agree with the others of addressing the sharp entrance to the bore. This was done with an original 10ML-II barrel. Not sure if a .090” depth is really needed but it was chosen by me at the time of going this route. No regrets and will have this done again without hesitation should I get another barrel or muzzle loader. Ed
|
|
|
Post by jims on Feb 4, 2011 6:55:47 GMT -5
I have the QLA in my my first Savage ML. I like it and it shoots well. I understand that Savage had to stop offering it as it supposedly violated TC or some manufacturers patent. I find that hard to understand as it is a type of false muzzle in a way and we have had them for over 100 years. Many think their breech plug is the best one and they may be correct and if you can offer more that is fine but for the most part just having a screw in replacement barrel and breech plug that matches the Sav factory will serve well IMO. Most buying a replacement barrel already have a breech plug or spare. I have 5 or 6 but none of the newest type but will get one soon.
|
|
|
Post by rangeball on Feb 4, 2011 9:35:19 GMT -5
My SMI .50 has a qla, and I love it, no accuracy issues saboted or sabotless.
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Feb 4, 2011 19:15:31 GMT -5
Question to the masses. Someone asked me today about a "QLA" Quick Load Accurizer. Basically from the crown back 1" the barrel has no rifling. Said that it makes it easier for muzzle loader shooters to load. Is this something we should think about and if so should we offer this? Seems like a simple process of drilling out the rifling to the finished bore dimension on a lathe. Just curious. Having used both quite a bit I prefer no QLA and just light chamfer & polish to "squeeze" sabot into barrel.
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Feb 4, 2011 19:21:57 GMT -5
IMO the "standard" should be setup with savage plug.......
Would it help if someone sent a take off .50 barrel & savage breech plug they could use for "matching" and record.
|
|
|
Post by savagebarrels on Feb 4, 2011 21:23:58 GMT -5
Savage-barrels.com wants to serve your needs, not dictate them. So our question is what is your ideal contour for the 45 cal and 50 cal? Do you need a longer straight section over the breech tapering to muzzle, or???
We have done some ML barrels but seems like every plug we get is slightly different. We realize that not everyone is using the same plug, and we can deal with this. This is one reason that we always request your breech plug is to ensure that you get what you need.
Love the chamfered muzzle crown idea, and it is not difficult to get it right. My personal opinion (for what it is) is that if someone is creating the QLA and it is off-center, they did not indicate the bore prior to removing the rifling. If this is something that is done in the factory, most likely they are indicating the outside of the barrel rather than the bore. The outside should always be concentric to the bore, but if there is even a slight difference and they are drilling out the rifling it will stick out like a sore thumb. I believe that the gunsmiths that we work with would do it right the first time. Same thing with the 15 degree chamfered crown.
We're here to help. Fire away, let me know what you need and we'll see if we can get you there. We're learning to, and appreciate everyone's input. The only way that you will get a truly custom barrel is if the company making it, makes it the way that you ask.
Help us design a custom contour(s) and we'll name them the DMB-1, 2, 3 etc etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by alphaburnt on Feb 5, 2011 2:18:55 GMT -5
Rossman has had some good input on contours. On my discussions with him, seemed the ignition point and a couple inches past needs to straight, like 5-6". Using PacNor barrel weight calculator (bore .458) , I found one I think would be a happy medium. Dimensions: A=1.20, B=.950, C=.820, D=4.5, E=9, F=19, G=25, R=35(?not sure about this one). Weight would be 4.13#, seems like it would put enough steel in the right areas and most of the weight in the rear 1/3rd for handling ( my pick would be SS, 11 degree target crown and the 15 degree chamfer on the crown). For comparison sakes, weight would be 3.8# for a contour #6, 4# for a Sendero and 5.6# for a #7. This barrel would have no fluting and be in the weight range of the Light Palma. There are a lot of more qualified, more knowledgeable and more experienced guys here that could answer better than me though. Hopefully Dave D and some of the .45 pioneers here will share their input.
