Gunsmithing Trued action

[Dirtrider389]

So I've been wanting to build a rifle for a while now. Got to looking at actions to start with and found northland shooter supply has trued 700 actions.... BUT, the only surfaces that have been tried is the locking lugs and the reciever face. Is this going to be sufficient for a precision rifle? I would figure the squaring the threads to the reciever face would be important. Any thoughts would be appreciated

 

[Dirtrider389]

I guess the real question I'm trying to ask is it so much better to buy factory action and send it off to be blueprinted or get this already half trued?

 

[MElank]

Buy a Zermatt Bighorn Origin, or a Tikka.

 

[One1Bravo]

What ^ he said. Get an Origin and be done with it.

 

[LRI]

We'd be happy to help you OP.

 

[fdkay]

So I've been wanting to build a rifle for a while now. Got to looking at actions to start with and found northland shooter supply has trued 700 actions.... BUT, the only surfaces that have been tried is the locking lugs and the reciever face. Is this going to be sufficient for a precision rifle? I would figure the squaring the threads to the reciever face would be important. Any thoughts would be appreciated

To really answer your question, yes this is sufficient for a very accurate rifle.
The norm used to be, true the action face and lap in the lags, add a surface ground recoil lug or quality aftermarket lug and shoot tiny groups.
There is nothing wrong with going above and beyond that, but you certainly reach a point of diminishing returns.
NSS offers a good product at a good price.
They sell excellent barrels there as well, might as well have them sell you a barreled action.

 

[Wannashootit]

^^^
I agree. IMO, quality of the barrel, and chambering job is most important.
As pointed out- diminishing returns. Can you realize- through your skillset of both handloading and driving the rifle- the very small, incremental gains? Some can, the majority cannot.

 

[Dirtrider389]

I really appreciate the help guys thanks for the input!

 

[Ledzep]

What's funny is when one gunsmith "trues" an action then another gunsmith "dials it in" and finds non-square surfaces...

My take on it is that as long as both lugs are making contact (100% or 20%), both lugs are supported and won't be meaningfully deflecting under firing. I've purposely misaligned barrels in actions and seen no degredation in group size. If you're going to go through the full OCD of benchrest heavy gun... well you probably aren't starting with a factory M700... But that aside, it may pay off for that. For PRS/NRL/hunting etc... A quality barrel with a good chamber will get you what you're looking for.

 

[MachoMan]

Barrel and bedding !

 

[Dirtrider389]

I'm not at all looking for a benchrest gun, more than likely I'll play at the range more than anything, maybe an occasional prs style match... u guys have been a lot of help, I almost didn't ask at all cause I haven't had much more than being made fun of for my ignorance so thanks for real input

 

[PAYDIRT]

My untrued 700/ Criterion remage barrel rifle gets the stink eye a lot at matches. Especially "if" I clean the KYL.

 

[Average guy]

My son and I assembled a 6.5 creedmoor using a trued 700 and a criterion barrel from Northland. Give James a call. He’s super knowledgeable and you will end up with a great gun. We bought everything from NSS except the bravo chassis.

 

[DAVETOOLEY]

I can't tell you how many winning 1K BR rifles I built in the 90's that didn't have the treads straightened. All I did was run a tap in to clean and uniform the treads. Square up everything else and keep the thread fit a bit loose. Some things matter more than others. In the barrel/action connection it's providing enough room in the threads so the shoulders square up. That applies to custom actions as well.

 

[FisherT&C]

When on a budget I always tell guys to put their money in the barrel first. Second don't skimp on the optic, as Muhammad Ali once said" the hands can't hit what the eye's can't see." Surely followed by something clever that rhymes but that's not the point.

 

[Steel head]

Slap a nice barrel in it and go shootin.

 

[fdkay]

I can't tell you how many winning 1K BR rifles I built in the 90's that didn't have the treads straightened. All I did was run a tap in to clean and uniform the treads. Square up everything else and keep the thread fit a bit loose. Some things matter more than others. In the barrel/action connection it's providing enough room in the threads so the shoulders square up. That applies to custom actions as well.

i think the whole "true the threads" was an extra step offered for a deluxe package that somehow ended up in the internet world as "a gun won't shoot worth a shit unless it's done" mandatory thing. Either that or it was a "sucker born every minute" increase the profit of each job kind of thing.

