2 groove barrels

[RU shooter]

Hi all, this spring I am planning getting a decent 1903A3 not a show piece but just a shooter mainly for cast boolits ,are the 2 groove barrels better ,worse ,same in the accuracy dept. with cast. I know with jacketed the accuracy is pretty much the same,but didnt know with cast. what say you all! TIA

[Phil]

The 2 groove is GREAT with cast bullets!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

Cheers,

Phil

[45 2.1]

I highly recommend the 2 groove barrels. They shoot cast much better than the 4 groove ones do.

[Char-Gar]

If you are going to shoot cast bullet and have a choice go with the 2 groove. Those wide lands support the bullet nose in a first class manner.

Four grooves 03A3 are no slouch either with cast. I have a 4 groove Remington and a 4 groove Smith-Corona and they both are cast bullet shooting jessies.

I am having a Krag rebarreled with a 2 groove Remington barrel. The chamber will also be much tighter than the military chamber. The stock will be a full house custom walnut outfit. I have high expectations of this rifle as a cast bullet rifle.

[KCSO]

As long as the bullet fits 2 goove is good with cast bullets. I never had a problem with the 03-a3, but some of the enfields can be a bear. I had one that needed a 317 bullet to shoot decent.

[Nueces]

Hey, Guys, thanks for sharing your experience with the 2-groove bores. I have been 'looking' for a 4-groove replacement for my 1903, because I thought that was what CBs needed. 2-grooves are much more common. It's sweet to know they work, too.

This rifle was a DCM purchase in the early 60s, and nearly new, until my brother and I failed to clean it well enough after some corrosive ammo. :(

Years ago, I found a nice C stock and a new Lyman 48S for it, but nice barrels seem to be made of unobtainium. The last star-gauged Springfield barrel on eBay went for over $700. :shock:

Since we had all of $12.50 in the rifle, I had wanted to make a National Match or an NRA Sporter out of it. But values have climbed so much that I don't feel as free to modify it as before. Still has the dark bore, though. Probably the smart thing to do would be to clean it again and maybe fire-lap it, and see how it shoots.

Thoughts?

Mark

[No_1]

If you are not happy with what you have, then fire lap it. What have you got to lose? After the fire lap job, do a chamber cast, slug the bore and see what is left. Find a bullet to fit the throat and barrel then it should shoot great. That is the beauty of cast boolits. You can fit the bullet to the gun. If it does not work then re-barrel it.

Now if you think that is too much work, I will give ya what you have in it AND pay the shipping / ffl charges on both ends....

Good luck,
Robert


Hey, Guys, thanks for sharing your experience with the 2-groove bores. I have been 'looking' for a 4-groove replacement for my 1903, because I thought that was what CBs needed. 2-grooves are much more common. It's sweet to know they work, too.

This rifle was a DCM purchase in the early 60s, and nearly new, until my brother and I failed to clean it well enough after some corrosive ammo. :(

Years ago, I found a nice C stock and a new Lyman 48S for it, but nice barrels seem to be made of unobtainium. The last star-gauged Springfield barrel on eBay went for over $700. :shock:

Since we had all of $12.50 in the rifle, I had wanted to make a National Match or an NRA Sporter out of it. But values have climbed so much that I don't feel as free to modify it as before. Still has the dark bore, though. Probably the smart thing to do would be to clean it again and maybe fire-lap it, and see how it shoots.

Thoughts?

Mark

[Nueces]

no 1

Man, the generosity on this board will just bring a boy to tears.....:wink:

Like I said elsewhere, though, a man has to clean up his own messes. So, let's see if I can rehabilitate the bore, then decide whether to rebuild it.

If I rebuild, there is no reason to use an original barrel beside the inconvenient fact that I just think the rifle 'needs' one. Am I projecting? Bob Sconce (Miniature Machine Co.) called me a purist. Yup.

Mark

[brimic]

My first experimentation with cast boolits was with a Smith Corona with a fresh Remington 2-groove barrel installed. I use a lee 200 gr boolit over 16 gr of 2400 with the bullet seated to engrave in the rifling. I was absolutely shocked at how well it shot, it shoots these slugs tighter than it does with SMKs out to 100 yards.

[Nueces]

Brimic,

When you say 'seated to engrave in the rifling', do you mean a bore-riding nose or the full-diameter shank pressed into the leade?

