Benchrest shooting has never been exactly mainstream, but places like Namaka and Clearwater took "not mainstream" to extremes.  Both ranges were truly grassroots organizations. Today, the venues have changed but the esoteric nature of the sport has not. That is the attraction for most people, I suspect. Bill.



 

Another thing I have to say: I have shot Benchrest, intermittently mind you, since 1976. In this fifty-year time span, the one constant has been the good nature of the people involved. In my experience, the shoots you will think of with regret, are those you chose to skip. I have a lot of regrets! Bill.

Sorry to hear that. A reminder that time passes for all. I don't know that there are any shooters around from the seventies. I'm happy to say though, the new shooters are just as congenial and welcoming as we were. Well, maybe not as nice as I was, but pretty nice nonetheless! Bill

Well, I shot like a visually impaired man suffering serious cognitive issues. I have never shot so poorly in my life. I shot a great group in practice, so I put the gun away and awaited the start. That was the last good group I produced. My score targets didn't go any better. I felt like Alice in Wonderland. I was in a place where nothing was as it seemed! I plainly over-estimated my abilities! I'll need to spend some time at the bench with serious intent. I may have been a little cavalier in my approach! Still, a pretty good time, poor shooting notwithstanding. Bill

After many, many years away from BR competition, I decided to get back into it. There was a time when I was a passable shooter but that was then. Nonetheless, I attended a couple of matches this past summer (where I shot quite poorly, thanks for asking) with the intention of attending a big match once I got sorted out a bit. I heard about the Tack Driver match, organized by Jim Cline in South Carolina. It is a match fired at 300m (I like the distance) for group and for score (the score part is on a 200 yd hunter BR target!). It is kind of a "run what you brung" event, but the winning formula, to date, has been a HV rifle in PPC or a BR or BR derivative.  Hugh Williamson has come very close to cleaning the score portion of the event and has placed second overall. If pressed, I would be inclined to pick Hugh as the likely winner this year. Still, ever the optimist, I entered the match and I brashly told Jim that I would show up with a 308. Now, I had a heavy 308 with which I had shot a 750/750 on the ISSF target and it is a pretty solid 1/4 minute rifle at that range. Instead of that, I decided to build another.
I had three suitable actions and a couple of old Hart barrels. I also had one unsuitable action which I naturally chose to use. This is an old Wichita Mini action with a PPC bolt.  I fitted one of the Hart barrels to it and rebated the rims on twenty cases to test the concept.  It worked fine except for one thing; it didn't shoot as well as my silhouette rifle. In fact, it sucked. Now and then, it would shoot under .4 but it was usually closer to .8. Pretty good for a lightweight 30/06 but an embarrassment for a BR gun. Now I had previously shot this rifle, with a 6BR barrel on it (also with rebated rims) at a couple of BR matches. It had not shot particularly well. It was worse as a 308. The likely reason became apparent when I was taking it apart to do some diagnostic work. When I removed the scope (a 36x Weaver) it rattled! Now I'm no expert, but I don't think they are supposed to do that. I replaced it with an old 24x Leupold I have and, at the same time, put on a new Williamson barrel. The improvement was immediate and I'll tell all about it later. Right now, I've got to go to town. Bill

Although you wouldn't necessarily think so, given my shooting, I had a great time. I'll see you at the provincials in August, with rifles and self finely tuned!
This is a great facility and location. I do think the wind generator could be turned down a bit!  Bill

So, I was going through some piles of stuff and came across an old Certificate Dad (James E. Leeper) got for establishing a new Canadian 200yd group record in Sporter class (for the younger members, Sporter class was like light Varmint, but you couldn't shoot a 22. It died out when it was realized hardly anyone shot a 22 anyway). The record was five shots into .844"! This would, of course, cause most competitors today to gnash their teeth and mumble obscenities. Dad's note says this was shot with a Remington 40XBR in 6mm Remington caliber. The scope was a 20X Remington with external adjustable mounts. The load was 4895 behind a Sierra 75HP. I have the action from the rifle, but nothing else. Plainly, accuracy has come a way since then. Regards, Bill

I made an improved model using aluminum flashing and duct tape. I labeled the "Red Green signature model" and expected to be swamped with orders. Didn't happen though.  Bill

Wow! That is really impressive. Got to be Canada's best BR venue. Regards,   Bill.

These guys test batches of barrels of the same make (whatever their favourite maker may be at the time). The reason they test batches of barrels (this assumes their pockets are deep enough to allow such testing and re-inforces the idea that the winners buy their way in; a contention with which I disagree) is that nobody is able to identify exactly what makes a good barrel vs a great barrel. If a barrel is perfect in all identifiable respects, it may or may not be a great barrel. If a barrel is obviously flawed, it may or may not be a turkey. It may be assumed, however, that a barrel which is straight, consistent in dimension, and smoothly finished, has greater potential to be exceptional than the flawed barrel.
Now, I have to say, I disagree with the practice of not lapping a barrel and I believe lapping may well be the most important step in producing a great barrel. Until this final finishing touch, the barrel is only potentially great. Some barrels may be good enough before lapping but they are likely to be better afterward. Also, a mediocre barrel can be improved to where it may achieve greatness. Nonetheless, I am willing to accept an unlapped barrel if I think it is basically sound because I can always lap it myself. If it doesn't work out, I have only to look in the mirror to lay blame.
I am also convinced that while most rifling configurations are just a demonstration that most anything will work well, there are configurations which are better than others for good, practical reasons.
I don't believe there is a great deal of difference between cut and buttoned barrels. Many years ago, I was quite convinced that buttoned barrels were somewhat more consistent but the ascendency of Krieger barrels over the last fifteen years or so puts the lie to this. Their practice of honing prior to rifling and lapping subsequently is a large part of their success and the guys doing the lapping should be well paid.
At one time, Ed Shilen figured that barrel straightness was immaterial as long as the barrel was not so crooked that fitting and chambering was difficult. The thing is, it doesn't take much of a curve to create a challenge when trying for a BR quality chamber and Shilen has, in recent years acknowledged this and begun straightening their barrels during manufacture (I assume this is done after drilling but prior to reaming as this makes the most sense from a machining standpoint).
Ultimately, one has to feel he is getting what he paid for and when barrels are getting into that 400 dollar range (thanks to market interference by the US State Dept.  Free enterprise, my ass!)one would hope that the necessity for trying out a batch of barrels would be a memory.
I'm hoping this is the summer our campground will take care of itself a little better and allow me to shoot a bit. We'll see what happens. I just don't have the time I need to have!   Regards,   Bill