Testing chambers for Lapua use............

Lets bump this back up

Nobody's been talking about leade angles much these days but there seems to be more going on below the surface with this as well, in particular with MI barrels.
My guess this is one big item the WLM is keeping close to the vest. Fair amount of thought out there that the two are linked.
 
Lets bump this back up

Hi Jerry, I hope you have been well.

I just noticed this thread was started in 2011 (I can’t believe it’s that old!). Three years of more water under the bridge!

Since you bumped this, I thought I write to update the thread. I will again pre-apologize, I am not sure how much of this information translates to BR but it certainly addresses our common interest in rimfire. I have continued to test (for myself and for others) and continue to learn in the process. I went back and re-read the posts, and it made me smile on many occasions – thanks to everyone who contributed to it. There are some really amazing people here, and I appreciate so much hearing what others have experienced and have to say.

As an update (believe it or not) I am still using the same chamber for Lapua ammunition, even after three more years. I still believe the 1.5 degree leade angle is the best choice for this bullet profile, and I still can’t get over how much engraving depth plays into overall accuracy potential. I have conducted additional testing every year since this thread began, and there is definitely a “sweetspot” regarding engraving depth. I think that as the throat moves back towards the case, the room for the buildup of carbon / wax decreases (especially considering the throat is elongated at shallower angles). With more engraving, initial accuracy was good (sometimes REALLY good), but fliers would develop and accuracy would not last. I am still setting the engraving depth at .030” (if measured with a live round, it should be about .075” from the datum face to the case head).

The only case study I have found where the 1.5 degree is not optimum (for Lapua or other round nosed profiles) is the Shilen Octagon. I am not sure what is going on internally, but the 2 degree is definitely best with all bullet profiles. I have tested a pile of these blanks and have had great success with them – just not with the 1.5 degree leade. They are great barrels, and are some of my favorites.

I am still using the 2 degree profile for Eley ammunition, and I still think this leade angle is the best for the EPS bullet. I admit I have not dedicated the time into this testing (for obvious reasons! LOL), but I have done a lot of testing on builds for others. I like to set chambers up to engrave .090”, and when conducting the same optimization testing, this seems to be best in my opinion. I have had great luck with Octagons with this chamber, at this depth FYI.

As we all get older (and wiser!), there are a few items regarding rimfire that, for now at least, I am willing to count as constants. I know this is not necessarily chamber related, but here goes (hope I am not stating the obvious here!):

- I find the straightness of a blank as I receive it has a lot to do with how successful it might be. I have had some barrels with large run-out shoot really well, but generally, straight barrels shoot better in most cases for what it’s worth. Maybe it is just easier to work with them, and true them initially.

- Barrels of what some would consider “large” internal dimensions for me, seem to be optimal. I really like bore diameters as close to .2220” (but not larger) as I can get, and land dimensions around .2170”. I certainly remember a time when tight barrels were the rage, and some of them did shoot amazingly well. I think the large bore size, and the shallow leade both help to disturb the bullet as little as possible (eliminate as much swaging as possible), which is a very good thing.

- I don't think large amounts (over 2 tenths) of taper are a good thing anymore. My best barrels for the past few years have been blanks with 2 tenths or less. Some of these had tapers of less than one tenth. Octagons are another anomaly here - it seems (to me) that they shoot best with no measurable taper.

It would be great to hear your thoughts, please post if you have time.

I hope all of you are well, I want to wish all of you the very best in 2015!

Thanks again,

kev
 
Kevin, I've got a couple for you please. Have you tested your Lapua camber vs your ELEY chamber in regards to how many rounds you get before you feel either one carbon's up to the point of concern? Put another way, after your usual course of fire either one exhibit substantially more carbon in the throat ?

Hey, belated happy new year.
 
Kevin, I've got a couple for you please. Have you tested your Lapua camber vs your ELEY chamber in regards to how many rounds you get before you feel either one carbon's up to the point of concern? Put another way, after your usual course of fire either one exhibit substantially more carbon in the throat ?

Hey, belated happy new year.

Belated happy New Year to you too Tim!

Part of my criteria is round count (without cleaning), the normal prone course of fire mandates at least 200 rounds, so if I can't get that consistently in testing I move on. I don't like to be tied to cleaning between stages (some people do, but if you can get great accuracy throughout the string, that's an advantage, to me at least).