 

[Wannashootit]

I can't tell you how many winning 1K BR rifles I built in the 90's that didn't have the treads straightened. All I did was run a tap in to clean and uniform the treads. Square up everything else and keep the thread fit a bit loose. Some things matter more than others. In the barrel/action connection it's providing enough room in the threads so the shoulders square up. That applies to custom actions as well.

I agree.
Some years ago, I spoke with both "Dave's" about re-cutting threads concentric to the bolt raceway with a piloted tap- without cutting them oversize.
Both were of the opinion that what is of paramount importance is perfectly square shoulders- and the threads are there just to roughly align the parts being brought together. Tight thread fit is not required, and crazy tight threads "lapped" into place are more likely to be detrimental.

I'm well aware that some argue about the efficacy of this; I use piloted taps that are not oversize- but do "clean up" the threads perpendicular to the boltway/receiver face on any rebarreling job. Has always worked for me.

 

[Messmaker]

I dont know why a gunsmith would go through all the effort to dial in an action and not touch the threads. I literally only takes a few more minutes to give them a clean up pass. I also agree that tight fitting threads are more detrimental than having a very small amount of play. I use the Gretan truing jig and PTG indicating rods to dial actions in which is by far the longest part of truing an action. @LongRifles Inc. great job with cutting edge equipment, and as always your product looks top notch.

 

[1moaoff]

I dont know why a gunsmith would go through all the effort to dial in an action and not touch the threads. I literally only takes a few more minutes to give them a clean up pass. I also agree that tight fitting threads are more detrimental than having a very small amount of play. I use the Gretan truing jig and PTG indicating rods to dial actions in which is by far the longest part of truing an action. @LongRifles Inc. great job with cutting edge equipment, and as always your product looks top notch.

In the case of offset threads or trying to clean up or square threads that may be slightly oversize already you can increase the thread spec beyond usable

 

[1moaoff]

I would personally do it the same way LRI does.

But you asked why people wouldnt

 

[DAVETOOLEY]

In the case of offset threads or trying to clean up or square threads that may be slightly oversize already you can increase the thread spec beyond usable

Not really. Look at the wall thickness of a Tika action.

 

[Messmaker]

In the case of offset threads or trying to clean up or square threads that may be slightly oversize already you can increase the thread spec beyond usable

Never even come close to that but I suppose it’s possible.

 

[81STFACP]

I can't tell you how many winning 1K BR rifles I built in the 90's that didn't have the treads straightened. All I did was run a tap in to clean and uniform the treads. Square up everything else and keep the thread fit a bit loose. Some things matter more than others. In the barrel/action connection it's providing enough room in the threads so the shoulders square up. That applies to custom actions as well.

Dave,

About how much looser from pitch diameter do you think is empirically sufficient to provide a good receiver to shoulder lock up?

My first bolt gun barreling job was on a glued action, my brother's 30 BR. I downloaded the tenon print from the action manufacturer, got the chamber done, measured everything and it matched the print. Had to adjust the thread as the old barrel was 0.008 looser than the print.

Thanks.

Nez

 

[DAVETOOLEY]

Dave,

About how much looser from pitch diameter do you think is empirically sufficient to provide a good receiver to shoulder lock up?

My first bolt gun barreling job was on a glued action, my brother's 30 BR. I downloaded the tenon print from the action manufacturer, got the chamber done, measured everything and it matched the print. Had to adjust the thread as the old barrel was 0.008 looser than the print.

Thanks.

Nez

This could easily get into a deep dive into threading in general.
I have never come up with a firm number. It would take an enormous investment in gauging, ground plug gages, to correctly determine an exact number. Custom actions give us some sense of repeat-ability action to action. Hit the middle pitch diameter for the given thread spec and things work until they don't. In a perfect world most people, going by feel , would probably say that's a bit loose. I err on the side of loosy goosy if I have any doubts about action thread quality. As a smith a trued action is a different animal. Did I do the work or did someone else? I have old barrel stubs with different size threads so I can make a SWAG at it. Back when I did a lot of BR work, which had glued in actions, and I didn't know what a thread mic was then, I threaded between centers. I could take the barrel out for a trial fit and take more off if needed.
Back to your question. For lack of a better engineering term, I like some wobble in the action right up until the barrel shoulder makes contact with the action. With everything being clean, if the action doesn't stop abruptly and locks up with the barrel then the threads are probably to tight. Err on the side of loose rather than tight.
I have a saying when it comes to rifles. "Everything has it's own natural resting place. Don't force things where they don't want to go."

