Toasted throat?

[Hedge]

Had my Savage .204 bore scoped a while back. It didn't seem to be shooting as tightly as it had been. Throat looked toasted and there is pitting in the barrel. (that pitting is a puzzle. I always lube it before storage)
Anyway, I was a bit down after seeing what it looked like, but can't afford a new barrel, yet. My wife wants to shoot it in an upcoming varmint rifle competition at 200 yds. Figured I'd better check it out, just to see if it would be worth while.

I think it's going to work. She shoots better than me.

Shots are from prone off a bipod.
First target has a cold bore shot and then a four shot group of .8".

The second target is interesting. I tweaked the turrets to bring POI to the center but it looks like it didn't take until the recoil of the first shot settled the reticle. Hope that's just because I haven't worked the knobs much, yet. We'll see.

[Sth Oz Dan]

I've often wondered about that adjustment issue you mentioned. Haven't done any thorough testing to work it out, but first shots are sometimes a little off after adjustments.
I'd be interested to hear from others if they know a little more on this.

Not too bad for 200yds if the throat is knackered.
I guess a target from 1000 shots or so back might help, or any typical group size data you have.

Do you have an OAL guage, and a measurement from way back to compare with now. Maybe just seating out a few thou will help?

S'pose you know all this anyway, but just putting it out there in case

[Hedge]

I've wondered about those mysterious "flyers" myself. It hadn't occurred to me that it might be the scope until a friend pointed out that the first shot on the second target was still in the first group.

I don't have any 200 yd targets to compare. The only records I kept were load development at 100 yds. It was grouping in the .2s and .3s.
The current load has been adjusted. It shoots just under 1/2 MOA at 100 and still under 1/2 MOA at 200. We have an 8" steel plate at 270 yds we've shot at. Myriam put all 5 shots in 1.6" with three rounds on top of each other. So, I'm thinking the throat looks worse than it really is and I need to practice my longer range shooting.

[Sth Oz Dan]

I'm reading a book on gunsmithing. Just got to a part on trigger adjustments where the author says " knowledge can be dangerous". A customer of his had a perfectly good gun he'd taken deer with then found out the trigger pull was around 4.5 lb - it suddenly didn't shoot so good any more and "needed" to be lightened.

If it is just lack of practice on your behalf, then that's a good thing - you got an excuse for more trigger time!

Relax, forget about the throat for now and get some holes on paper. If you're still convinced accuracy is sliding, perhaps you could send it to me to look at for you
With all the paper work involved and import/export fees, it may not be viable to send it back to you though

[Hedge]

A most generous offer, Dan...let me get back to you on that.

Yup, good excuse for more trigger time. Keeping the cross hairs steady at 100 is nothing like doing it at 200 or more. Dang targets keep movin' around.

[Silverfox]

Hedge--If you really want to take a look at the throat on that rifle, bring it up to Williston, ND and I'll let you use my borescope to check it out. However, I think you should just keep shooting that rifle until the accuracy REALLY goes south on you.

When I do adjustments (windage and/or elevation) on my scopes I gently tap the scope with my hand four or five times to try to make sure whatever springs, etc. have been affected will follow whatever adjusments I made. Most times, after tapping the scope after the adjustments, the following shots reflect point of impact that is accurate according to the number of clicks I have made for the change I wanted. Once in awhile, though, it takes a shot or two to get the desired adjustment. Because of that, I don't just take one shot or two shots after making an adjustment, I do another three- to five-shot group after the adjustment.

If you want to take me up on using the borescope, contact me via e-mail at:

[Hedge]

Silverfox -

Thanks for the offer.
I've had it 'scoped and looked through the 'scope myself. I'm coming to the conclusion that it looks worse than it really is. Loaded up some practice rounds, today and will punch some paper tomorrow if the wx is right.

May just get up to Williston one of these days. It's not that far from Baldwin. I'll drop you a line before hand and bring the rifle along. Maybe we can find some critters to hunt or at least swap some lies.

I'll be using your technique when I adjust my scope. Sounds like a good practice.

[Bodei]

I'll take that group at 200 yds.

[Jim White]

If I read right your flier is usually the 1st shot. I can tell you from my experience a bad throat will cause fliers but they will be random..not just the 1st shot. Try a 20-shot group test but do try and keep the barrel temp the same/contant (it will take several minutes) and see how she does. If it is still good I would follow "Silverfox's" advice.

Out of curosity, how many rounds have been fired?

[Hedge]

Jim-

I plan to do that when the wind dies down.

The more I think about it, the more I'm not so sure that CB shot is off at all. I think I adjusted the elevation before I took the shot. I know I did on the second target. Guess I'm going to have to take better notes, next time.

Best I can figure, there are at least 2000 rounds through the barrel. Never kept a tally. I got the barrel pretty hot on a PD town. After that, he accuracy wasn't quite as good.

[futuretrades]

The second target is interesting. I tweaked the turrets to bring POI to the center but it looks like it didn't take until the recoil of the first shot settled the reticle. Hope that's just because I haven't worked the knobs much, yet. We'll see.

Any time I make a scope adjustment, I use either my pocket knife or a screwdriver, that I always have in my shooting bag, to gently tap the adjustment screws, both horizontal and vertical screws. I learned this from a fellow shooter 30 or 35 years ago. However on my newer Leupolds', I don't really think this method is necessary.