APR_Shooter
New Member
Was just made aware of this thread, and again, against my better judgement feel like it needs a response so folks can see "the whole story".
John 264 - I remember our conversation very well. First, we both know that the gun was not ever meant to be a "PRS" gun. The customer chose the components he wanted on the build, just like every other customer does. We are kind of up to speed on what constitutes a PRS rig, as several of the top 10 shooters in the nation have been fielding our work for the past few years.
When you contacted me with this issue, the first thing I asked was what you had done to "determine" there was an issue, so we could establish a baseline. At that point you had fired exactly one brand and type of ammo(maybe even the same lot?) and the gun didn't seem to like it. No trying other ammo, no trying another optic or any of the other normal protocols that would be SOP for determining there was an actual issue.
Next you did indeed point out that there was uneven lug contact. When I asked if you determined that with the trigger and fire control removed, you told me no. I'm going to tell you here just like I did on the phone that you can't make that determination by coloring the lugs with a sharpie/dykem and going to town. Especially with the fire control system still in play. The bolt has to have clearance in the raceway for it to function, right? Let's call it .006" simply because it actually IS on that action. We have the lugs on one end and a trigger on the other, right? Guess what happens with that .006" clearance when that trigger pushes up on the opposite end of the bolt? Most likely the top lug is going to come off face. Of course that is not an issue when the pressure is taken off the bolt by the trigger during actual firing sequence, since the bolt will go back to it's center and lugs will come into alignment as intended. Now knowing all that and using a little common sense and also knowing that a bolt is often cycled far more than it is actually fired, it's pretty obvious as to why the bottom lug would actually show more wear.
And the bedding...........You did indeed say the bedding was bad and not "how you do it". When I asked you to clarify, you said it didn't extend past the lug......you like a couple inches forward of that. Ok, I'm not going to argue your method and didn't on the phone either. I'm not sure there is one single "right" way to do it as I've seen many work. I'm sure yours is wonderful. I will say our method which is the same as many other precision builders does not carry forward of the recoil lug for several obvious reasons. Harmonics being altered by thermal expansion being the main one. I would be curious as to how you concluded the .010" stress was present? Our method does not rely on screws or anything else to force the action out of it's neutral positioning in the bedding compound. That said, I can still force it to show error on an indicator if I set the test up improperly.
I'm truly sorry you got the impression of us you did on the phone. I must admit the constant reference to your "20 years of experience" during our conversation probably did have me somewhat frustrated as I found myself having to explain these very basic concepts to someone at that level. We try very hard to provide a product and service that exceeds our customers expectations. We mostly succeed, but sometimes fall short. Given the chance, we'll make it right 100% of the time. Guys like you make that task harder by diagnosing "issues" that you clearly don't understand or haven't done your due diligence in isolating all the variables.
Sorry to be on here posting in a "defensive" position. I completely understand that not everyone is going to like our product or service. That's just life and business. I usually refrain from commenting on these threads altogether. But when someone posts something about us that is false or only half the story on a public forum, I feel it warrants a response.
John 264 - I remember our conversation very well. First, we both know that the gun was not ever meant to be a "PRS" gun. The customer chose the components he wanted on the build, just like every other customer does. We are kind of up to speed on what constitutes a PRS rig, as several of the top 10 shooters in the nation have been fielding our work for the past few years.
When you contacted me with this issue, the first thing I asked was what you had done to "determine" there was an issue, so we could establish a baseline. At that point you had fired exactly one brand and type of ammo(maybe even the same lot?) and the gun didn't seem to like it. No trying other ammo, no trying another optic or any of the other normal protocols that would be SOP for determining there was an actual issue.
Next you did indeed point out that there was uneven lug contact. When I asked if you determined that with the trigger and fire control removed, you told me no. I'm going to tell you here just like I did on the phone that you can't make that determination by coloring the lugs with a sharpie/dykem and going to town. Especially with the fire control system still in play. The bolt has to have clearance in the raceway for it to function, right? Let's call it .006" simply because it actually IS on that action. We have the lugs on one end and a trigger on the other, right? Guess what happens with that .006" clearance when that trigger pushes up on the opposite end of the bolt? Most likely the top lug is going to come off face. Of course that is not an issue when the pressure is taken off the bolt by the trigger during actual firing sequence, since the bolt will go back to it's center and lugs will come into alignment as intended. Now knowing all that and using a little common sense and also knowing that a bolt is often cycled far more than it is actually fired, it's pretty obvious as to why the bottom lug would actually show more wear.
And the bedding...........You did indeed say the bedding was bad and not "how you do it". When I asked you to clarify, you said it didn't extend past the lug......you like a couple inches forward of that. Ok, I'm not going to argue your method and didn't on the phone either. I'm not sure there is one single "right" way to do it as I've seen many work. I'm sure yours is wonderful. I will say our method which is the same as many other precision builders does not carry forward of the recoil lug for several obvious reasons. Harmonics being altered by thermal expansion being the main one. I would be curious as to how you concluded the .010" stress was present? Our method does not rely on screws or anything else to force the action out of it's neutral positioning in the bedding compound. That said, I can still force it to show error on an indicator if I set the test up improperly.
I'm truly sorry you got the impression of us you did on the phone. I must admit the constant reference to your "20 years of experience" during our conversation probably did have me somewhat frustrated as I found myself having to explain these very basic concepts to someone at that level. We try very hard to provide a product and service that exceeds our customers expectations. We mostly succeed, but sometimes fall short. Given the chance, we'll make it right 100% of the time. Guys like you make that task harder by diagnosing "issues" that you clearly don't understand or haven't done your due diligence in isolating all the variables.
Sorry to be on here posting in a "defensive" position. I completely understand that not everyone is going to like our product or service. That's just life and business. I usually refrain from commenting on these threads altogether. But when someone posts something about us that is false or only half the story on a public forum, I feel it warrants a response.
