Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

David Tubb's Final Finish Review

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by atek3, Mar 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. atek3

    atek3 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    3,024
    Location:
    SW CT
    Last year I put together a nice "tacticool" AR-15 as I mentioned in this thread.

    Without a scope I never bothered to really bench it for accuracy.

    Well my friend lent me a leupold LR/T on a Larue Mount so I could test it out.

    [​IMG]

    The results were not impressive... Wolf printed about 4", my old 69 gr match loads printed around 2". After purchasing some Federal Gold Medal Match 69gr and Black Hills 75gr I had some good ammo to test it. The FGMM didn't print well at all, so I tried the Black Hills.
    Here were the groups (at 100 yards):
    #1 2.93"
    #2 1.526"
    #3 1.49"
    average 1.982"

    (All groups were 5 shots, fired with front bench and rear bags).

    I purchased the Tubb Final Finish loaded ammo from Midway for about $30 dollars.

    After throughly cleaning the bore with tetra copper solvent, gun blaster, and rem oil, I hit the range.

    The system consists of two batches of 10 cartridges. The directions recommend firing 5 cartridges of the #1 batch, cleaning, firing 5 of the #1 batch, cleaning, firing 5 cartridges of the #2 batch, firing 5 of the #2 batch, cleaning, done.

    After firing the first batch I cleaned using a delrin bore-guide, and a dewey rod. First I did several passes with a bronze brush moistened with copper solvent, then I blasted the residue out with gun blaster. Following that I cleaned with patches soaked with rem oil until the patches came out clean, then I sent a dry patch, and fired the next batch of cartridges.

    This shoot, clean cycle took me about 90 minutes.

    After that was complete, I mounted the L/RT and fired a few shots at 50 yards to verify the zero on the scope and foul the barrel.

    After that, I fired 5 groups of 5 rounds each at 100 yards.
    These were the group sizes
    #1 0.757"
    #2 1.295"
    #3 1.702"
    #4 1.85"
    #5 1.822"
    Average 1.485"

    Here are the groups:
    [​IMG]

    Although the average group size fell from 1.98" to 1.49" inches, more importantly the best group and worst group got significantly better. The best group size shrank in half to under 1 MOA (which was my goal for the experiment). The worst group shrank from 3" to 1.85", a marked improvement.

    Although the reduction in average group size would not be statistically significant using a rigorous confidence level, I am still satisfied with the results of Tubb's Final Finish Loaded Ammo.

    Use these results as a data point, or anecdote, but at least in one rifle, the groups got tighter.

    atek3
     
  2. Car Knocker

    Car Knocker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    3,809
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Cancel that - I can't read!
     
  3. skinewmexico

    skinewmexico Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,621
    Location:
    West Texas
    I wonder how much it moved the throat............
     
  4. pbrktrt

    pbrktrt Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    Messages:
    329
    i had similar results in my vanguard 270 win. went from slightly over moa to sub moa. i think it helps a new barrel. ymmv
     
  5. LoadedDrum

    LoadedDrum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    612
    Could this product be used instead of a more traditional clean the barrel after every shot break in process?
     
  6. GaryGGR

    GaryGGR Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Central New York
    “I wonder how much it moved the throat.........…” It Didn’t.

    “Could this product be used instead of a more traditional clean the barrel after every shot break in process? “ Yes

    Go Here for more Info

    http://www.davidtubb.com/finalfinish.html#downloads
     
  7. Richard.Howe

    Richard.Howe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    887
    Did you measure the throat using an SP OAL gauge or borescope? Or did you pour a chamber mould?

    Rich
     
  8. skinewmexico

    skinewmexico Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,621
    Location:
    West Texas
    A guy tested it on Savageshooters, it moved his throat .018 to .030, depending on the bullet. Maybe it was more of a change in the lead-in angle. Probably not a big deal with an AR.
     
  9. Seafarer12

    Seafarer12 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Did you get all the grit out of your gas system. Thats the only thing that would stop me from using it in a semi-auto. I am glad it worked for you. It should clean up quicker too.
     
  10. Khornet

    Khornet Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,861
    Location:
    NH
    Not to inject a sour note here

    but could it be that the bore really needed a good cleaning, and that's what you accomplished?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page