the bigger issue is, if this is the standard for that particular gunsmith, imagine how many others he's ripping off with that sloppy work..
Bad Throat/Barrel?
- Thread starter Boss334OP
- Start date
When I say shoot, I mean shoot well.
If the barrel has .75moa guarantee, and he hasn’t shot it, how do you know it’s not to spec? Can it chamber a sammi cartridge? Don’t know? Then due diligence has not been done.
He stated we were ignoring the evidence. Now you’re saying he doesn’t need any. I was saying he doesn’t have any.
I meant he doesn't need evidence that it shoots well. He HAS evidence if a shit chamber job
This seems like a complete reversal of the burden of proof, especially when dealing with an expensive precision-machined piece of metal.
The seller bears the burden of responsibility to show that saleable goods work, function, and are in good condition when sold, and if something shows up apparently damaged in some way, it is incumbent on them to remedy the harm. The burden of production rests with the seller.
Let’s go back to my experience with barrels where the chamber wouldn’t have passed internet know it all standards and were hammers, and those with chambers that were pristine, but couldn’t shoot for shit.
Seems YOU’RE not getting it.
Seems YOU’RE not getting it.
I get the feeling you buy used tires.
This is a total nitpick on my part but i suspect you meant to say something like “burden of quality”. It’s incumbent upon a manufacturer to produce quality products (safe to use and perform to advertised claims) based on a reasonable person’s standard of what quality means, if quality is not somehow empirically definable (in this case it is - blueprint vs actual unit).
If a newly purchased item’s defect is visible to the naked eye, I’d send it back.
I wonder if the OP @Boss334OP has heard back from the manufacturer yet…
If the chamber appears to be rough, that's damage beyond what a reasonable person would expect for a chamber job on an expensive premium barrel.
With visual damage to the chamber, placing the burden on the buyer to show that it doesn't work isn't the right play here.
I suspect that even if the damage is purely cosmetic and does not affect the intended purpose in any way, the seller's management team would likely not want to ship the product anyway for the purposes of maintaining brand equity and reputation.
We were discussing who bears the responsibility to prove what and why requiring the buyer to disprove the seller's assumed claim of quality is a reversal of the ordinary burden of production.
The seller has an affirmative duty to prove their product meets a certain standard of quality, and if something appear visually off or damaged, requiring the buyer to undergo the expense of fitting and test-firing before seeking a remedy from the seller turns that concept upside-down.
Yes, agree the buyer shouldnt be encumbered with that burden in this case.
WTF are you talking about, Every scope has a margin of error but if it don't track you send it back to get fixed
Apples and oranges, if the machining for the scope tube was off I'd send that fucker in just like that barrel. It's time to smarten up
This is like arguing with a child who wants cookies right before bed time. I say good day to you sirApples and oranges yet we use car analogies with dented fenders and that’s fine.
If we're comparing apples to apples here dealing with high-end products, if a high-end scope doesn't track, you approach the seller for a replacement. I've even had PA eagerly replace a scope that didn't track as I got to the further extremes of the turrets, and most companies are willing to work with customers.
There's a place for "not-pretty-but-still-does-the-job" products out there. Companies make products to fit the value proposition that a customer has in mind.
If I saw a rough chamber in a cheap 870, I doubt anyone would balk at that.
However, we're talking about a $700 barrel with a 6 month lead time from a premium company, and the expectations change. This company thrives off of their reputation with customers, and likely does not want even the suggestion that their QC didn't catch something to stain their company's reputation.
Perfect. So if a barrel doesn’t shoot, you approach the seller and send it back.
If someone paid for a premium luxury car and it came dented, the seller ought to fix it, even if the defect is purely cosmetic, and no reasonable person would take delivery of that vehicle.Apples and oranges yet we use car analogies with dented fenders and that’s fine.
Whether the car drives or not doesn't even enter into the calculus.
Again, in the car analogy, the dented fender is the cheek piece. Please try to keep up.