 

[81STFACP]

This could easily get into a deep dive into threading in general.
I have never come up with a firm number. It would take an enormous investment in gauging, ground plug gages, to correctly determine an exact number. Custom actions give us some sense of repeat-ability action to action. Hit the middle pitch diameter for the given thread spec and things work until they don't. In a perfect world most people, going by feel , would probably say that's a bit loose. I err on the side of loosy goosy if I have any doubts about action thread quality. As a smith a trued action is a different animal. Did I do the work or did someone else? I have old barrel stubs with different size threads so I can make a SWAG at it. Back when I did a lot of BR work, which had glued in actions, and I didn't know what a thread mic was then, I threaded between centers. I could take the barrel out for a trial fit and take more off if needed.
Back to your question. For lack of a better engineering term, I like some wobble in the action right up until the barrel shoulder makes contact with the action. With everything being clean, if the action doesn't stop abruptly and locks up with the barrel then the threads are probably to tight. Err on the side of loose rather than tight.
I have a saying when it comes to rifles. "Everything has it's own natural resting place. Don't force things where they don't want to go."

Dave,

Thank for the response, I appreciate that. I have 3 other buddies who just bought their lathes will appreciate your input. Will pass this one to them.


Nez

 

[LRI]

My thoughts:

If you leave no stone unturned, you set yourself up for a predictable outcome. I chew on threads for a number of reasons. The first r began as a need that was isolated inside of my business. It's now metastasized into an extensive dealer network north of 300 shops worldwide.

I need a very consistent thread form on the receiver so that I don't have to chase random .001's worth of pitch diameter fluctuation while barreling. The truncated lead thread, being taper free, void of bellmouth, and concentricity are all just additional flavors of cake icing.

The focus anymore these days seems to lie solely on the accuracy potential of a gun. How it looks, what the details are, etc... seem to get a bit lost. "Blueprinting" (to me) means more than just little groups on paper. It's equally important to improve functionality here on the machine shop floor and for you at the firing line. An example of this would be the effort to machine a relief on the exit of the front base hole screw where it interfaces with the receiver ring threads. Anyone who has installed a few barrels has likely witnessed an edge peeling little slivers of barrel threads off as you screw it together. The unfortunate have had a barrel lock up because of it. If you're a switch barrel guy, this is a deal-breaker for sure. So, we address that.

We have always thread milled the receivers because a tap merely qualifies a thread size and pitch diameter. It does nothing to control position. The mandrel guided taps are a joke and I personally think it's one of the biggest scams in the industry. Think about it.

You have multiple cutting surfaces across a circumference. They are guided by a 1/2" diameter shaft supported at two locations by a pair of bushings. The picture I'm painting is one full of tolerance stacking, as well as, one void of rigidity.

Are the threads being on center a big deal? From a pure accuracy potential, prolly not, but one needs to appreciate cascading effects and unintended consequences.

Scope base holes are meant to pilot off of the center of bore. You can align them to the "gillionth" on the action but it does little good if the barrel is pointed somewhere else. The shoulder being square should do this yes, but biased threads run the risk of screwing with this. Is it enough to create an issue? Likely no, but why chance it? YOU folks, as the consumers, are paying for work that is supposed to pay attention to stuff like this...

I consider David Tooley as a friend. We've never met and we've never chatted all that much, but I think we both respect each other as ethical, skilled folk who run pretty solid businesses. He mentioned earlier in this thread about benchrest. While its a great litmus test for accuracy, it doesn't do a whole lot to address the need to minimal windage and elevation correction at the distances typical for NRL type matches or the ELR stuff a lot of guys are doing today. Keep in mind also that BR all but ignores the need for group center repeatability. Sighters are for getting you on paper, then you go for record. In a "gamer gun" match 1st round impacts are the difference between the front of the line at the prize table or winning your "attendance award": a bag full of stickers.

There will likely be a litany of comments that counter much of what I've said and that is fine. I offer this as a closing argument to consider. Given a circumstance, what makes the most sense? A 1,000 different people who've done one thing a few times or 1 guy who's done the same work over a thousand times?

Be safe and enjoy your day.

C.

 

[1moaoff]

Not really. Look at the wall thickness of a Tika action.