Looking at the leade length (between a 1.5 degree and a 2), a 2 degree is about 25% shorter, so it makes sense that more engraving is possible without encroaching on the free space at the case mouth (where debris builds up).

I will also admit that my cleaning regime continues to change. There has been a lot of conversation recently about solvent use (and the "glazing" effect some have), and I agree. I think some really do "glaze" (for lack of a better term). For years I only patched and never used a brush - lately, I brush with every cleaning. I don't know if you saw Dan's email on his cleaning process at the Eley range, but I really appreciated him posting it. It is always awesome to hear what others are doing because generally, cleaning is all over the map from person to person.

I decided I would rather brush at every cleaning (and potentially shorten the barrels life, but get the most out of it) rather than just patching and have it go away with build-up or "glazing". I would be interested in your thoughts.

To answer your question though (sorry), both chambers meet my criteria for round count, and I never continued shooting until they fell off (so I don't have good data to offer you). Dimensionally, my 1.5 degree chamber is slightly smaller (at the junction of body and leade), so if I had to wager, it would give up the ghost more quickly.

On a side note - I have not done a significant amount of testing with Eley in the 1.5 degree chamber, setup for Lapua ammunition. From the testing I have done, it is not optimal. The 2 degree shoots both well, but the 1.5 degree (although optimal for the Lapua ammunition IMHO) seems less inclined to be Eley tolerant. I am sure that it could be, possibly at another engraving depth?

I believe Karl used a 1.5 degree almost exclusively in his work, which was the major reason I decided to investigate it in the first place. But during his career, he only had round nosed ammunition to work with. All I know is that I can see why he liked the configuration so much, and if it was good enough for him it is far good enough for me!

All the best,

kev
 
Thanks Kev. Since you breached the cleaning discipline i can tell you that most I know are closer to Dan's regimen.
I can tell you what myself and several in the northeast have done and it has been quite consistant. I use a minor and a major approach, if you will. After a card, oiled patch and then dry patch. After a couple matches, usually brush with solvent, patch, oil, patch done. After a barrel is seasoned, every few matches the throat gets cleaned.
Several barrels have performed well using this process. It rarely takes more than 3-4 shots to get going altough usually there's 10-15 sighters, sight adjustment shots before we begin and i keep a steady pace even if i'm picking on the sighters.
 
Cleaning solvents

Belated happy New Year to you too Tim!

Part of my criteria is round count (without cleaning), the normal prone course of fire mandates at least 200 rounds, so if I can't get that consistently in testing I move on. I don't like to be tied to cleaning between stages (some people do, but if you can get great accuracy throughout the string, that's an advantage, to me at least).

Looking at the leade length (between a 1.5 degree and a 2), a 2 degree is about 25% shorter, so it makes sense that more engraving is possible without encroaching on the free space at the case mouth (where debris builds up).

I will also admit that my cleaning regime continues to change. There has been a lot of conversation recently about solvent use (and the "glazing" effect some have), and I agree. I think some really do "glaze" (for lack of a better term). For years I only patched and never used a brush - lately, I brush with every cleaning. I don't know if you saw Dan's email on his cleaning process at the Eley range, but I really appreciated him posting it. It is always awesome to hear what others are doing because generally, cleaning is all over the map from person to person.

I decided I would rather brush at every cleaning (and potentially shorten the barrels life, but get the most out of it) rather than just patching and have it go away with build-up or "glazing". I would be interested in your thoughts.

To answer your question though (sorry), both chambers meet my criteria for round count, and I never continued shooting until they fell off (so I don't have good data to offer you). Dimensionally, my 1.5 degree chamber is slightly smaller (at the junction of body and leade), so if I had to wager, it would give up the ghost more quickly.

On a side note - I have not done a significant amount of testing with Eley in the 1.5 degree chamber, setup for Lapua ammunition. From the testing I have done, it is not optimal. The 2 degree shoots both well, but the 1.5 degree (although optimal for the Lapua ammunition IMHO) seems less inclined to be Eley tolerant. I am sure that it could be, possibly at another engraving depth?

I believe Karl used a 1.5 degree almost exclusively in his work, which was the major reason I decided to investigate it in the first place. But during his career, he only had round nosed ammunition to work with. All I know is that I can see why he liked the configuration so much, and if it was good enough for him it is far good enough for me!

All the best,

kev

Kevin,
Would you care to post which solvent you are currently using?
Thanks,
Rod
 
Kevin,
Would you care to post which solvent you are currently using?
Thanks,
Rod

Rod:

Right now I am using plain old Hoppe's #9 for everything rimfire.