[No_1]

All joking aside, if you have never done what I suggested then maybe you should experiment a little and try it. No matter what you do (almost) you can fix it. You have the perfect giny (sp) pig in your hands. Going through the motions with this rifle will open your eyes to a new world of purchasing guns. People that are not what I call "open thinkers" will ditch a gun cheap because it won't shoot or the barrel is what they perceive as "done" and the cost associated with a re-barrel job is more than they are willing to spend. With a little tender love & care, a good lapping job and the correct bullet / load almost any rifle can be made a shooter IF the owner has the patience to stick with it long enough to figure it out. This board has been around a long time and the members have freely shared their experience which has built a very impressive database of info. Ask some questions to get the right terms that are used here then use the search function to find the threads. You will find this place is like the holy grail.....

Good luck,
Robert


no 1

Man, the generosity on this board will just bring a boy to tears.....:wink:

Like I said elsewhere, though, a man has to clean up his own messes. So, let's see if I can rehabilitate the bore, then decide whether to rebuild it.

If I rebuild, there is no reason to use an original barrel beside the inconvenient fact that I just think the rifle 'needs' one. Am I projecting? Bob Sconce (Miniature Machine Co.) called me a purist. Yup.

Mark

[Texasflyboy]

Hi all, this spring I am planning getting a decent 1903A3 not a show piece but just a shooter mainly for cast boolits ,are the 2 groove barrels better ,worse ,same in the accuracy dept. with cast. I know with jacketed the accuracy is pretty much the same,but didn't know with cast. what say you all! TIA

My first 03A3 was a RA 9-43 dated 2 groove barrel. I shot over 10K rounds of ball, and M2AP in it until the throat finally gave out. I replaced it with a new USGI 9-43 RA barrel and followed Ed Harris's recommended break in routine with AP ammo.

I shot Hensley & Gibbs #99 bullets in it for the first time last year and got 1" groups at 100 yards pretty much all day. I was shocked at how well it shot cast boolits.

Two groove barrels work for me....

Click the link to see a photo of the Hensley & Gibbs 99:

Hensley & Gibbs #99 (http://hgmould.gunloads.com/molds/99&502.jpg)

[brimic]

When you say 'seated to engrave in the rifling', do you mean a bore-riding nose or the full-diameter shank pressed into the leade?

The bore riding portion. The mould I have casts the bore riding portion at .301, I seat them so that there is some resistance when closing the bolt.

[Safeshot]

I have seen good results with 2 groove barrels using jacketed and cast bullets, both in Springfields and 1917 Enfields. The "JA" 2 groove barrels for the 1917 seem to do quite well. There is a lot of information concerning 2 groove barrels being better for cast bullets.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I've never had a rifle with one, but I have a friend who has used them extensively, but with ex mil and jacketed reloads only over many years since the war, he still shoots, but uses a 7.62 target rifle nowadays. He said the 2 groove barrels were as good as the rest, but went sour quicker when they were getting to the end of their life. the multiple groove barrels seemed to hang in a little longer and went off slowly it appears. He has an old 20 gallon drum full of worn out (they are really worn out, I checked them) barrels pulled off No1 & No4 303s, 7.62 conversions and P14s and M17s. Lord knows how much ammo he has sent downrange in his lifetime. Lots of them were two grooveers. He said he didn't mind them and bought them cheap off guys who didn't trust them when he was bringing up a family and his belt was buckled up a bit tighter.

[Nueces]

Thanks, All. This board has become my home on the net, next to eBay, where I get the toys to bring home!

I had thought that 4-groove barrels were much to be preferred for CB shooting, and have let some rel goodies get by me at auctions. Thanks for setting me straight.

Mark

[Bob S]

I posted this on the CMP site last night. Someone mentioned that SARCO has "4-groove barrels" that are "remanufactured two-groove barrels", and someone else said it couldn't be done. I have a few that definitely are. I am just going to paste my post in here because I'm too lazy to type it again:

"This line art is from the fourth edition of Clark Campbell's book "The 03 Springfield Rifles' Era" and should help you visualize how it's done. BTW, if you are interested in 03's and particularly 03A3's, this book should be in your library.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v76/BobS1/Springfield%2003s/WWIIboregroovedim.jpg

The two groove barrels were optional only if/when the form of rifling would result in cost and production time savings. This meant de facto it applied only to those manufacturers who were still cutting the rifling grooves individually. High Standard was already broaching when WW II started, so all HS made-barrels are 4 or 6 groove, which includes nearly all of the SC-marked barrels.

