Judging from the groups SU35 is shooting (after not doing anything to the barrel at all, despite plenty of suggestions from the Campfire), his rebore turned out very well.
Yeah.....that's what it looked like to me.
I've only taken the 338-06 to the range once, and the 9.3 hasn't been yet, but from my sample size of one, SU35's turned out WAY better than mine. I free floated the 19" barrel of the 338-06 and the action was previously glass bedded. For the first outing, I loaded 9 of the most accurate loads that I have fired in my other 24" barreled 338-06, and shot them into 3 groups. It was pretty horrid. But I have high hopes for the rifle as the bore does look really good. The 9 I alluded to were 225 Hornady's loaded over a medium charge of PP 2000-MR (.75" in the other rifle). They were going about 2440 FPS from the carbine and printed 3-to-5" groups. I followed up with 8 cast fireform loads with the 270 NEI RN over 14 gr Unique, with the bullets a jam fit in the lands. These bullets were going about 1250 FPS and interestingly landed in the same POI as the 225 Hornadys at 2440. I consider this a good sign. Also, the cast were more accurate. I should also add it was an unknown scope - an old Leupold 4X that I had not previously mounted - I could swap that out to if I don't see better results soon but those things are pretty darn rugged and it's odd for them to fail.
The Hornadys had to be seated .060 off the lands due to the throat length versus magazine length. I can seat the 210 Partition right up to the lands as well as the 200 Speer. Next time out I'll be trying one of those to see if getting the bullet closer to the lands helps. It's a real good looking bore and ought to do a lot better than that first trip out, so we'll see (acknowledging all that's been said about how the looks through the bore scope doesn't predict a thing).
Cheers,
Rex