Beyond usable for standard oem threads

 

[1moaoff]

Never even come close to that but I suppose it’s possible.

Beyond usable for standard oem threads

 

[DAVETOOLEY]

For the record I have 4 actions with Chad being worked over as I type this. He does things the rest of us can't do. I see things from a little different view point. I was a shooter first, then a smith and then I did development work in the ELR field. In the early 90's we were doing ELR before it was cool. 2,000+ yards was pretty common. Maybe a couple hundred of us country wide were doing this. Before Bruce Thom, BAT Machine, started making actions we didn't have many action choices. Allen Hall, Tony Gilkes and a few small shops were our only action choices for wildcats based on the 416 Rigby or 378 Wby case. There wasn't a 338 Lapua then. McMillan made their Tac-50 action and a few used it for 338 wildcats built on the 50 cal. spotter round. Any smaller cartridges were built on 700's. To say the rifles we built back then were less than predictable, reliable is well just an opinion from someone who wasn't there and watched the development of long range shooting in 90's. I have nothing but respect for what Chad has done. He's taken the machine work side to a new level. I have a different perspective as a shooter and consumer. In the world of diminishing returns I look at the return on investment for the common guy.

There's room for everyone.

Dave

 

[hengehold]

I have a trued Rem 700 and the action operates very smoothly in rapid fire strings because there is enough slop in it also. Some of the guys I shoot with have found some of the custom Rem 700 clone actions to be more challenging to use in rapid fire strings. Presumably due to tighter tolerances.
If you do not plan on shooting disciplines that require rapid fire with a bolt action then the custom action may be worth considering.
-TH

 

[LRI]

I have a trued Rem 700 and the action operates very smoothly in rapid fire strings because there is enough slop in it also. Some of the guys I shoot with have found some of the custom Rem 700 clone actions to be more challenging to use in rapid fire strings. Presumably due to tighter tolerances.
If you do not plan on shooting disciplines that require rapid fire with a bolt action then the custom action may be worth considering.
-TH

This isn't directed at you, it's just that you used "the words", lol. "Tighter tolerances". I have always asked myself "tighter than what exactly?" when I see this. The beauty of being in a manufacturing type of business where you take raw materials and make a product is that you get to decide what those dimensions should be. The hope is, through testing, the proper solution for any particular problem is realized.

So, go with that for a second. "Gamer gun" matches are at least a decade old now. Think of how many brand X, Y, and Z brand actions are on those firing lines any given weekend during the season. Now take a poll on how many of those guys deal with bolt manipulation that goes to shit once the dust starts flying. It's bad enough to the point of being silly when you consider the timeline (10+ years) that OEM's have had to take a corrective action. Yet nothing gets done about it.

My point is the fundamental problem is largely ignored and yet the shooting community perpetuates this idea that having a bolt fitted to some ridiculous clearance from the receiver bore is a good thing because it somehow makes the gun shoot better. My thoughts are that the most accurate rifle in the world is all but useless if it doesn't work in the environment it's intended for.

I would start asking OEM's why they insist upon making stuff absurdly tight when maybe .001% of the shooting sports community plays the BR game.

Just a thought...

 

[Tucker65]

Chad,

Not to get this thread de-railed from the original topic but why haven't you just designed and built your own actions for the shooting community. It seams that with all your knowledge and experience, both past and present, that you would have something designed and on the drawing board. I'm wondering if there is too much red tape involved in building actions to sell compared to just fixing the problems with the ones already out there.

John

 

[LRI]

Chad,

Not to get this thread de-railed from the original topic but why haven't you just designed and built your own actions for the shooting community. It seams that with all your knowledge and experience, both past and present, that you would have something designed and on the drawing board. I'm wondering if there is too much red tape involved in building actions to sell compared to just fixing the problems with the ones already out there.

John

While flattering, here's how I view this:

Make a list of every action manufacturer you can think of. Now throw that against the portion of the shooting community willing to spend more for an action than what a whole gun costs at a box store. Now try to rationalize how you are going to float the front end of the capital investment required to try and compete with those companies already doing it. My point is the buy-in is extremely expensive.

While you are doing all of this, grab a bamboo cane pole, and if you convince yourself that you alone have the secret, smack your sack with the stick to shock yourself back into reality. (seriously)

Last, for me to do this it would mean that I would be in direct competition with folks I've grown quite close to; Ted and staff from ARC.