I don't want to name what I was using (I don't want to do any harm to any manufacturer), but it had some ammonia in it which I liked because I could use one solvent for my Palma rifles and RF stuff too. I am not a chemist, and I am not completely sure if the solvent was the issue, but I had a much shorter than normal life expectancy from the past few really good barrels - so I am just trying to eliminate some variables.

There are drawbacks though - I love Hoppe's, but it does (in most builds) take longer for a barrel to settle down (compared to my old solvent). I do like the fact that it is not so hard on a bronze brush though!

You would think that after 25 years of shooting and building rifles that I would have settled on a cleaning routine! I would really appreciate hearing what you use, and what others here are doing. This subject alone should probably be a thread by itself!

All the best,

kev
 
Rod:

Right now I am using plain old Hoppe's #9 for everything rimfire.

I don't want to name what I was using (I don't want to do any harm to any manufacturer), but it had some ammonia in it which I liked because I could use one solvent for my Palma rifles and RF stuff too. I am not a chemist, and I am not completely sure if the solvent was the issue, but I had a much shorter than normal life expectancy from the past few really good barrels - so I am just trying to eliminate some variables.

There are drawbacks though - I love Hoppe's, but it does (in most builds) take longer for a barrel to settle down (compared to my old solvent). I do like the fact that it is not so hard on a bronze brush though!

You would think that after 25 years of shooting and building rifles that I would have settled on a cleaning routine! I would really appreciate hearing what you use, and what others here are doing. This subject alone should probably be a thread by itself!

All the best,

kev

I have been told by a couple industry folks way back that rimfire fouling that is heavy on the lube componant is handled well with any of the purpose built stuff with a citrus componant. The Rimfire Blend works quite well. I've been tempted to try Wipeout Patchout , because they work so well on carbon, etc. in my PPC barrels but figure, if it ain't broke.
 
Hi,

I’ve been hanging ”off-line” for a while and this is my first post in here. This topic is so informatic, because there are real numbers, so you don’t need to read “between the lines”. Sorry my English, it’s not my native language.

For me, there are some information I ‘m not sure what they mean, or how those are measured. If anybody or Kevin himself could give me a good explanation with some measurements what I’ve been trying to figure out.
Also, I do want to carry my part of examination into this nice writing.

Reason why I’m trying to figure out some things is bringing into focus how small I can squeeze freebore without losing accuracy (If the best accuracy lies with smallest freebore). I’m looking the best accuracy for benchrest game (for about 50 shots).

Kevin wrote on his posts #1 and #82, that .030” engraving set actual length is .075” when measured over live ammo. From where .030” should be measured, or where should I set that dimension?

There are setup dimensions’ writings on posts #1 and #63 through .580 "-. 660". Between what two points this dimension has been measured or should be set? Is that a dimension from the point where the bullet shoulder makes contact on the leade up to the face of the barrel or what?

In topic Lapua vs Eley post #26 Kevin has been mentioned engraving length .40”. Is that measured from live ammo, or is this some setup which makes some XX- length live engraving.
http://www.rimfireaccuracy.com/Forums/showthread.php/10593-Lapua-vs-Eley/page2

On post #82 Kevin wrote: I like to set chambers engrave up to .090” (live ammo?). Is that the result of post #26 with .040” engraving setting length (for Lapua?), or is this one Eley (live?) engraving length?

When bullet is its contact point, bullet has always (99,9% of all cases) some way to go before rifling starts to engrave. When people talk “ogive” contact, I'm little confused, because for me ogive won’t hit to the lands. For me the contact point is the foremost outer corner of the bullet.

I drew one example of a graphical format (Picture #1) Sorry, I must use another site than Photobucket, it didn't want to play with me.
14352778.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
Grey area is part of bullet, straw-colored is part of case. Everything else than rim area is on scale. This describes a setting where bullet has visual engraving length as .075”. This is true only on the picture marked values. Bullet has same diameter from “nose corner to case” in drawing, but diameters marked as they are.
Dimensions may have some odd numbers, because those have been converted from meters to inches, and I was too lazy typing enough numbers.

I typed on picture “Leade starts to the left from this point. Straight part of chamber starts to the right at this point up to front of rim”. I mean that rim is located at same position as the face of the barrel, when ammo is loaded.

