I wish my PVA Barrel was etched where yours is. They etched mine 1/3rd down from the muzzle and makes for a issue with fluting it.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Nucleus Orders
- Thread starter hereinaz
- Start date
I wish my PVA Barrel was etched where yours is. They etched mine 1/3rd down from the muzzle and makes for a issue with fluting it.
Agreed, the bolt feels wants to close. Disagree on the bolt lift, I love the short throw, but I can see how it could be a personal thing.
Anyone running the bolt seeing the cartridge snap into the extractor before you run the cartridge all the way in? Mine doesn't act as controlled round feed until it is almost in the chamber. I think that is one reason I'd say it likes to be run fast or with authority. I've never had a control round feed, so don't know exactly what to expect.
Impressions after running the three side by side:
It's not quite a fair comparison to compare a brand new action to well used ones. I also ran these dry only because the Nucleus is in 6 dasher and I don't have any loaded dasher ammo. That being said, the Nucleus is a damn nice action.
The Nucleus needs to be run with authority. I foresee it having issues if users pull back on the bolt too slowly. In order to activate the ejector, the bolt must be pulled back with some amount of force. Pulling the bolt too lightly or slowly causes it to just stop at the ejector. This may be something that just need to wear in however as I notice it getting better already. There is also some binding when the bolt is all the way back. I have determined this is a result of the extractor making contact with the receiver. This is not very noticeable when running the bolt fast. It is noticeable when running it slow. The extractor seems to be a floating design with no spring pressure on it keeping it in a consistent position. Here is the extractor and the marks from making contact with receiver can be clearly seen:
The bolt lift is certainly heavier than the TL3. That's expected since the TL3 is a 90 degree action and known to have one of the lightest lifts made. I would say the bolt lift is on par with, if not slightly lighter than the RPR. This is actually a pretty close comparison as they are both 70[ish] degree actions and both have dual cocking cams. My RPR has a longer bolt handle than the Nucleus so the fact that the Nucleus may have edged it out is certainly a good thing.
When putting upwards pressure while trying to push the bolt forward, it is difficult and binds, similar to the TL3. I would say it doesn't bind quite as badly from upwards pressure as the TL3 does. With downward pressure, they both run well, with the smoothness going to the TL3. The RPR runs regardless of what direction the bolt is pressed.
As far as the bolt moving forwards and backwards goes, the TL3 is easily the smoothest. The RPR bolt makes contact with a lot points within the receiver. While I wouldn't call it "rough", I would describe it as "bumpy". The Nucleus is similar in that respects but not quite as bad as the RPR. The aforementioned binding with the extractor does not help.
Bolt close is very different between the three. The TL3 closes with smooth even pressure. The RPR has a bit of resistance as soon as I start pressing down. As soon as I break that bump, the bolt snaps complete shut. The Nucleus seems to require me to push forward a bit while pulling down in order to get it to shut. I noticed in a few of hereinAZ's videos, he does not smoothly pull the bolt down and I am experiencing the same if I do not push forward while trying to pull the bolt down. There is a little plunger on a spring at the back of the bolt that is causing this. Not sure what purpose it serves. I think this is a non-issue if cycling the bolt quickly like in a match.
The RPR seems to require less effort to cycle back and forth. I can certainly cycle it faster than I can the Nucleus. The Nucleus is faster than the TL3, but my TL3 is a long action so no quite a fair comparison.
Tilt test. I'm not really a fan on this test, but I've seen come people conduct comparisons with it before. With the bolt fully open, I tilted the rifles downwards to see when the bolt starts sliding forward. I feel that there are a lot of other variables taken into account and that it's not a good test for action smoothness. The TL3's bolt was the first to move, requiring the least angle to do so. This was closely followed by the RPR. The Nucleus required a near 45 degree angle to get the bolt to move. I think this is in most part due to extractor binding.
Overall the cycling of the Nucleus is not bad, especially when running it fast. However it seems that this action NEEDs to be run fast to function. I will continue to cycle it and see if it breaks in more.