I have zero interest in that effort.

 

[308pirate]

This isn't directed at you, it's just that you used "the words", lol. "Tighter tolerances". I have always asked myself "tighter than what exactly?" when I see this.

Exactly, as if they had any idea of what each dimension's tolerance should be.

And to go further, 99% of the people on gun forums use the word "tolerances" incorrectly to describe fit.

To those who don't know what I'm talking about imagine a bolt head diameter of .450" with a tolerance of ± .0002" and a raceway diameter of .500" with a tolerance of ± .0002". Both parts are held to very tight tolerances, but they rattle like a BB in a boxcar when put together because they have a clearance fit of .0496" - .0504"

Fits are not tolerances. Tolerances are not fits.

 

[Big Ern]

Send it to LRI and put your mind at ease.

 

[seanh]

I'm not sure, but I think Chad offers a 700 action with everything done from his shop

 

[AccuSol-ERN]

While flattering, here's how I view this:

Make a list of every action manufacturer you can think of. Now throw that against the portion of the shooting community willing to spend more for an action than what a whole gun costs at a box store. Now try to rationalize how you are going to float the front end of the capital investment required to try and compete with those companies already doing it. My point is the buy-in is extremely expensive.

While you are doing all of this, grab a bamboo cane pole, and if you convince yourself that you alone have the secret, smack your sack with the stick to shock yourself back into reality. (seriously)

Last, for me to do this it would mean that I would be in direct competition with folks I've grown quite close to; Ted and staff from ARC.

I have zero interest in that effort.

Is the buy-in for action building more than blueprinting 700s on a 5-axis or squaring ejection ports on 7s???

 

[RTH1800]

@LongRifles Inc.
Chad,
Since we have wondered into the details of actions is there anything to be gained by "improving" a custom action like a Surgeon? Truing it up etc.

 

[Ledzep]

@LongRifles Inc.
Chad,
Since we have wondered into the details of actions is there anything to be gained by "improving" a custom action like a Surgeon? Truing it up etc.

No. It's a case by case basis but the best thing to happen is for it to come from whoever makes it, made correctly. In the world of custom actions (and even standard factory rifles for that matter) if there is anything to be gained by truing/blueprinting, the action is defective and should be returned to the manufacturer.

You dip into the realm of "theory" and almost all of it is lost in the noise in the real world.

 

[AccuSol-ERN]

And just think......all those pre-fit barrels flying off the shelves are being screwed on brand new actions without lapping the lugs or any of the other old school trickery.

I was never a fan of lug lapping without cutting both surfaces to be lapped. Otherwise, all you are doing is lapping in inconsitency. Some would argue that sitting there and jerking off the bolt handle is lapping in inconsistency anyway.......more compound on one side than the other.......holding the bolt unevenly to one side more than the other......etc.

 

[LRI]

@LongRifles Inc.
Chad,
Since we have wondered into the details of actions is there anything to be gained by "improving" a custom action like a Surgeon? Truing it up etc.

I am of the opinion that if the need to "true or blueprint" an aftermarket action exists, then you bought the wrong action for the simple reason that its part of what you are supposed to be paying for in the first place.

 

[LRI]

And just think......all those pre-fit barrels flying off the shelves are being screwed on brand new actions without lapping the lugs or any of the other old school trickery.

I was never a fan of lug lapping without cutting both surfaces to be lapped. Otherwise, all you are doing is lapping in inconsitency. Some would argue that sitting there and jerking off the bolt handle is lapping in inconsistency anyway.......more compound on one side than the other.......holding the bolt unevenly to one side more than the other......etc.

Lapping a bolt (imo) should be nothing more than part of the inspection process. Lapping a bolt with the hopes of obtaining more surface area contact is a bit of a fallacy. What the bolt does while being jerked off in your hand is radically different from what happens when the candle gets lit.

 

[LRI]

Is the buy-in for action building more than blueprinting 700s on a 5-axis or squaring ejection ports on 7s???

PDF attachment covers the scope of what were doing.

 

[AccuSol-ERN]

I understand what you are doing to blueprint 700s (and other work). I am simply asking, given the amount and quality of work you do, are you really that far off from building a complete action? Seems like you are pretty much just short an EDM operation for the inital raceways......and chances are you have an EDM too.

I totally understand your point of this industry being very tightnit and you don't want to compete with those you call friends.

