Glass Bedding 452

[hornet22]

I've put a new trigger sear and spring in,floated the barrel all the way back to the receiver which was mostly all ready done and it still only shoots about a 1 1/2'' group at a 100 yards.I've decided the next step is glass and would like to do it myself and glass the whole gun,barrel chanel,receiver lug and tang.anyone done this,any tips,and how good it works would really be appreciated.

[stans]

I glass bedded mine with Brownell's Acraglass, but I only bedded the front and rear of the receiver, I left the barrel free floating.  I glass bedded mine because I had problems with groups opening up and stringing vertically.  After bedding, the groups were consistant at about 1 inch at 50 yards.  This rifle is in need of a trigger job and a nice scope, it currently wears a Bushnell 4x32 Sportview for air rifles and 22's.  The optics are fairly clear, but the cross hairs completely obscure the "X" at 50 yards.  I feel that this rifle is capable of so much more, but one inch at 50 yards is within minute of squirrel!

[Fred Flinstone]

Trying to post a link thru Easy-Board is mission impossible, so follow this continuous e-address:
www272.pair.com/
stevewag/
turk/
turkbed3.html

[hornet22]

I was thinking of just bedding the receiver and was told that by bedding the barrel chanel and receiver I would have less viberation because of nothing being able to move that it would be better than free floating? I'll be useing it for hunting,but also paper punching and if I can't get 1'' or less at 100 yrds it's for sale

[Fred Flinstone]

Anschultz rifles are reputed for accuracy, but at 100 yards you're asking too much, even Anschultz rifles have a hard time producing such shooting. Pricing for an Anschultz exceeds CZ's by a far margin as you must know. You'll be more at home with a .22 Win.Mag.

Precision long range shooters 87% of the time free float, some of their rifles intentionaly don't touch by 1''(distance between barrel & barrel channel).

By having the barrel supported by the stock channel you insure precision but after a few fired shots your barrel(steel) will expand and rub against bedded barrel channel(which is almost inert due to your glass-bed) thus changing point of impact, result: not accuracy. The basis in having a glass-bedded action is to give a rigid & almost monobloc fondation to the barrelled action(even if not supported. Big artillery canon are non supported and can shoot extremely precisely(shooting a projectile the weight of a Wolkswagon into a bunker 30some miles away.)

Don't get frustrated by my answer I've been in your shoes earlier on

[caswinson]

I am constantly amazed at people wanting to shoot .22's at a 100 yards and who look for some sort of accuracy.
Certainly you can get it close but MAO at a true MOA distance (meaning 100 yard shots minimum) really isn't the focus of the .22 lr

Sure lots of people try, some people get it, and some people even say they have an MOA gun when they don't.
I've been shooting long enough and have enough training and education to know it's not the norm. The reason guys like Brandon Johnson win with an overall of .874 is because not many 22 LR's can do MOA.

There was a game (well still is) called BRV/BR-50 it's a 50 yard game open to rimfire and air rifles, interestingly the world record holder and a lot of the current winners are people that switched from rimfire to airguns.

I mean it's a neat thing to do if you are into it (build up a $260 gun to be something it isn't) but in the end after all the time and money is invested, you would have been better off with a 2013 or a FWB 2602 Super Match.

This is no knock to your ability to smith a gun, or the gun in questions, but like CLint Eastwood has said, "a mans got to know his limitations" of his gun.

An interesting "factoid" it's actually not the guns that are a problem but the bullet design. That "flat a$$" bullet with no defined point or tail is not the best when dealing with the yaw of repose and other forces related to exteral ballistics. As well the actuall cartridges are of issue as you can not really tailor a load (including bullet) to a gun. You have to go out and buy ammo, test it and then hope in subsequent batches it's exactly the same.
Certainly there are some very good choices for ammo...but they all suffer the same problem...they use a variation of the bullet that IS the problem.


That all being said, if you REALLY want accuracy out of a .22 rimfire, you throw the stock away and build it into a rail gun.

[hornet22]

It is a 22 magnum,even though that's asking a lot, I like trying.I have had 22 mags before that would cut holes at 50 yrds which would have been moa at 100 and sold it  what a mistake.I love the feel of this little 452 american so much i got keep trying.

[Fred Flinstone]

First bed entirely the action(not just fron & rear) and the first 2 inches of the barrel(where it joints the receiver). Check scope mount & reticle holding power. Then check muzzle crown. Check screw or screws holding stock to barrelled action(too tight and you'll get harmonic vibrations & not enough will cause change point of impact. Have a trigger job done to lower lbs of trigger pull.

Have you free-floated the barrel(entirely from the 2 first inches near the receiver) until the tip of the fore-end. The shooting position to shoot with the benchrest is of the outermost importance: rest forward sand bags(or other rest) under the front receiver ring( closer to the fore-end may bind the stock and respectfully force the barrel upward). Try as caswinson said a variety of bullets and see which is best, then try buying in the same  mfgr. lot.

If after all this you're still not there: ''Sell it'' and go the center-fire highway.

[Fred Flinstone]

I was replying to this post when posting then dissapeared, then when posting back I'm now UNREGISTERED?

[hornet22]

Thanks Fred, I'll take your advise and run with it.Right now I'm waiting on my glass from brownells,everyone around here is sold out of it except for jel.

[Ridge-Rider]

Respectfully, Fred, it didn't like your answer and you got demoted. Sorry. Wade

[caswinson]

Yeah it should do pretty good at 100, and decent at 200.

Myself I have been a fan of the .17 as it rides the wind a bit better.

But yeah you can do REAL nice at 100.

[hornet22]

well not completry disagree with you,fred give me facts.Can you tell me why you disagree with him.

[caswinson]

I'd go the route of what fred said. I'd glass bed the action and fully flaot the barrel. Heck you could cut off the forend and save yourself some weight  .

Glass bedding the entire action, barrel included seems to only really work well on inert stocks...and even then it's sort of touch and go.

The one thing I've found about the glass is that it's HEAVY.