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Feb 5, 2011 11:16:34 GMT -5
IMO the first attempt would be create exact match drop in for savage stocks...........Most that will do the conversion want to minimize stock work......but offered with max weight reduction fluting as an option.
In other words make it easy for us non mechanic technical types.
Then expand the line into custom contours for weight reduction, walking guns, but the first needs to be easy for us dummies to know what how to order.
Most guys won't order until they are satisfied in their mind they have not missed any variables that would keep them from accomplishing their goal.
This is what Dave D made happen for us with the pacnor line..........Quality, easy to order, easy to change, barrels.
The best seller will always be the drop ins,,,,,,IMHO. If I were selling these I would have some on hand for same day shipping in a standard drop in model......then the guys that wanted custom could wait the time necessary for manufacture and shipping.
|
|
|
Post by fishhawk on Feb 5, 2011 11:49:01 GMT -5
Savagebarrels, I assume you know the concerns of several members of the combination of a lighter contour/ loading mistake that is far less probable in a cartridge gun. We seek a contour that hopefully will not burst in the event of a possible double load. We know bulging is difficult to avoid, and I accept bulging as a result of my mistake vs bursting. Alphaburnt, that contour is plenty stout enough to make a barrel safer than a factory 700ML contour, but I and others seek a contour that will stay within the limits of the factory stock. The dimensions you listed may work fine in some aftermarket stocks, but slightly exceed what the factory syn. can handle. In looking at the contour table of McGowan, they list fewer parameters than Pacnor. I have studied offered Pacnor standard contour dimensions and felt that a #6 was stout enough, and would work in the factory stock with channel opening work. Member "nctta" tried to get Pacnor to change an order he had placed to this #6 and was told the C dimension of .750 (diameter near or at muzzle depending on F) was too small for .45 cal. After hearing this and checking my #7 Pacnor .45 and finding that it measures .800 at the muzzle I agree that .750 is too small especially if the F is shorter than the finished length G which could make the muzzle diameter even smaller than .750. I propose a contour to work within the factory stock and be much safer than the factory contour of using Pacnors #6 dimensions of A=1.20, B=.950, D=3, E=6. Then changing to C=.800 as long as F and G are the same. In other words the muzzle diameter is always .800 no matter the barrel length and it is tapered to that from the .950 B dimension. Based on this a 25" barrel would weigh 3.93lbs using Pacnors weight calculator. I hope this is clear enough to all but I'm not sure how else to put it.
|
|
|
Post by dannoboone on Feb 5, 2011 12:03:54 GMT -5
IMO the "standard" should be setup with savage plug....... Would it help if someone sent a take off .50 barrel & savage breech plug they could use for "matching" and record. That might be ok but the very tip of the snout fits into a .50 barrel whereas they have to machine another step into a .45 barrel to accomodate the end of the factory breech plug. Would it not be better to have the end of the factory pb machined off for a .45 conversion?
|
|
|
Post by dannoboone on Feb 5, 2011 12:20:45 GMT -5
Fishhawk, I believe you are right on with your dimensions. The barrel could be only slightly smaller at the crown for safety, but it would amount to only a very few ounces, so the .800" would be perfect for a minimum.
As for opening up the channel if the need arises.....c'mon guys, it doesn't take rocket science. Sand paper around a dowel will open up that barrel channel. It just takes a little patience and time, placing the stock on the barrel a few times to determine how much more is needed. Even a rookie like me the first time, made it look professionally done. It just isn't that hard.....just takes a little time.