The two groove barrels were made by simply "skipping" every other groove, resulting in very broad lands. See the pic. The two groove barrels got a very bad rap after WW II, although the ordnance testing showed them to have acceptable "service accuracy". The bad rap likely came about because of the dimensions of the bore/groove that were allowed under the wartime relaxed tolerances. The bore and groove could be as big as .3015/.3095 and still "pass". I have had a few hundred of the two groove barrels come across my bench in the last 40 years, and I have slugged the bores and cast the chambers of most of them. Nearly all of the new two groove barrels that I have measured are close to, at, or even over the maximum dimensions. With those kind on internal dimensions, the barrels would shoot "OK" for battle rifles - remember that the nominal groove diameter for the M1917 five-groove barrels was .310" ... .300 bore plus .005 groove depth, but for civilians wanting to shoot 10's and X's, or even 5's and V's, with .3075" arsenal bullets, most likely not. So with the "bad rap", whether deserved or not, Dilbert Q. Barrelbuster was more than willing to pay a HUGE premium to get a "four groove" barrel, which may have the same "issue" as many of the 2-groove barrels. At the time that the DCM was selling new 2-groove barrels for 98 cents, the civilian emporiums like Sherwood were getting $8-10 for new in wrap 2-groove and $20-25 for new or even used 4 groove.

It is a relatively simple matter (in theory) to set a two groove barrel up on a rifling bench, and cut the "missing" two grooves, turning an $8 barrel into a "New in the wrap" 4-groove barrel for $25 and up. W-A-Y up these days. In practice, it is nearly impossible to really precisely index the barrel on the existing grooves. If the barrel is not precisely indexed, or if the job is done sloppily, this gives two sets of lands with visually-detectable different widths, and even if the indexing is pretty good, a careful examination of the surface finish in the opposite pair of grooves will give it away. The opposite pair of grooves may have measurably different depths also, but this in itself is not diagnostic because even broached 4 groove barrels can show this quirk.

Two-groove barrels got the rep as being "great for cast bullets" because cast bullet shooters will take the time to measure the bore and groove dimensions, and then cast and size bullets to fit that particular bore. Also, the .30 cal moulds of the 40's through about the 60's very typically cast the bore-riding noses at .298 or so, which is way to small for reasonable accuracy in a typical US .30 cal barrel. The two-groove barrels with more than 50% of the area at "bore" dimensions, would support even the undersized noses much better than the 4 or 6 groove barrels. With a bullet that truly fits the individual barrel, be it cast or jacketed, a 2-groove barrel in new condition will shoot right along with a 4-groove barrel in new condition, up to 600 yards. "

The only thing that I would add here is that two-groove barrels have no inherent advantages for cast bullets over *true* four-groove barrels, as long as the bullets fits.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Four Fingers of Death]

Thanks Bob, we gain a bit of knowledge every day on this board. Mick.

[RSOJim]

I know I shouldn't admit this but I shot my mauser action 2 groove RA -43 barrel yesterday at the range using Lymans accuracy load. The load is 49 grains of 3031 under a sierra 110 grain hollow point bullet. The caliber is 30-06. I have an old 1957 manufactured weaver scope of 10x mounted on this rifle. I shot 3 groups of 3 shots each at a measured 100 yds. Almost one holers, all bullet holes were touching. I tried other bullet weights along with other powders, but the above load impressed me as well as my buddy who I shoot with 2 times per week. I have 2 other mausers with 2 groove barrels chambered for 308. I usually shoot lead out of these 3 rifles, but I wanted to see how the other bullets shot. I am impressed with the 2 groove barrels I have. Now that I have my C&R I will be having built some more of these good shooting rifles. After all, only accurate rifles are interesting. I have been lurking around here daily for some time. Did I mention I am impressed with the 2 groove barrels ?

