Custom GP 100

bcgunworks said:

There will always be ones that dont like different things or ones who fail to accept new ideas and thats fine.

Click to expand...

Sorry sir but my comments and skepticism won't be dismissed as just rhetoric from an old stick in the mud. You don't have the reputation, following or credibility of Hamilton Bowen, Jack Huntington, Jim Stroh, Alan Harton, John Linebaugh, Dick Casull, David Clements or myriad others so pardon me if I ask you to explain how you came about your conclusions. I am merely skeptical about your theories concerning barrel harmonics and the viability of free floating a revolver barrel. Also, the biggest factor that introduces the most variables is the cylinder itself. A revolving cylinder with six individual chambers, mounted on a swinging crane is the single most important factor affecting revolver accuracy. Not the barrel. So yes, you can bet your ass I'm going to ask you how you go about mitigating the inconsistencies inherent in any factory revolver cylinder. Questions, I might add, that you did not answer. Questions, I will also add, that any of those men mentioned above would gladly answer during the course of a quick phone call.

PS, Bog Gear can hardly be considered a "field rest". I know that's how it's marketed but please, it's basically a portable benchrest. What you are doing, that does alter point of impact, is resting the butt.

Rumrunner said:

Jules, what will you put on yours for optics?


Looking forward to seeing results with the Redhawk conversion.

Click to expand...

I had a Leupold 2.5 x 8 LER on it and am sticking with that for now. But am thinking real hard on trying a riflescope.

I tried a rifle scope on a MK II 22 long ago, but it was difficult to shoot steady, more because of the gun itself. I have a Bushnell Trophy 2 x 6 on a 12" Encore in 223. With that set up I can get 1.5" groups at 100. Have thought about a rifle scope for that one, just don't know if my shooting ability will notice a difference.

Craigc

These questions have been answered here and elsewhere before.

Everything is worked over as needed for each individual wheel gun.

I have found it to be more important to reduce the time the bullet is unsupported.
This is done with a minimal bc gap and a modified forcing cone angle.

Line boring is not required to accomplish proper alignment.

The targets over the distance speak for themselves. Show me another setup that consistently shoots near MOA.

With the use of a muzzle brake and muzzle climb being greatly reduced the guns track nearly strait back...so the butt resting issues don't matter.

These guns are shot more like a specialty pistol (xp100 or tc).

If bog gear is a bench then I can't wait to see what it will do at 300+ yards off an actual bench with a front rest and bags....I'd bet I could do half MOA.

Bog gear has flex...it pivots under recoil spreading shots right to left...And a few other short comings....

Once again....there will be a few customers running these at Wyshot and myself. There will be lots of videos and pictures.

If you still can't believe it come on out there as I try and work on 5" steel plates to 500 yds....nope I won't hit them all. It's one shot per target and with a wee little pistol round wind call is key.

The pdog will prob be easier since I can get multiple shots....I took pdogs out to about 200 yds last year with iron sighted wheel guns. Even took some to 50ish with a little Walther ppk in 32acp...and there are lots of witnesses to this...I

Or if you can't make it there you can come to my shop like many others have and shoot it for yourself. That has eliminated any doubt for many.

These have impressed many shooters who have a focus on extreme accuracy with specialty pistols.

Ernie bishop. Well known and respected specialty pistol shooter. Many look at as an expert. Shooting one of the first prototype franken Rugers. 100 yard group with factory ammo. I don't remember the group size. But that's on an 8" plate...it's way under moa...and way under 1/2 moa measured center to center. Writes for eastmans hunting and has some articles in online mags to..off the top of my head I think it's handgun hunter and a long range mag.

Rum runner

Rifle scopes are a learning curve for sure. I run one on my super munk...chipmunk 22 pistol that has been rebarreled and accurized.

The rifle scope once you learn to use it gives you all the advantages that typically come with a rifle optic. More adjustment. More magnification. And so on. Once you get use to it it's actually fast.

I don't shoot many of the specialty pistol type guns but most of the guys that do use rifle scopes. A muzzle brake helps with this. Even on your 223 it would take out all of the reward motion under recoil

I use a rear bag on the bottom of my grip of the Franken Ruger and on MOA maximum specialty pistol and on my XP 100 specialty pistols.
I have been using a small field bag under the grip of both rear grip and center grip handguns for years with very good success and yes even at distance.
Resting the barrel of a revolver or a rifle on something hard is going to change point of impact You need two things to prove that an accurate gun that is consistent and someone who can shoot it consistently
I would encourage people to try this for themselves and witness the change
You don't have to believe what people say, just prove it to yourself.

bcgunworks said:

These questions have been answered here and elsewhere before.

Click to expand...

They have not been answered here and I have not asked them elsewhere.

bcgunworks said:

Everything is worked over as needed for each individual wheel gun.

Click to expand...

Which basically means you either don't know what I'm asking, or you can't do it and won't admit it on an open forum.

bcgunworks said:

Line boring is not required to accomplish proper alignment.

Show me another setup that consistently shoots near MOA.

Click to expand...

bcgunworks said:

I doubt you will find another shooting system that can do this.