It's not quite a fair comparison to compare a brand new action to well used ones. I also ran these dry only because the Nucleus is in 6 dasher and I don't have any loaded dasher ammo. That being said, the Nucleus is a damn nice action.
The Nucleus needs to be run with authority. I foresee it having issues if users pull back on the bolt too slowly. In order to activate the ejector, the bolt must be pulled back with some amount of force. Pulling the bolt too lightly or slowly causes it to just stop at the ejector. This may be something that just need to wear in however as I notice it getting better already. There is also some binding when the bolt is all the way back. I have determined this is a result of the extractor making contact with the receiver. This is not very noticeable when running the bolt fast. It is noticeable when running it slow. The extractor seems to be a floating design with no spring pressure on it keeping it in a consistent position. Here is the extractor and the marks from making contact with receiver can be clearly seen:
The bolt lift is certainly heavier than the TL3. That's expected since the TL3 is a 90 degree action and known to have one of the lightest lifts made. I would say the bolt lift is on par with, if not slightly lighter than the RPR. This is actually a pretty close comparison as they are both 70[ish] degree actions and both have dual cocking cams. My RPR has a longer bolt handle than the Nucleus so the fact that the Nucleus may have edged it out is certainly a good thing.
When putting upwards pressure while trying to push the bolt forward, it is difficult and binds, similar to the TL3. I would say it doesn't bind quite as badly from upwards pressure as the TL3 does. With downward pressure, they both run well, with the smoothness going to the TL3. The RPR runs regardless of what direction the bolt is pressed.
As far as the bolt moving forwards and backwards goes, the TL3 is easily the smoothest. The RPR bolt makes contact with a lot points within the receiver. While I wouldn't call it "rough", I would describe it as "bumpy". The Nucleus is similar in that respects but not quite as bad as the RPR. The aforementioned binding with the extractor does not help.
Bolt close is very different between the three. The TL3 closes with smooth even pressure. The RPR has a bit of resistance as soon as I start pressing down. As soon as I break that bump, the bolt snaps complete shut. The Nucleus seems to require me to push forward a bit while pulling down in order to get it to shut. I noticed in a few of hereinAZ's videos, he does not smoothly pull the bolt down and I am experiencing the same if I do not push forward while trying to pull the bolt down. There is a little plunger on a spring at the back of the bolt that is causing this. Not sure what purpose it serves. I think this is a non-issue if cycling the bolt quickly like in a match.
The RPR seems to require less effort to cycle back and forth. I can certainly cycle it faster than I can the Nucleus. The Nucleus is faster than the TL3, but my TL3 is a long action so no quite a fair comparison.
Tilt test. I'm not really a fan on this test, but I've seen come people conduct comparisons with it before. With the bolt fully open, I tilted the rifles downwards to see when the bolt starts sliding forward. I feel that there are a lot of other variables taken into account and that it's not a good test for action smoothness. The TL3's bolt was the first to move, requiring the least angle to do so. This was closely followed by the RPR. The Nucleus required a near 45 degree angle to get the bolt to move. I think this is in most part due to extractor binding.
Overall the cycling of the Nucleus is not bad, especially when running it fast. However it seems that this action NEEDs to be run fast to function. I will continue to cycle it and see if it breaks in more.
I noticed the same thing when closing the bolt slowly, at first I thought something was wrong because without that extra forward pressure it won't close. As you said, when running faster it just works better. It really does seem to want to run fast, and it feels smooth that way.
That plunger at the back of the bolt, if I remember correctly, is what keeps the bolt shroud from rotating when out of battery. The Remington 700 accomplishes this by having a cutout at the top of the cocking ramp for the cocking piece to sit in when the bolt is open. It requires a concerted effort to move it from that "notch." The Nucleus doesn't have this at the top of the cocking ramp (neither does the Mausingfield, I think), and so that little plunger catches in its own cutout on the bolt body when the action is open to accomplish the same task.
So are rounds sliding up into the bolt face under the extractor out of the mag? It seems that different mags whose feed lips are different lengths can change where the round pops up.
I think we are all having the same experience, describing some of the same things. I don't think there was anything I would disagree with above.