In example drawing, live ammo engraving length will be realized when ammo is set carefully to the leade contact and dimension from case head to the barrel face is .1235”.
Calculation formula: Distance what bullet must travel from its contact point to groove diameter .0084” + live ammo engraving travel .075” + rim thickness .0401= .1235”. That should be pretty close in real world (only drawing dimensions).

What affects measuring? What do you think what diameter is your bullet? It is not simple to look and measure engravings length from live ammo.
When we take a closer look at Lapua ammo and its bullet diameters. Bullet straight part has not same dia in every part, it is “variable” (Picture #2)
2 Ammo dias.jpg

Bullet’s 0,01mm (.000394”) diameter change has 0,1905mm (.0075”) length on 1,5-degree leade. If bullet is this small on front corner, before first greasing “groove”, it is probably deeper than we imagined. With this small 5,65mm (.2224”) front dia, bullet has still 0,213mm (.00084”) travel to go before it is on groove, where engraving starts.
If bullet has same diameter all over its straight part, for example dia 5,69mm (.2240”) bullet, it has 0,99mm (.039”) travel to groove 5,6388 mm (. 2220”), from its contact on leade.

Estimating engraving lengths, it needs microscope, or magnifying glasses with a big magnification. I use light bringing contrast, usually I take picture. I enlarge picture and check engraving length. Cheap smartphone is better than nothing. It is still not a piece of cake. (Pictures #3-5)
3 Light.jpg4 Engraving close.jpg5 Engraving.jpg

It’s not the most reliable place measure setup length from case end to the barrel face, especially with live ammo. Ammo may (or will) pass deeper than its real contact point is on leade. I made a dummy brass ammo with Lapua dimensions, it should give more reliable readings. It is way better to compare chamber length with this tool than try to figure out it visually from live ammo (Pictures #6-7)
6 Tool.jpg7 Measuring.jpg

It does not have to be exactly same dimensions than your live ammo. It is more tool you can compare chamber lengths, it gives more sensitive feeling. If you use tool like this, you must know exactly groove diameter, chamber leade angle, your tool dimensions. You can use math to find out what affects to where and how much.

Part of this is hair splitting, but it shows you can’t trust some other “seating depth setting”, unless your parameters are exactly the same.



Regards
Juha

ps. When comparing this setup together with PTG Eley ESP reamer chamber (with Eley ammo), what has quite small clearances, this example has much way bigger freebore (Picture #8)
8 Freebore.jpg
Just think of this from another point of view. Freebore volume what ESP reamered chamber has, could you shrink Lapua chamber freebore down to the same? If that small volume freebore works on ESP, would it work on Lapua?
If you only focus on compare volumes, it is not necessarily the same thing. Maybe carbon ring needs its length (and height), whatever they are.
 

Attachments

  • 1 Lapua 15 set.jpg
    1 Lapua 15 set.jpg
    22 KB · Views: 649
Last edited:
As someone who just got his action back from being rebarreled and who wants to use Lapua ammo, A Big Thanks for rejuvenating this thread. Very enlightening.

Hoot
 
Hi,

I’ve been hanging ”off-line” for a while and this is my first post in here. This topic is so informatic, because there are real numbers, so you don’t need to read “between the lines”. Sorry my English, it’s not my native language.

For me, there are some information I ‘m not sure what they mean, or how those are measured. If anybody or Kevin himself could give me a good explanation with some measurements what I’ve been trying to figure out.
Also, I do want to carry my part of examination into this nice writing.

Reason why I’m trying to figure out some things is bringing into focus how small I can squeeze freebore without losing accuracy (If the best accuracy lies with smallest freebore). I’m looking the best accuracy for benchrest game (for about 50 shots).

Kevin wrote on his posts #1 and #82, that .030” engraving set actual length is .075” when measured over live ammo. From where .030” should be measured, or where should I set that dimension?

There are setup dimensions’ writings on posts #1 and #63 through .580 "-. 660". Between what two points this dimension has been measured or should be set? Is that a dimension from the point where the bullet shoulder makes contact on the leade up to the face of the barrel or what?

In topic Lapua vs Eley post #26 Kevin has been mentioned engraving length .40”. Is that measured from live ammo, or is this some setup which makes some XX- length live engraving.
http://www.rimfireaccuracy.com/Forums/showthread.php/10593-Lapua-vs-Eley/page2

On post #82 Kevin wrote: I like to set chambers engrave up to .090” (live ammo?). Is that the result of post #26 with .040” engraving setting length (for Lapua?), or is this one Eley (live?) engraving length?