Click to expand...

There's a whole bunch of gunsmiths, many of whom have been building guns since you were crapping yellow, who would probably disagree with that statement. So what you're saying is that your guns shoot better than those built by Bowen, Linebaugh, Huntington, Harton, Stroh, Clements, Freedom Arms, etc. and that you have figured out something they haven't? Moreover, you get testy when questioned about it and supply nothing but vague, often condescending answers???

Fact is, any of the custom linebored guns or FA's will shoot MOA or close to it and they do it without free floating barrels. Except they're never built with 12" barrels and picatinny rails for big variable scopes so few people are shooting for tiny groups at 100yds. You're using light bullets at extreme velocity to cheat the wind, reduce flight time and flatten trajectory.

The reason I'm doing this is that you've made several comments over the last nine months implying that you placed yourself on the same tier with those folks I mentioned above. Now you've gone so far as to place your work on a tier above. I have a real issue with that. You're not there, not by a long shot.

CraigC said:

bcgunworks said:

These questions have been answered here and elsewhere before.

Click to expand...

They have not been answered here and I have not asked them elsewhere.

bcgunworks said:

Everything is worked over as needed for each individual wheel gun.

Click to expand...

Which basically means you either don't know what I'm asking, or you can't do it and won't admit it on an open forum.

bcgunworks said:

Line boring is not required to accomplish proper alignment.

Show me another setup that consistently shoots near MOA.

Click to expand...

bcgunworks said:

I doubt you will find another shooting system that can do this.

Click to expand...

There's a whole bunch of gunsmiths, many of whom have been building guns since you were crapping yellow, who would probably disagree with that statement. So what you're saying is that your guns shoot better than those built by Bowen, Linebaugh, Huntington, Harton, Stroh, Clements, Freedom Arms, etc. and that you have figured out something they haven't? Moreover, you get testy when questioned about it and supply nothing but vague, often condescending answers???

Fact is, any of the custom linebored guns or FA's will shoot MOA or close to it and they do it without free floating barrels. Except they're never built with 12" barrels and picatinny rails for big variable scopes so few people are shooting for tiny groups at 100yds. You're using light bullets at extreme velocity to cheat the wind, reduce flight time and flatten trajectory.

The reason I'm doing this is that you've made several comments over the last nine months implying that you placed yourself on the same tier with those folks I mentioned above. Now you've gone so far as to place your work on a tier above. I have a real issue with that. You're not there, not by a long shot.

Click to expand...

Dude! Not trying to start anything but If you let things likes this get your panties in an uproar you have plenty of issues.

well for one....I have never tried to put myself on anyone else's level....I dont want to be compared to anyone else. I am my own person.

All of those you listed are exceptional smiths. And all do great work and all have their own methods for accomplishing what they want.

You lost me on the whole 9 month thing....I am hardly on here...some people have posted work that I have done for them and I have posted some of mine.

If I am getting constant results I must have some kind of a clue of what I am doing for truing these guns. Every individual firearm is different. And each individual firearm has different stacked tolerances that need to be eliminated as much as possible.

That common 2-6 bushnell elite handgun scope is hardly big glass...

little wiegand scope rails are no bigger than most use.....

So once again so its clear....I DO NOT COMPARE MYSELF TO ANY OTHER PERSON...and noone else should

THere is more than one path to the same goal....

and the offer has been made. If you want to try the product your more than welcome. I told you two places where it will be. In addition it will be in SC in October.

Its something different....nope its not traditional....nope its not pretty...Its all about function.

and in closing....tiny groups are proof all on their own.

Your leather work looks nice by the way

Craig,
I consider Bob a friend (I do not know the other gentlemen you listed), and I usually get to spend a day or two with him, as a bunch of specialty pistol nuts (12+) are shooting at paper for groups at 500, 75, and 1000 yards in June, south of Sundance WY.
Neither of my FA's could shoot the groups I did in SC with two prototype Franken-Ruger's that I had never handled until the day I shot them. And I was shooting Extremunition ammo...I didn't even do load development
The Burris scope (Silver Satin one) was a 1-4 or 1-5 LER scope.
Will I be using higher magnification scopes on mine? YES
Why? Because they have better glass, and more internal adjustment for distance
Bog-Gear is way more steadier than off-hand, but it is hardly used for benchrest comps-Now that would be funny to watch.
This is front rest used for benchrest shooting...


This is Bog Gear...
Scope is a Burris 2-7 LER on this FR


FWIW-I would rather shoot prone with a bi-pod and a small pillow bag any day over seated with Bog-Gear.....Much steadier. A Harris bi-pod is a far cry from a front rest that people use in BR.

bcgunworks said:

well for one....I have never tried to put myself on anyone else's level....I dont want to be compared to anyone else.

Click to expand...

When you make comments like those I quoted above, you ARE saying that your work is better than theirs. Whether that is your intent or not. You have stated unequivocally that your setup out shoots all the rest. That lineboring is unnecessary. Now, you could've continued posting your guns and your results without making such claims and that would've been fine. But you did make those claims. I find those to be a rather bold statements, considering that you are apparently doing NONE of the traditionally accepted modifications typically done when accurizing a revolver, aside from installing a new barrel. No fitting oversized bolts. No blocking the action. No building new linebored cylinders from scratch. Which I don't have a problem with in the least but if you're going to make such statements, you better be prepared to back it up.

bcgunworks said:

THere is more than one path to the same goal....

