@LoonWulf, thanks for reminding some of why I didn't sell the rifle. I would never sell a defective item without full disclosure which normally means taking a big hit in the wallet so I'm pleased that the rifle turned out good in the end. I don't plan on selling this rifle, but if I did I would tell the new owner all about the work I've done and that would crash the sale price, and that's one reason why I most likely won't sell it.
On a side note, it looks like a member here will be buying the factory 1:11.5 twist barrel that has less than 50 rounds through it which will help me recoup some of the cost of the McGowen barrel. He wants to use it for cast lead bullets. I checked the twist rate four times on Saturday and got something around 11.5 to 12 which confirms that it does indeed have a slow twist. I might have confirmed that 10 years ago but if I did I'd forgotten about it and didn't want to sell the member a barrel that was faster than he needed.
The difference in height between the front and rear bridges was about .100" but the fact that the tops of the bridges weren't horizontal was a big part of the problem. As I mentioned in my first post, the bridges sloped down front to back. When I measured the thickness of the receiver in four locations i.e. front bridge front and back, rear bridge front and back it was clear that the tops of the bridges were not parallel to the bottom of the receiver. I hope this makes sense.
On a side note, it looks like a member here will be buying the factory 1:11.5 twist barrel that has less than 50 rounds through it which will help me recoup some of the cost of the McGowen barrel. He wants to use it for cast lead bullets. I checked the twist rate four times on Saturday and got something around 11.5 to 12 which confirms that it does indeed have a slow twist. I might have confirmed that 10 years ago but if I did I'd forgotten about it and didn't want to sell the member a barrel that was faster than he needed.
hps1 said:
The difference in height between the front and rear bridges was about .100" but the fact that the tops of the bridges weren't horizontal was a big part of the problem. As I mentioned in my first post, the bridges sloped down front to back. When I measured the thickness of the receiver in four locations i.e. front bridge front and back, rear bridge front and back it was clear that the tops of the bridges were not parallel to the bottom of the receiver. I hope this makes sense.
. Sounds like the bridges were ground as opposed to lathe finished as someone previously alluded to. 
Congratulations on your perseverance in resolving the problem and not passing it on to some poor unsuspecting buyer.