[Larry Gibson]

Got to agree with Bob S, two groove '03 barrels don't shoot any better than four groove barrrels. Actually with jacketed bullets the better accuracy of the four groove barrels is noticebly better past 200 yards. It all has to do with distorion of the bullet by the rifling. The egg shaped bullet of the two groove is not going to be as balanced in flight as that of the four groove shot bullet and thus not as accurate. Two groove barrels are much cheaper to make than four grouve barrels (cut barrels) so why don't we see them being made these days if they are more accurate? They aren't, that is why.

Years ago I bought into the "two groove barrels shoot cast bullets better" myth and when I made my .308 CBC I used a new, in the wrap, two groove '03 barrel. I quickly discovered it didn't shoot any better than any of the 4 groove '06 barrels I was already using. I've had numerous two and four groove barreled '03s over the years (still have 3 with four groove barrels). Most all of them, with a cast bullet that fit shot pretty much the same at 100 yards. However, all of the four groove barrels were more accurate at 200 yards with the same cast bullets than the two groove barrels even though they showed equal accuracy at 100 yards.

Since most don't shoot cast bullets past 100 yards (heck many don't shoot cast bullets out of rifles past 50 yards) it really doesn't matter as a good two groove '03 is generally a good shooter with cast bullets. However, it is hard to get past the story, the legend and the myth.

Larry Gibson

[45 2.1]

Got to agree with Bob S, two groove '03 barrels don't shoot any better than four groove barrrels. Actually with jacketed bullets the better accuracy of the four groove barrels is noticebly better past 200 yards. It all has to do with distorion of the bullet by the rifling. The egg shaped bullet of the two groove is not going to be as balanced in flight as that of the four groove shot bullet and thus not as accurate. Two groove barrels are much cheaper to make than four grouve barrels (cut barrels) so why don't we see them being made these days if they are more accurate? They aren't, that is why.

Years ago I bought into the "two groove barrels shoot cast bullets better" myth and when I made my .308 CBC I used a new, in the wrap, two groove '03 barrel. I quickly discovered it didn't shoot any better than any of the 4 groove '06 barrels I was already using. I've had numerous two and four groove barreled '03s over the years (still have 3 with four groove barrels). Most all of them, with a cast bullet that fit shot pretty much the same at 100 yards. However, all of the four groove barrels were more accurate at 200 yards with the same cast bullets than the two groove barrels even though they showed equal accuracy at 100 yards.

Since most don't shoot cast bullets past 100 yards (heck many don't shoot cast bullets out of rifles past 50 yards) it really doesn't matter as a good two groove '03 is generally a good shooter with cast bullets. However, it is hard to get past the story, the legend and the myth.

Larry Gibson

I don't agree with either of you!!! My two groove barreled rifles definitely out shoot the others. At long range also.

[Larry Gibson]

45 2.1

We mostly agree but occaisionally we disagree as this time. That's what makes shooting cast bullets fun, eh? I'm sure there are always exceptions to the rule but I've not seen anything thast shows 2 groove barrels are more accurate, especially at 200 yards and beyond. Given two '03 rifles of equal quality, one with a 2 groove barrel and one with a 4 groove barrel I'd bet that you'd be hard pressed to find a micrometer's worth of difference in cast bullet accuracy between them. I'd also bet that at 200 yards with the same loads the groups from the 2 groove barrel would on the average be larger than the 4 grooves groups. I'd further bet that the 300, 400 and 500+ groups of the 2 groove barrel will be correspondingly larger than the 4 groove barrels groups as the range increases. I've run the test and seen it to many times.

Larry Gibson

[45 2.1]

45 2.1

We mostly agree but occaisionally we disagree as this time. That's what makes shooting cast bullets fun, eh? I'm sure there are always exceptions to the rule but I've not seen anything thast shows 2 groove barrels are more accurate, especially at 200 yards and beyond. Given two '03 rifles of equal quality, one with a 2 groove barrel and one with a 4 groove barrel I'd bet that you'd be hard pressed to find a micrometer's worth of difference in cast bullet accuracy between them. I'd also bet that at 200 yards with the same loads the groups from the 2 groove barrel would on the average be larger than the 4 grooves groups. I'd further bet that the 300, 400 and 500+ groups of the 2 groove barrel will be correspondingly larger than the 4 groove barrels groups as the range increases. I've run the test and seen it to many times.