Click to expand...

Not really. It's pretty straightforward, with little variation.

bcgunworks said:

Its something different....nope its not traditional....nope its not pretty...Its all about function.

Click to expand...

Once again, I made no judgements based on looks.

bcgunworks said:

and in closing....tiny groups are proof all on their own.

Click to expand...

I really don't care about ringing gongs. If it's not five or six consecutive shots on paper, you're not showing me anything quantifiable. I know of another guy that brags about his tiny groups but you never seen them on paper, only on paint cans.

jules said:

Dude! Not trying to start anything but If you let things likes this get your panties in an uproar you have plenty of issues.

Click to expand...

I'm not the one with their panties in a bunch. I asked some basic, valid questions and your gunsmith got awfully defensive.

Ernie Bishop said:

Bog-Gear is way more steadier than off-hand, but it is hardly used for benchrest comps-Now that would be funny to watch.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the condescending lesson but I think I know the difference. Sorry but I have to chuckle when I see something like the Bog setup referred to as a "field rest". Perhaps, if all you're doing is shooting prairie dogs 20ft from the truck. :roll:

Craig,
What I look for is results.
I am not a machinist or a gunsmith.
Never have been, and never will be, but I know what works.
If my shooting style is bothersome to you, in that you don't think it will work-I have no problem with that.
Still doesn't change the facts.
If you consider Bog-Gear a BR set-up, fine with me.
We are still shooting the groups that we are shooting.
A guy named Frank, who I had never met before, shot the FR (In South Carolina) and wouldn't you know it, shot the smallest 6-shot group of his life at 100 yards.
I am in with Chris on this.
If you want to see one in action or better yet actually come and shoot one yourself, consider yourself invited.
I'm interested in results.
I don't have to shoot off-hand to reveal the accuracy of a weapon or hunt/shoot with no support to feel like I am a handgunner.
I want to get the best, most solid rest I can, so I can put the bullet exactly where I want it.
It seems like since Chris' revolvers are shooting groups that you believe can't be done with other revolvers by other smith's, therefore Chris must be a liar and a fake. Maybe all these groups are made up or are at 25 yards....
This is the reason for the invitation.
Pretend you are from Missouri (SHOW ME STATE), and come watch us and video us shooting.
But then by all means, get behind one or two yourself and see what you can do.
What is posted here you will not cause you to believe or be satisfied with what has been posted (At least that is my assumption currently).
I will pay for your ammo that you shoot when you come out and buy you supper or grill steaks for you.
Bring your video camera or smart phone.
Most of the shooting I do, I do amongst a group of people or in a competition.
I have hunted with revolvers (mule deer, antelope, and whitetail), and haven't much cared for them because of their accuracy when using them in the field.
This is why I am excited about the FR system.
Ironically, after shooting Chris' two FR's, it was the first time ever that I actually wanted a Ruger revolver to hunt and shoot with.
I just never put the name Ruger with accuracy (Sorry guys, but that is how I really felt).
About the condescending part...Was there sarcasm in there? Yes.
I guess it is clear that you do not appreciate when someone responds that way.
I would encourage you to consider that before you plow into someone else.
I wanted to make it obvious how you were comparing two shooting aids.

The FR is easier to shoot accurately since you can have a solid two points to rest the revolver without changing point of impact - This is the simple answer.
Second, what he does to build these is working.
They shoot good, regardless of what you or anyone else is convinced is required-Proof is in the results.

CraigC....I have one question for you. Are you a gunsmith or a machinist?

I'm just upset you didn't comment on me saying your leather work looked nice.

:lol:

bcgunworks said:

I'm just upset you didn't comment on me saying your leather work looked nice.

Click to expand...

:lol:

Hey Chris,
Thanks for the explanation on using a rifle scope. I think my Encore on a bag will be more user friendly then what my MK II was. I have a new scope at home that is replacing a scope on one of my rifles so might put the scope I replace on my Encore 223.
I took the Encore on a prairie dog shoot and usually had no problems out to 200+ yards. Still I would like to see just how accurate it could be.

Ernie would be the expert on rifle scopes and handguns...

But I'm sure he would recommend a muzzle brake to reduce recoil

With a small rear bag and a standard front rest you should do fine.

Ditto on what Chris said.
FWIW I have a Leupold 4.5-14 on my Franken-Ruger currently. It is braked
Here is an older article, but the principles still apply.
I only have one maybe two LER scopes on my pistols. A 223 Rem Freedom Arms, and a Ruger 22/45
http://www.handgunhunt.com/promo/membership/features/readNewArticle.php?oid=12&title=Rifle%20Scopes%20On%20Specialty%20Handguns
If you want, I can post links to videos showing how I shoot SP's with high magnification riflescopes.
Or I could PM them, since this about revolvers-Still same principle