So many of the top manufactured barrels look exactly like that Shilen, Bartlein you name it.
Borescopes do not tell this story.
like many have said shoot it.
Borescopes do not tell this story.
like many have said shoot it.
Wow this thread has become popcorn worthy for sure.
Can I interject one thing and then I will politely sit back and watch from afar.
If all this internet "inspection" is visual ONLY........are all the naysayers OK with a freebore/throat that looks concentric (fully cleaned up rifling) ONLY because the reamer was spec'd with a freebore diameter of bore+.003" instead of the typical match bore+.0005"??? This will most likely make the rifle shoot poorly also.
I am not choosing a side, just trying to dig a little deeper into the visual pass/fail scenario above.
Ern
Can I interject one thing and then I will politely sit back and watch from afar.
If all this internet "inspection" is visual ONLY........are all the naysayers OK with a freebore/throat that looks concentric (fully cleaned up rifling) ONLY because the reamer was spec'd with a freebore diameter of bore+.003" instead of the typical match bore+.0005"??? This will most likely make the rifle shoot poorly also.
I am not choosing a side, just trying to dig a little deeper into the visual pass/fail scenario above.
Ern
I bet if he can even chamber a round it it leaves marks on the bullet where the lands go to the chamber. Ask me how I know.. Heres the 6.5 PRC barrel that I sent back upon request from the mfg. They recut the freebore. You can see copper rubbing where the freebore area is supposed to be.
Finally!!
This is more than likely going to be his problem as well. People aren’t even considering the poor ballistics it will probably have. The bullet will “slug” up in the bore/throat uneven and unbalanced.
It might shoot a .3” at 100 yards, but .3” moa is not needed at 100 yards. 3/4-1 moa is needed at 1000 yards. Highly doubt any offset chamber will hold even 2 moa at 1000.
Same situation here, PA immediately replaced a scope for me that had "minor" cosmetic defects. Their reputation obviously is worth more to them than the idea of a "subpar" quality product floating on the market with their logo on it.
agreed on the point about an 870 as well, same reason I mentioned the $400 savage.
Im a little surprised that we're even debating the point that a custom barrel went out, with sloppy work, and it should be treated as anything other than sloppy work and sent right back to them?
I wonder if a brand name being exposed on the barrel would change that? How would the hive mind feel if this came from a shop with a K or C on it.
If there's even the suggestion that it doesn't shoot based on a visual inspection, and something is there that shouldn't be, the buyer has every right to seek a replacement or a remedy from the company.
We're talking about the chamber of a barrel that a buyer expects to shoot well for a reasonable length of time, based on an informed round count for that caliber.
Even if we assume that it would shoot well were he to install it, the buyer has no guarantee that it will continue to shoot well during it's lifespan as it wears.
The prudent customer will not want to take the risk of a potential future problem, knowing that there is no way that a company would work with them after they've put a large number of rounds down the barrel.
The safest move is to seek a replacement, and most companies, especially those working in the high-end space for their respective industry, are more than happy to help.
Why?
I want to know what happens between the manufacturer and OP (as I’m sure others do also) and besides it’s too entertaining to lock.
I believe that Criterion specifically calls out their chambering and rifling, as a statement to the quality of work.
There's a reason why "criterion" + "bore scope" brings up so many videos with positives about the brand.
You can un-watch the thread.
You don’t have to click on it.
Hahaha, fuck no. It pushed the bullet so far back in the case that there was a gap around the rim.
If you want to know what that looks like take your comparator and push a bullet in until it touches the Case
Like any of you would fucking know anything about machining or inspecting the results of.
I don’t but I did stay at a holiday inn express
I have my own lathe that I do hobby parts on, so your wrong there. Also do enough research on the subject and talk to guys who do it for a living and I can get pretty good idea of what's right and what's not. Nick from straight jacket cut the chamber in my current rig, got it about 2 months ago and the first thing I did was scope it. Guess what absolutely awesome work, with none of that nonsense going on in OP picture, that chamber is shit