When bullet is its contact point, bullet has always (99,9% of all cases) some way to go before rifling starts to engrave. When people talk “ogive” contact, I'm little confused, because for me ogive won’t hit to the lands. For me the contact point is the foremost outer corner of the bullet.

I drew one example of a graphical format (Picture #1) Sorry, I must use another site than Photobucket, it didn't want to play with me.
14352778.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
Grey area is part of bullet, straw-colored is part of case. Everything else than rim area is on scale. This describes a setting where bullet has visual engraving length as .075”. This is true only on the picture marked values. Bullet has same diameter from “nose corner to case” in drawing, but diameters marked as they are.
Dimensions may have some odd numbers, because those have been converted from meters to inches, and I was too lazy typing enough numbers.

I typed on picture “Leade starts to the left from this point. Straight part of chamber starts to the right at this point up to front of rim”. I mean that rim is located at same position as the face of the barrel, when ammo is loaded.

In example drawing, live ammo engraving length will be realized when ammo is set carefully to the leade contact and dimension from case head to the barrel face is .1235”.
Calculation formula: Distance what bullet must travel from its contact point to groove diameter .0084” + live ammo engraving travel .075” + rim thickness .0401= .1235”. That should be pretty close in real world (only drawing dimensions).

What affects measuring? What do you think what diameter is your bullet? It is not simple to look and measure engravings length from live ammo.
When we take a closer look at Lapua ammo and its bullet diameters. Bullet straight part has not same dia in every part, it is “variable” (Picture #2)
View attachment 2408

Bullet’s 0,01mm (.000394”) diameter change has 0,1905mm (.0075”) length on 1,5-degree leade. If bullet is this small on front corner, before first greasing “groove”, it is probably deeper than we imagined. With this small 5,65mm (.2224”) front dia, bullet has still 0,213mm (.00084”) travel to go before it is on groove, where engraving starts.
If bullet has same diameter all over its straight part, for example dia 5,69mm (.2240”) bullet, it has 0,99mm (.039”) travel to groove 5,6388 mm (. 2220”), from its contact on leade.

Estimating engraving lengths, it needs microscope, or magnifying glasses with a big magnification. I use light bringing contrast, usually I take picture. I enlarge picture and check engraving length. Cheap smartphone is better than nothing. It is still not a piece of cake. (Pictures #3-5)
View attachment 2409View attachment 2410View attachment 2411

It’s not the most reliable place measure setup length from case end to the barrel face, especially with live ammo. Ammo may (or will) pass deeper than its real contact point is on leade. I made a dummy brass ammo with Lapua dimensions, it should give more reliable readings. It is way better to compare chamber length with this tool than try to figure out it visually from live ammo (Pictures #6-7)
View attachment 2412View attachment 2413

It does not have to be exactly same dimensions than your live ammo. It is more tool you can compare chamber lengths, it gives more sensitive feeling. If you use tool like this, you must know exactly groove diameter, chamber leade angle, your tool dimensions. You can use math to find out what affects to where and how much.

Part of this is hair splitting, but it shows you can’t trust some other “seating depth setting”, unless your parameters are exactly the same.



Regards
Juha

ps. When comparing this setup together with PTG Eley ESP reamer chamber (with Eley ammo), what has quite small clearances, this example has much way bigger freebore (Picture #8)
View attachment 2414
Just think of this from another point of view. Freebore volume what ESP reamered chamber has, could you shrink Lapua chamber freebore down to the same? If that small volume freebore works on ESP, would it work on Lapua?
If you only focus on compare volumes, it is not necessarily the same thing. Maybe carbon ring needs its length (and height), whatever they are.

I don't know the exact specs. used on my barrels but this is how much a live round will stick out of the chamber when you push a round in and stop once you feel resistance. it measured 0.075 I also can not see any engraving when the round is fully seated.
I do know the reamer used was Myer's 1.5 the smith Evelio McDonald used the information from this thread. if you go to the Lapua vs Eley thread I posted my results with this chamber.Rockcreek barrel.jpg
 
I don't know the exact specs. used on my barrels but this is how much a live round will stick out of the chamber when you push a round in and stop once you feel resistance. it measured 0.075 I also can not see any engraving when the round is fully seated.
I do know the reamer used was Myer's 1.5 the smith Evelio McDonald used the information from this thread. if you go to the Lapua vs Eley thread I posted my results with this chamber.View attachment 2415

Calculated engraving length on your live ammo should be around .0265", when done with parameters I've been put on my drawing (with that .075" drop dimension).

