Jump to content

meles meles

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About meles meles

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

241 profile views
  1. Rifle bounce

    We've always considered bipeds to be over rated...
  2. Agreed: we should consider 'fitness for purpose' rather than 'best'. Some of the best blade steels are actually stainless, for example 12C27 can take an awesome edge and gives the benefits of corrosion resistance, long life and a fair degree of toughness but it can be difficult to get it sharp in the first place and it's not the easiest steel to work with. As a good all round steel, the carbon tool steel O1 takes some beating for cutting edges, but needs some care to prevent it rusting. End use and operator skill are what really matters...
  3. Scope for 7.62x39

    That looks ideal ! Now, where in the UK sells' em ?
  4. Ah, still quicker than ordering a 'London Best' shotgun then....
  5. Scope for 7.62x39

    We're torn between a nice fixed magnification scope like a Meopta, of which we already have several 6x42 and 7x50 on other rifles, and a low magnification zoom , say 1-4 or 1-6, with a specific 7.62x39 reticule. Leatherwood and Primary Arms both make scopes in the latter category but they don't seem to be available here in England...
  6. Scope for 7.62x39

    We like Meopta and have several 7x50 scopes by them, but think they may be a little big for such a small rifle as the CZ527. We were wondering about something like a Nikon Monarch 1-6 or similar
  7. Scope for 7.62x39

    Can anyone recommend a scope for use on a CZ 527 chambered in 7.62x39 ? It will be used at short to medium range, generally with military surplu sammo but occasionally with hand loads for greater accuraccy. Ideally we'd like it to have a 1 " tube, magnification can be fixed or relatively small (say no greater than x10), FFP would be nice but not essential. A reticule with hashes for holdover would be nice (we're not a fan of mil dot though). Budget is low, up to £250, less is preferable.
  8. It's more a matter of science and engineering allied to a dose of chemistry rather than belief. Mechanical wear isn't due solely to the projectile, which as you grasp is moving slowly and with little energy. Trapped behind the projectile is a supersonic, high pressure flamefront carrying with it a myriad particles of partially burnt propellant that scour away at the metal, attacking the weaker areas - which happen to be the grain boundaries. The CVD and DVD coatings used in precision weaponry are quite unlike those used in engines (google is your friend). However, given that civilian shooters don't yet appreciate chromium treatments I suspect that the technology won't cascade down into the civil shooting arena for decades to come. Look at the lag involved with stainless steels: Harry Brearley developed them in 1913 in the quest for better guns for the RN's dreadnoughts. 104 years later we're still arguing if they are useful or not.
  9. It is possible to enhance the corrosion protection of the bore, though many are against it for a variety of reasons, most of them ill founded. Chromium plating is widely used on military weapons, from pistols to the main armament on things like tanks and some howitzers. Properly done, it provides a useful increase in both wear resistance and resistance to erosion / corrosion during repeated, high intensity firing. The Russians and Chinese favour this approach for most of their guns, in the West it tends to be mainly done on machine guns. Many civilian shooters and smiths decry the practice, claiming it reduces accuracy. It can do, if not correctly performed, but if properly applied chromium plating is a definite benefit. The current state of the art for high end precision rifles (military at the moment, not civil) is a either a chemically or physically deposited (CVD / PVD) diamond like coating or a tantalum plating. Both significantly improve wear, temperature and corrosion resistance.
  10. As a small aside, we really feel we ought to defend Big Al. We exchanged a few pms, very pleasantly. The public post Big Al referred to was made before we read his pm and so was a little out of synch. If there was a fault it was on our part, not his. We certainly don't feel 'sniped' at ! His messages to us were friendly and informative. If we meet him in person we'd be happy to shake paws and scoff mince pies! He's done no wrong in our eyes.
  11. .458 SOCOM: your thoughts?

    Heavy lumps dropping out of the sky can be good. Unless you is a dinosaur...
  12. Indeed so. For most people a chrome moly barrel is quite good enough, and stainless barrels, irrespective of which particular flavour, aren't inherently more accurate. They are just a little more forgiving of poor care, hot loads and high rates of fire. In ascending order, we'd recommend: Chrome Moly Austenitic stainless steel (316L or even 317) Martensitic stainless steel (416) 600 series precipitation hardened (630, PH17-4, LW50) Harken to what Baldie says though: how you use and care for it will have a greater effect on barrel life for most shooters.
  13. Beggin' pardon, Big Al, but are you sure you didn't mean 'martensitic' stainless? Gun grade 400 series steels are martensitic, not ferritic, and would be pretty good barrel steels. Preferable to most 300 series austenitics in fact...
  14. Beggin' pardon oomans, but if a pawful of degrees in metallurgy and umpteen years in failure analysis count for owt, can we venture an opinion ? (It's worth exactly what you paid for it) Go "stainless". Ideally, a PH steel barrel. Lothar Walther make 'em, as do several other companies that really know what they are doing. Your standard barrel steels, chrome molybdenum et al, are good, very good in most cases and, when properly prepared by a decent smith, of the sort that frequent these fora, they will do an excellent job. However, if you pay a little more and go for a stainless barrel you will get better performance if you need it. Don't bother with a ferritic stainless steel, they are inferior to a decent chrome moly barrel. An austenitic stainless steel, say a 316, has a higher chromium content and is more resistant to high temperature erosion corrosion, quite useful when you are shoving a lump of metal followed by a supersonic gas down it. As you increase the alloy content, increasing the nickel and chromium content, that performance is enhanced. If you fire lots of rounds, hot loads, and in quick succession, you'll benefit. At the top end, go for a precipitation hardened stainless (Lothar Walther uses Bohler PH17/4). Most wear and tear on barrels comes from the supersonic gases, at around 2000 degrees C, scouring away at the grain boundaries of the steel, progressively eating them away. Through a borescope you'll see a 'crazy paving' type pattern appearing around the throat as the first sign. Continued use allows the gases and subsequent combustion products to erode and corrode deeper and deeper 'lifting' scabs of metal out and accelerating the wear process. The high chrome and other alloy content improves resistance to this (but doesn't stop it entirely !). So, if you are top end target shooter, using hot loads and firing strings of shots, a high end barrel makes sense. If you are a stalker, firing one or two shots a month, chrome moly steels are more than adequate. Neither is intrinsically more accurate than the other.
  15. rebarrel expectations

    It does rather sound like builder error. We have two rifles with interchangeable barrels, one a DTA and the other a Schultz and Larsen. Neither is a true custom gun, but on both it is possible to swap barrels and for the new barrel in a different calibre to shoot within about 2 MoA of the previous. With a custom gun built by some of the smiths on here we'd expect that to be bettered quite easily. We don't own any of their guns, but we have seen them used by friends who do and wouldn't besurprised to see a same hole group at 100 mards if the calibres were the same.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy