A gunsmith buddy got a new bore scope camera thingy, so I took a Savage 110 in 30-06 over with some other rifles to have a look. The Savage has about 200 rds. thru it and shoots around 1 1/2" at 100 yds. I cleaned the bore good and with a bore light it looked smooth and bright. The scope told a different story. Major machine marks and pulled metal on the lands and machining "lines in the grooves. It looked bad under magnification, really rough. I guess fire lapping would smooth it out, but I'm good with what I got for what I use it for, it's not a benchrest rifle. So the moral, just shoot your guns don't look at them with a bore scope, it may just drive you nuts.
Bore scope reality
- Thread starter kyron4
- Start date
- Status
Coltdriver
Member
Fire lapping only accelerates the wear on the barrel.
Shooting it wears it out slowly.
Savage makes great utility rifles. I suspect you would be amazed at the view inside other makers barrels as they may be much more similar to yours than you would imagine!
Shooting it wears it out slowly.
Savage makes great utility rifles. I suspect you would be amazed at the view inside other makers barrels as they may be much more similar to yours than you would imagine!
michaelbsc
Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 374
So were you satisfied with 1.5" prior to seeing the bore, and now your upset?
Or were you looking for a reason for the poor performance?
Or were you looking for a reason for the poor performance?
MachIVshooter
Member
This. Under high magnification, a scalpel blade looks like a mountain range.
No, I'm not upset. I'm good with a 1.5 MOA rifle. It's an lower end rifle with a $100 scope. I just always thought the bores on modern newly made rifles would be smooth and free of machine/tool marks. I'm not going to do anything but shoot it like I have been. Just wanted to share what I thought was interesting.
michaelbsc
Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2012
- Messages
- 374
Like MachIVShooter said, at high magnification anything looks rough.
I'll be interested if you could get the pictures and post them, however. Surely the device has a capture mode.
And I suspect if you could get measurements on the RMS value of the machining marks it's probably lower than you would guess looking at it without a reference measurement.
Having spent some time working in metrology years ago I was kind of astonished at how bad humans are, me included, at judging things like that just by looking at them. You need an instrument to gauge.
Our brains have who knows how many eons of prewired preponderance to judge "Wow! Bad! Danger!" as a survival instinct. We don't come prewired to make objective empirical measurements by eye.
So for a lower end rifle, good enough was probably good enough.
Post some pictures if you can get them. I'm interested in what they look like.
MB
Coltdriver
Member
If you do go back and he happens to have a high quality barrel, match grade etc, ask if he will show you that too.
There is a lot of difference between bores on a Savage and those on a Match grade barrel. A lot of that difference means the Savage fouls quicker among other things. But there are plenty of fairly rough bores that shoot just great and Savage has a reputation for creating inexpensive rifles that do in fact shoot great.
If you are cranking barrels out cheap in large quantity you use an entirely different rifling process than a one at a time match barrel maker. And of course a good match barrel can go at $500 before you have it mounted by your smith.
For the real world difference you get between a Savage barrel and a match barrel it has to be your intended use that makes your decision. Lots of game has been take by Savage rifles and if an inch one way or the other makes or breaks your shot you probably should not take it anyway!
There is a lot of difference between bores on a Savage and those on a Match grade barrel. A lot of that difference means the Savage fouls quicker among other things. But there are plenty of fairly rough bores that shoot just great and Savage has a reputation for creating inexpensive rifles that do in fact shoot great.
If you are cranking barrels out cheap in large quantity you use an entirely different rifling process than a one at a time match barrel maker. And of course a good match barrel can go at $500 before you have it mounted by your smith.
For the real world difference you get between a Savage barrel and a match barrel it has to be your intended use that makes your decision. Lots of game has been take by Savage rifles and if an inch one way or the other makes or breaks your shot you probably should not take it anyway!
stubbicatt
Member
I think OP was simply sharing an observation that surprised him. Don't think it was intended as an indictment of Savage, just a "wow, you wouldn't believe what I saw!" sort of thing.
IME, a Savage 22-250 which fouled incredibly badly, outshot a Remington 40x in that same caliber once while I watched. Savage makes a really good rifle, and at a very low price point.
IME, a Savage 22-250 which fouled incredibly badly, outshot a Remington 40x in that same caliber once while I watched. Savage makes a really good rifle, and at a very low price point.
beatledog7
Member
Seeing one's barrel at that level of detail, especially the barrel of a rifle whose accuracy is satisfactory, is probably a bad idea.
Personally, if I have a hunting rifle that I like a lot and that shoots to deer lung of angle at 200 yrds, I don't care what the bore looks like under a scope. I don't need to care.
Personally, if I have a hunting rifle that I like a lot and that shoots to deer lung of angle at 200 yrds, I don't care what the bore looks like under a scope. I don't need to care.
Zeke Markham
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2008
- Messages
- 82
One thing I've learned about using borescopes is not to, unless you really want to find something you didn't want to see.
- Status
