Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Remington "Chatter marks" in bore?????????

Looks like my Mountain Rifle, still shoots good though.

Looks like its from a reamer.

If it shoots good ignore the marks.You could always lead lap or fire lap the bore to help the appearance and maybe function

I sent a .270Ti back to Remmy for a chamber that basically left a fired case looking like it had two shoulders, wierdest thing I have ever seen, they sent me back a different rifle, real pronto, I have had no problems with it since.

Now that right there is a good example of chatter marks on the internet.

saw several savage barrels like that but last coupled i bought have been very smooth

Small edit.

I had a Remington 700 varmint special in 6 mm that had chatter marks and this rifle was my first one that would shoot 3 shot .250 groups after a lot of fiddling around with loads. The catch was you had to clean it every 15 or 20 rounds with sweets 7.62 solvent or it would copper foul quite badly. Won a lot of turkey shoots with that rifle and shot a truck load of coyotes. That barrel is long shot out and gone now and I have to admit I do not miss the excessive cleaning it took.

They might shoot, but try owning a 17 Rem. with a bore like that. 5 shots and you're done.

The marks in the Remington barrels are not really "chatter" per se but are an artifact of the hammerforging process. The indication is that the machine is set up incorrectly. Stainless does not hammerforge particularily well and Remington stainless barrels have often shown the same flaw. These ripples in the bore may or may not preclude decent hunting accuracy. Up until the move to SC, I had never seen this flaw in a Winchester hammered barrel but have seen such recently in a couple of barrels.
The other barrel looks more like a very poorly reamed and buttoned barrel.
I have seen some Remington "rippled" barrels which were quite accurate but, as has been mentioned, fouling was often a problem. GD

Who says Remington barrels are hammer forged? I thought they were button rifled, like the 1903-A3. Didn't Remington invent button rifling as a manufacturing expedient for the 1903-A3? I never saw anything authoritative in print to back-up the notion that Remington uses hammer forging. Someone please clue me in on such authoritative documentation. Thanks.

Production rifles use hammer forged barrels. 40X Custom Shop barrels are button rifled. I believe it says so on their CS website too.

Found it! You are correct. Standard rifles use hammer forged barrels and 40X rifles are button rifled (and hand lapped and air gauged). Thanks for the tip.

Hi,

Has anyone seen chatter marks like this in the new generation Winchesters?



I had a look in the other rifles I have on hand and could see some chatter marks in most of their bores too, but nothing as bad as the Winchester's. Ruger Hawkeye - very clear chatter marks. Green Mountain 10/22 barrel - visible chatter marks. Ruger Hawkeye #2 - no significant marks.

I know it will cause fouling, but I'm not too concerned about that. I'm just trying to find out if this is the norm and what type of accuracy you were able to get with the rifle if you have the same problem. I'm planning to go and look at a few new ones to compare with as well.

Also, I found the article referred to in one of the posts. The link is: Notes on Hammer Forged Barrels - James Higley & Vern Briggs

riaan87,

First of all, welcome to the 'fire.

The marks shown in your picture are evident on both lands and grooves. That tells me they were probably there before the rifling operation. Also, if you look closely, they are evenly spaced radial lines with a pitch, like a thread. That sounds to me like they were made during the drilling or reaming operations as the tool was fed into the bore.

I would have a really hard time taking home a rifle with a bore that looks like this. Everybody wants accurate rifles, including me, and choosing one with obvious defects in the bore just goes against my grain. It may shoot just fine, and I hope yours does, but I cannot bring myself to buy rifles with obvious defects.

A general note on this thread: I've found Dyna Bore Coat to be very effective in barrels with visible marks, whether from reaming or hammer-forging.

I'm not all that fond of such barrels myself, but do end up doing test write-ups of rifles with very visible reamer marks and consequent copper-fouling problems. Anymore I just install DBC, which allows me to get through the testing without having to clean the bore several times.

I've had several remington barrels with marks like that and most of them have shot well, some have fouled worse than others. I always assumed it was from reaming the bore before rifling. Many top barrel makers will lap a bore after reaming and then cut or button the rifling.

Bb

I'd like to know the real per unit cost of improving the manufacturing and/or QC process so that kind of barrel wouldn't make it out of the factory.

Several of my model Rem 700 rifles that I shoot a lot are quite accurate and copper foul very little. These include VTR, XCR CT, XCR LRT and 5R MilSpec models. This indicates the standard manufacturing process, when done right, can make a good barrel. So how about a tune up?

Those pics look like a Savage barrel!

That being said, most people shoot half a box of shells a year, so it is not like those marks are going to foul very quickly.

I would bet the only cost involved is for the people manufacturing the rifles to give a chit, just a little.