As I cycle it more, it is smoothing out and I am getting used to it. It absolutely likes to be run fast, and to me that is a feature, not a bug. As soon as I stopped trying to "feel" the action and see what it was doing in the videos, and started running it in a shooting position like in a match, for speed and repetition, all the hicups went away.
This might not be an action that someone looking to sit at a bench and slowly feed rounds would necessarily make as a first choice. For a fast paced match, I see no downsides. My Savage would feed fine off the bench, running slowly. But, as soon as I got to a match, running it fast, I'd have issues staying on target, running the bolt fast, and feeding. So far, the Nucleus solved that, so I am a happy camper.
Afkirby, I will try a Magpul and Accurate mag tomorrow at the range and report.
As I cycle it more, it is smoothing out and I am getting used to it. It absolutely likes to be run fast, and to me that is a feature, not a bug. As soon as I stopped trying to "feel" the action and see what it was doing in the videos, and started running it in a shooting position like in a match, for speed and repetition, all the hicups went away.
This might not be an action that someone looking to sit at a bench and slowly feed rounds would necessarily make as a first choice. For a fast paced match, I see no downsides. My Savage would feed fine off the bench, running slowly. But, as soon as I got to a match, running it fast, I'd have issues staying on target, running the bolt fast, and feeding. So far, the Nucleus solved that, so I am a happy camper.
Afkirby, I will try a Magpul and Accurate mag tomorrow at the range and report.
I would also be curious to see how it feeds from ARC mags, I know the feed lips are shorter than the competitors.
Just some quick mentions...
I shoot 6x47 in my Mausingfield, the OACL is shorter than the longer cartridges. I took a .050 off the front of the lips of my AI mag so now the extractor groove of the case slides into the extractor as the cartridge pops out of the mag and is much smoother than before. It feeds like butter now, actually the best I've seen.
You guys could experiment with lighter firing pin springs. My Mausingfield had a strong spring which made the cocking effort stupid hard. I clipped off one coil which made the cocking a little lighter but feels much better and have had no ignition problems. I figured worse case was just ordering different spring strengths if my solution didn't work.
I'm at high 2700's so maybe next shipment.
Thinking hard about trying a 25 Dasher! 25" barrel with 125gr bullets, 2.5 twist barrel to stay with the theme, just JK on the twist, i'll do 7 twist and 131's if I go for it.
I shoot 6x47 in my Mausingfield, the OACL is shorter than the longer cartridges. I took a .050 off the front of the lips of my AI mag so now the extractor groove of the case slides into the extractor as the cartridge pops out of the mag and is much smoother than before. It feeds like butter now, actually the best I've seen.
You guys could experiment with lighter firing pin springs. My Mausingfield had a strong spring which made the cocking effort stupid hard. I clipped off one coil which made the cocking a little lighter but feels much better and have had no ignition problems. I figured worse case was just ordering different spring strengths if my solution didn't work.
I'm at high 2700's so maybe next shipment.
Thinking hard about trying a 25 Dasher! 25" barrel with 125gr bullets, 2.5 twist barrel to stay with the theme, just JK on the twist, i'll do 7 twist and 131's if I go for it.
FYI, I tested one 10 rd Magpul mag and it fed smooth as butter through all 10.
Shot my Nucleus today a little. I would disagree with running with authority, it ran great even slow. I think it is more important to run it harder forward than rearward.
Got my nucleus yesterday threw a fresh coat of elite sand cerakote on it this morning. Bought for the wife to start shooting and she wanted robins egg blue but I told her I couldn’t get caught shooting a blue rifle haha. Overall it’s a solid action from what I can tell. Wife should be happy with it
You can see a few threads on a shilen savage prefit. Not a big deal to me but it might bother some. Now I just need to find a mpa chassis for it
You can see a few threads on a shilen savage prefit. Not a big deal to me but it might bother some. Now I just need to find a mpa chassis for it
What the heck is the difference besides about $20?
https://www.brownells.com/magazines...blued-sku100005887-41006-76395.aspx?rrec=true
https://www.brownells.com/magazines...n-aics-magazine-308-winchester-prod45250.aspx
https://www.brownells.com/magazines...blued-sku100005887-41006-76395.aspx?rrec=true
https://www.brownells.com/magazines...n-aics-magazine-308-winchester-prod45250.aspx
the manufacturer
also...accurate does them without binder plate which is important for some to get the extra OAL
I'm jealous of you guy's that have received your action's. I shouldn't have to wait much longer,my invoice is 2495 so I'm getting close to getting it.