There is plenty to go around......both crumbs and cake.

 

[Ambivadox]

I have always asked myself "tighter than what exactly?" when I see this.

My Dad taught me many years ago and due to it I've always thought of that phrase as "allowed variance when manufactured".

Granted I'm not a gunsmith, but I have played in the automotive world for a while. So with my background I'll use bearings for an example (you won't need it but someone might someday). If bearing A has an acceptable range of +/-0.002 and bearing B is +/-0.02, I'm going bearing A due to tighter tolerances.

It may not be correct, but it makes sense to me

Carry on; Returning to reading... and more reading... and trying not to fudd up too badly.

 

[gnochi]

My Dad taught me many years ago and due to it I've always thought of that phrase as "allowed variance when manufactured".

Granted I'm not a gunsmith, but I have played in the automotive world for a while. So with my background I'll use bearings for an example (you won't need it but someone might someday). If bearing A has an acceptable range of +/-0.002 and bearing B is +/-0.02, I'm going bearing A due to tighter tolerances.

It may not be correct, but it makes sense to me

Carry on; Returning to reading... and more reading... and trying not to fudd up too badly.

That's correct. Tolerances define the product you can tolerate.

Clearances (how much space there is between components) are often mistaken for tolerances - you need space for something to move in, or to remove dirt, or whatnot, but that doesn’t prevent tight lockup or function.

So, a bolt might have a 0.010” nominal clearance in the raceway when pulled fully back, but due to tolerances on the raceway diameter and the bolt diameter, it might range from 0.008” to 0.011”.

Another way to think about it - clearance is intentional, tolerance is unavoidable.

 

[supercorndogs]

This could easily get into a deep dive into threading in general.
I have never come up with a firm number. It would take an enormous investment in gauging, ground plug gages, to correctly determine an exact number. Custom actions give us some sense of repeat-ability action to action. Hit the middle pitch diameter for the given thread spec and things work until they don't. In a perfect world most people, going by feel , would probably say that's a bit loose. I err on the side of loosy goosy if I have any doubts about action thread quality. As a smith a trued action is a different animal. Did I do the work or did someone else? I have old barrel stubs with different size threads so I can make a SWAG at it. Back when I did a lot of BR work, which had glued in actions, and I didn't know what a thread mic was then, I threaded between centers. I could take the barrel out for a trial fit and take more off if needed.
Back to your question. For lack of a better engineering term, I like some wobble in the action right up until the barrel shoulder makes contact with the action. With everything being clean, if the action doesn't stop abruptly and locks up with the barrel then the threads are probably to tight. Err on the side of loose rather than tight.
I have a saying when it comes to rifles. "Everything has it's own natural resting place. Don't force things where they don't want to go."

I had an instructor in Auto tech for drivelines, differentials, transmissions, he always said "A little loose, only you know, a little too tight, and everyone knows."

 

[LeftyJason]

I understand what you are doing to blueprint 700s (and other work). I am simply asking, given the amount and quality of work you do, are you really that far off from building a complete action? Seems like you are pretty much just short an EDM operation for the inital raceways......and chances are you have an EDM too.

I totally understand your point of this industry being very tightnit and you don't want to compete with those you call friends.

There is plenty to go around......both crumbs and cake.

For the numbers of actions that companies make you would need more than 1 edm. Production takes alot more than you think.

Edms are slow. We have some parts at work (aerospace turbine jet engines) that run on a robot cell edm. Those parts take 5 weeks running 24/7 on the edm for 30 holes. Same time to run 1 part or gang ten up and run them all at once.

 

[chevy_man]

So I've been wanting to build a rifle for a while now. Got to looking at actions to start with and found northland shooter supply has trued 700 actions.... BUT, the only surfaces that have been tried is the locking lugs and the reciever face. Is this going to be sufficient for a precision rifle? I would figure the squaring the threads to the reciever face would be important. Any thoughts would be appreciated

Simple answer.

If you want to run pre-fit remage style barrels go ahead and grab the NSS action. It'll shoot.


If you're going to have a smith fit barrels, consider a custom or call LRI.



I have seen and shot plenty of .25" factory untouched recievers with a quality barrel and trigger, in a correctly bedded stock or chassis.

I'd put my efforts to a solid chassis, good barrel, and a flat reciever face with a flat recoil lug. Make sure the lugs are both engaged.
Then start burning barrels out.