This is more Myers setup than Kevin engraving. Myers used very "light" engraving lengths (what I've been read on internet). This thread post #64 example and http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/gunweek078/

Looking at .0265" engraving length should be done by optimist. If your ammo has its foremost dia .2244" (or bigger), your bullet has "zero" engraving. It has shrink caused by leade but rifling is just waiting to engrave exactly in the foremost corner of the bullet.

ps. Earlier I put a picture about Lapua bullet diameter variation. I think this is good if bullet has greasing groove slightly over the surface. It helps ammo centering, and it may pass over heavy carbon easier than for example Eley. Eley may need tighter chamber when Lapua will serve longer with looser chamber, IMHO.
 
Calculated engraving length on your live ammo should be around .0265", when done with parameters I've been put on my drawing (with that .075" drop dimension).

This is more Myers setup than Kevin engraving. Myers used very "light" engraving lengths (what I've been read on internet). This thread post #64 example and http://www.accurateshooter.com/guns-of-week/gunweek078/

Looking at .0265" engraving length should be done by optimist. If your ammo has its foremost dia .2244" (or bigger), your bullet has "zero" engraving. It has shrink caused by leade but rifling is just waiting to engrave exactly in the foremost corner of the bullet.

ps. Earlier I put a picture about Lapua bullet diameter variation. I think this is good if bullet has greasing groove slightly over the surface. It helps ammo centering, and it may pass over heavy carbon easier than for example Eley. Eley may need tighter chamber when Lapua will serve longer with looser chamber, IMHO.

Not sure what you mean by "Looking at .0265" engraving length should be done by optimist." if you mean it may not shoot as good as .030 engraving.
I tell you what since this chamber can do this on a re-chambered barrel and no tuner, it doesn't matter to me if it is .026 or 0.30 as long as it will do this I am happy.
1411 no tuner 5-shot group C-X 7164 02-11-2017.jpg
 
Not sure what you mean by "Looking at .0265" engraving length should be done by optimist." if you mean it may not shoot as good as .030 engraving.
I tell you what since this chamber can do this on a re-chambered barrel and no tuner, it doesn't matter to me if it is .026 or 0.30 as long as it will do this I am happy.
View attachment 2417
I meant, you should be optimist if you can see engraving marks visually over live ammo with your eyes when only .0265 "engraving length has been done. Real rifling pattern marks are so short with this set-up.

I'd be as happy as you if I'd a gun with same accuracy than you have. I don't care either how its done if it shoots.

I do have little mixed feelings. Some guns shoot great with short engraving, some with heavy. Looks like do-test-change-test circle must be go through, few times. First cut length is hard to decide.
 
I meant, you should be optimist if you can see engraving marks visually over live ammo with your eyes when only .0265 "engraving length has been done. Real rifling pattern marks are so short with this set-up.

I'd be as happy as you if I'd a gun with same accuracy than you have. I don't care either how its done if it shoots.

I do have little mixed feelings. Some guns shoot great with short engraving, some with heavy. Looks like do-test-change-test circle must be go through, few times. First cut length is hard to decide.

I are you talking about the same ammo in regards to short or heavy engraving? I have 3-barrels with the same chamber all 3 will have the same amount of the case sticking out (0.075) 2-are Benchmarks and they both shoot equally well, the third is a Rockcreek and it shoots really good but the Benchmarks seems to shoot a little better and one unbelievable. I only shoot Lapua in them.
 
Last edited:
I are you talking about the same ammo in regards to short or heavy engraving? I have 3-barrels with the same chamber all 3 will have the same amount of the case sticking out (0.075) 2-are Benchmarks and they both shoot equally well, the third is a Rockcreek and it shoots really good but the Benchmarks seems to shoot a little better and one unbelievable. I only shoot Lapua in them.
Short engraving, like yours, barely seen on ammo, heavy (much longer) for me it is up to second grease groove or beyond that. I've seen both shot good. But I can't remember if those have been done exactly same ammo, but with same ammo manufacturer.
 
Anschutz 2013 Leade degree

Does anyone know what stock Anchutz 2013 Leade degree might be???
Just curious