I shot mine too. Yes, running it forward is where you need to give it a little more. You certainly don't need a lot of force. You can't baby it forward is what I would say.
Mine shot these group at 200 yards with some handloads I threw together this morning, so I gotta say I'm very happy.
There is nothing that bothers me about the action. I can't believe how much difference the shape of the bolt knob makes.
Nice! I'm kind of jealous of you guys that can shoot yours. I'm just waiting on an action wrench.
My Rifle is ready to shoot. But I can't shoot it because apparently Norma dasher brass requires a special shell holder. And the only place to get it was bullets.com which is going out of business.Nice! I'm kind of jealous of you guys that can shoot yours. I'm just waiting on an action wrench.
im actually having more issues with the arc than any other. the winner with mine with 6.5x47 lapua is by far the magpul mags. it push feeds half the time with the arc mags unless im running it fast.
I’m curious how my 223 is going to work out. 223 is the definitely the black sheep of AICS pattern magazines.
I am getting the feeling that Magpul mags are gonna be the winner with my 6xc. The Accurate mag was running fine, something just seemed better with Magpul mags. I'll have to look at it closer now that you mention it as well.
I'm 2499 and have a short and long action lefty. Pretty sure I'm gonna get screwed. Lefty's always do.
I took a video of mine doing the exact same thing. I don't have a youtube account, can I text it to you to post? If you don't mind, please send me a PM.
Did I see somewhere Ted mentioning that he was going to do an extended rail that limiting the rotation of the barloc when tightening it? It looks like the barloc is shaped for it, there just needs to be some protuberance that would prevent it from rotating.
They already said the lefty’s are NOT going to get screwed. We should be getting invoiced in August some time. Same issues they had with righty in the beginning with Supplier not following through and they moved production to in house. I’m 252* and have spoke with ARC about 2 weeks ago about LH.
I’m aware, I thought I saw somewhere that the barloc would also be indexed with the rail though. I’m trying to find the source, he sort of hints at it on the barloc Facebook video, he points out something on top of the barloc while mentioning that the demo action doesn’t have a rail on it, then changes the subject and says that’s an extra detail for later on.
I know the video you're speaking of and I took it to mean that the recoil lug would be what was being indexed by the rail to keep it perfectly vertical with the action without the need for an alignment tool or having the lug pinned.
There's a Facebook post from ARC in November showing it, but it also has the screw lower etc. Originally they were saying you'd have to cut a relief in the barrel for the screw, later versions moved it up. Might be that it is too tall to be indexed against the rail now. Either way, I'd trade having to index the barloc for not having to have to modify every barrel any day.
i dont think it would work very well because the rail would have to leave enough room for the barloc to slide into without the clamping screw then the screw is too high up to tighten if it was inside a rail
My action is smoothening up nicely. If I pull slightly upwards while pulling back on the bolt (a natural action), it is butter smooth. Still need to send the bolt forward with authority.
I ordered a short action and long action. My long action is in magnum bolt face. I haven't heard anything on the long action. And, if they have the magnum bolt faces made by that time, I hope I am one of the first to come off the line.
You should be able to see the Barloc recoil lug indexing on the rail in my videos, especially the ones where I tear down and build it back up. They are in the Nucleus videos thread I started.
Yeah, the original video Ted did had the cross bolt for the Barloc lower, which would have required notching every barrel. Thankfully, he moved it up enough so that a plain prefit works.
I know the recoil lug in held captive by the rail, I’m referring to the clamping mechanism being indexed by an onverhanging rail bit. That way you don’t end up using an Allen wrench to lever it into position to line up correctly.
the gap has to close when you tighten the Barloc.
and in the photos it looks like the Barloc is much wider than the scope rails