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Feb 5, 2011 12:28:55 GMT -5
IMO the "standard" should be setup with savage plug....... Would it help if someone sent a take off .50 barrel & savage breech plug they could use for "matching" and record. That might be ok but the very tip of the snout fits into a .50 barrel whereas they have to machine another step into a .45 barrel to accomodate the end of the factory breech plug. Would it not be better to have the end of the factory pb machined off for a .45 conversion? Was mentioning the .50 barrel only for contour for a drop in. I would prefer using standard savage plug, is time proven, easily replaceable. Just don't see a need to reinvent the wheel.
|
|
|
Post by alphaburnt on Feb 5, 2011 16:18:59 GMT -5
Remington 700/ 700ML compatible contour would be awesome as well.
|
|
|
Post by smokeless77 on Feb 5, 2011 18:18:55 GMT -5
I Agree with Danno, Take off the end of the factory B/P
John
|
|
|
Post by fishhawk on Feb 5, 2011 20:49:41 GMT -5
Maybe Savagebarrels can answer this question for us. Many here fear the results of accidental double loading a barrel built to the factory 700ML contour. This fear is why I posted the above contour. I would love to have a factory contour that fits the factory stock with no channel mods, but not at the loss of safety. I have never shot a double load, but came close once after being interrupted at the range during loading. Other have not been so fortunate, mistakes happen. Savagebarrels please if you have not already, look at my post #54 on this thread, I believe this also has a bearing on safety. Please note this is Dave D's and possibly others design thoughts and not mine, but I believe strongly in its merit.
|
|
|
Post by alphaburnt on Feb 5, 2011 21:03:15 GMT -5
Re Savage bp's being altered by cutting the "nose" off, I think this may hold some merit. Look at this post ( disregard most of the propaganda) and look at the gas cutting present on the face of the factory plug. See: www.hpmuzzleloading.com/Alert.htmlNOTE: This is the only way I know to show the picture and am not trying to get anything to rear its ugly head, lets please keep this on topic and none of the following should be on the post I am showing with the exception of talking breech plug design, please.
|
|
|
Post by alphaburnt on Feb 5, 2011 21:06:15 GMT -5
Looking at another photo in the above posted link, a breech plug resembling H. Ball's original might be in order with an update to use a hex head removal. I like all of those threads on the plug.
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Feb 5, 2011 21:19:14 GMT -5
Re Savage bp's being altered by cutting the "nose" off, I think this may hold some merit. Look at this post ( disregard most of the propaganda) and look at the gas cutting present on the face of the factory plug. See: www.hpmuzzleloading.com/Alert.htmlNOTE: This is the only way I know to show the picture and am not trying to get anything to rear its ugly head, lets please keep this on topic and none of the following should be on the post I am showing with the exception of talking breech plug design, please. I tested this thoroughly back then and gas cutting of this magnitude is just plain BS. The ONLY way I could reproduce this kind of gas cutting was to slightly loosen the plug. The plug I was testing then had almost 5K shots on it. This was during the time we were determining optimum vent hole size so I was shooting the heck out of it every day with different vents. I say again, no need to reinvent the wheel. If I need a another breech plug in 5 years I would prefer to not have to go to the machine shop to make it fit a wild hair I had today. There is a lot to be said for modular in these guns. No need for all those threads, again the savage plug is time proven. Even in the guns that have been blown up the plug DID NOT let go. Makes as much sense to have to rethread the action because the barrel threads are not the same as originally produced by savage. The more drop in it is the better it will be for the sales volume to the manufacturer,,,period. Reading the above post about contours make me think this thread need to go the way of a couple new threads. One for savage barrel and one for Remington barrels. Having been Remington "free" for several years now I forget sometimes in these discussions that they are still in business and that some members are converting them to smokeless ML's too,,,,,,my bad.
|
|
|
Post by alphaburnt on Feb 5, 2011 21:27:04 GMT -5
SS, I am not familiar with shooting smokeless at all, just saw this and thought it may be commonplace. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Savage Shooter on Feb 5, 2011 21:32:31 GMT -5
SS, I am not familiar with shooting smokeless at all, just saw this and thought it may be commonplace. Sorry. No need at all to be sorry, I hope I was not coming off as offensive. Sure did not intend to come off any other way than informative. Thank you for the comment tho.
|
|