AT-X questions

[tna9001]

Hello All,

I'm wondering a couple of things:

Are the barrels Bartlein?
Who's cutting them?
Has the issue with the mag catch been fixed on the new guns?
I understand the action isn't bonded to the chassis like other AI's, I was under the impression that the bonded action was one of the factors in making AI's so accurate. Is the AT-X as accurate as the other AI's? I had an AXSA a few years ago and it was a tack driver.

Thanks in advanced for the info.

 

[DocRDS]

(1) Dunno
(2) Win Tac I beleive (in NA)
(3) What Issue--been slaping AW and AI mags in w/o issue for well over a year. (I have a Gen 1)
(4) Nope, still tack driver, although some have reported copper fouling issues related to barrel. Pesonally I can spin barrel off and on for cleaning and not re-zero (although I do confirm it).

Huge thread on AT-X. Search that thread for the answers you seek.

Accuracy International AT-X

Ah I think you're right. I got confused by the product pages and titles being structured differently.

www.snipershide.com

 

[just browsing]

Lots of good info in the thread linked above, but it’s pretty long and can be hard to look through.

The 1-2 Gen rifles were Bartleins chambered by WinTac. Some of the 3rd Gen barrels have been reported to be Hawk Hill blanks, also chambered by WinTac, but I’m not sure how anyone could actually confirm that beyond getting a straight answer from AI or WinTac. I think it was a “that looks like a Hawk Hill,” it made some sense, and off that rumor went.

There were some rumblings of excessive copper fouling floating around with some of the more recent barrels (which coincided with the HH rumor) but I don’t think those issues could be considered anything more than isolated or just a couple of overzealous dudes with borescopes. Most all of the Bartleins have been confirmed to be shooters.

Some of the very early European rifles had a mag latch issue. That was resolved and put to bed pretty quickly. Beyond that, AINA has been pretty good about checking out and resolving feeding issues (there was a bad batch of mags in there, but again that issue seems to have long since been resolved). No other real concerns with them.

And lastly, re: bonding. AINA basically stated (ie admitted) that the process was used to offset inferior manufacturing practices with their older weapons systems. Essentially that the CNC/milling machines and technology used to make previous generations of rifles required the actions be epoxied into the chassis to guarantee a 1:1 mechanical fit. With the new machines and tech, they’re able to manufacture them to tight enough tolerances that are effectively superior to bonding without actually being bonded. I think you’d find that the overall accuracy of the new rifles reflects that idea as well.

Good luck, they are great rifles.

 

[diggler1833]

Hello All,

I'm wondering a couple of things:

Are the barrels Bartlein?
Who's cutting them?
Has the issue with the mag catch been fixed on the new guns?
I understand the action isn't bonded to the chassis like other AI's, I was under the impression that the bonded action was one of the factors in making AI's so accurate. Is the AT-X as accurate as the other AI's? I had an AXSA a few years ago and it was a tack driver.

Thanks in advanced for the info.

1. The barrels are usually Bartlein, but some Hawk Hill have been rumored. Mine is a 5R, so I think that narrows it down.
2. WinTac is doing the chambering.
3 .Yes, as far as I know. Mine gives zero mag-related issues.
4. The AT-X are usually fantastically accurate *HOWEVER*, like anything else there are a few examples out there that are leaving owners unimpressed.

Mine shoots sub-minute with both the factory 140 and 147 Hornady stuff. The agg for (4), five-shot groups with the 140 ELD was about 2/3 MOA.

Unfortunately, mine collects so much copper that I have to scrub to bare metal every 20 rounds. I'm not an overzealous dude with a borescope... I just wanted to know why I got a patch stuck after round #4 in the barrel of mine, and off the journey started. Take a look at page 102 of the AT-X thread towards the bottom. The copper pictures are repeatable about every 20 rounds.

Having a couple of 6.5x47s that offer no issue, I'm going to hold onto my reloading supplies for them and stop chasing this rabbit. I'm currently getting a 6GT barrel spun up for my AT-X that will hopefully make the rifle fun to shoot.

 

[RUN8]

I have a 5R barrel on my AT-X in 6.5 so I assume that is a Bartlein? I don’t bore scope it, but using Sweets I’ve noticed very little copper at all. I’ve run 60-70 rounds at a session and it doesn’t seem to collect much copper.

 

[Pete B]

Lots of good info in the thread linked above, but it’s pretty long and can be hard to look through.

The 1-2 Gen rifles were Bartleins chambered by WinTac. Some of the 3rd Gen barrels have been reported to be Hawk Hill blanks, also chambered by WinTac, but I’m not sure how anyone could actually confirm that beyond getting a straight answer from AI or WinTac. I think it was a “that looks like a Hawk Hill,” it made some sense, and off that rumor went.

There were some rumblings of excessive copper fouling floating around with some of the more recent barrels (which coincided with the HH rumor) but I don’t think those issues could be considered anything more than isolated or just a couple of overzealous dudes with borescopes. Most all of the Bartleins have been confirmed to be shooters.

Some of the very early European rifles had a mag latch issue. That was resolved and put to bed pretty quickly. Beyond that, AINA has been pretty good about checking out and resolving feeding issues (there was a bad batch of mags in there, but again that issue seems to have long since been resolved). No other real concerns with them.

And lastly, re: bonding. AINA basically stated (ie admitted) that the process was used to offset inferior manufacturing practices with their older weapons systems. Essentially that the CNC/milling machines and technology used to make previous generations of rifles required the actions be epoxied into the chassis to guarantee a 1:1 mechanical fit. With the new machines and tech, they’re able to manufacture them to tight enough tolerances that are effectively superior to bonding without actually being bonded. I think you’d find that the overall accuracy of the new rifles reflects that idea as well.

Good luck, they are great rifles.

Mate, just an honest question.
I can see how it could be AS effective as having an action bonded, however I'm not sure how it could be superior?
Interested in your thoughts and/or others on this point?
Cheers
Pete

 

[just browsing]

Mate, just an honest question.
I can see how it could be AS effective as having an action bonded, however I'm not sure how it could be superior?
Interested in your thoughts and/or others on this point?
Cheers
Pete

Would have to go back through the linked AT-X thread… AI’s words, not mine. But the gist was “superior machines and manufacturing processes.”

Fwiw I don’t really think there’s an appreciable difference in accuracy, but definitely so in terms of maintenance, durability, and the fact that you can take it apart and reassemble without really impacting zero or performance of the gun.

 

[Pete B]

I think AI is maybe being a lil loose with facts to fit the times..... Guess we will never really know, however if they were to say bonding was superior, kind of leave them in a "spot".
Personal opinion, for civilian use of these rifles, it makes no difference. Keep in mind they still bond the AX, perhaps they are still making them on those old wonky machines!!!
PS I have a AX
Pete