Larry Gibson

I've done the same with quite a few rifles of both groove types and manufacturers. I still don't agree with either of you! Furthermore, I don't shoot loads like either of you have listed either. With my loads there is a definite difference, a quite striking one at that.

[Larry Gibson]

45 2.1

I've just got to bite; which loads that I've listed are we talking about?

Larry Gibson

[KCSO]

I sure won't argue with Bob S as he has probably shot more good targets than I have ever seen. If I were offered a rifles that were identical except for grooves i would flip a coin, but if the two groove was the nicer gun I wouldn't hesitate just because two grooves were "Missing".

[45 2.1]

45 2.1

I've just got to bite; which loads that I've listed are we talking about?

Larry Gibson

I believe that Bob is a proponent of 2400. I also believe that you use this in rifles (not having a wonderfull memory of others folks loads) also as do many here. I'm not a believer of 2400 in rifles though. I basically use three powder speeds in the 30-06: Unique, IMR4064/4895 and AA3100 for specific loads, jacketed and cast.

[Larry Gibson]

45 2.1

With regards to the '06 in general and the '03s specificly I have used 2400, mostly with 311284 - a bullet I don't use anymore. It makes for fine 100-300 yard loads in the 1650-1800 fps range. I prefer 311299 with 4895 and a dacron filler in the 1900-2000 fps range. This load (in 4 groove barrels) is a consistant 1 1/2-2 MOA load for a 22 shot high power slow fire strings at 600 yards. The 2 groove barrels proved to be 3+ MOA rifles at 600 yards with this load even though they matched the 4 groove barrels at 100 yards for accuracy. I've found the same with 168/175 MKs in both barrels also although accuracy is a little better. For the 200-300 yards line I throttle the 311299 bullet back to a more sedate and accurate velocity of 1740 fps. I'm also finding that Lee's 311-185 bulet over 26 gr of AA5744 at 1876 fps is very accurate at the 200-300 yard lines but haven't shot it at 600 yards yet. It probably won't hold sonic velocity to there though.

We really must get together for a nock down drag out BS and shooting session some time with the 6.5x55 and these '03s, I think we both would enjoy it.

Larry Gibson

[Phil]

Well, I have shot two groove barrels with jacketed match ammunition at 600 yards, in registered competition, and they shoot just fine. They are also much easier to find a good shooting cast load with lead bullets than are the narrow land four groove barrels.

Cheers,

Phil

[45 2.1]

45 2.1
We really must get together for a nock down drag out BS and shooting session some time with the 6.5x55 and these '03s, I think we both would enjoy it. Larry Gibson

Sounds like a plan. Are you going to move? We're a long ways apart. I've got two board members close to me, one I see a lot and one i've never seen. It would be a really good session.

[Bob S]

I am a "proponent" of 2400 because it has been winning matches for me for over 40 years now in a variety of cartridges. I only use it for 100-200 yards. Beyond that, I used 4895 and WW II surplus 4831. I have not fired cast in .30 cals beyand 300 yards because I figure they won't shoot Master class scores at 600, and I am competing against Match rifles with high velocity and high BC jacketed match bullets. I have two 03A3's with issue barrels that I used to fire regularly XC; one two groove and one 4 groove, and they would shoot comparable scores at 600 yards ... low 190's with jacketed match bullets. The one 03A3 with the heavy 6 groove barrel would shoot 198's pretty regular.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Larry Gibson]

Sounds like a plan. Are you going to move? We're a long ways apart. I've got two board members close to me, one I see a lot and one i've never seen. It would be a really good session.

Enough of the previous insults!!!

You have thrown down the gauntlet and I gladly pick it up! I'm not moving but I do retire shortly and am planning some traveling, where could we have a 2-3 or maybe more shoot and gab fest? Maybe later this fall or next spring? Let's not let this drop as I'd really like to come back and meet and shoot with you guys.

Larry Gibson

[45 2.1]

Enough of the previous insults!!!

You have thrown down the gauntlet and I gladly pick it up! I'm not moving but I do retire shortly and am planning some traveling, where could we have a 2-3 or maybe more shoot and gab fest? Maybe later this fall or next spring? Let's not let this drop as I'd really like to come back and meet and shoot with you guys.

Larry Gibson

I live in Southern Illinois, glad to have a visit and shoot. Have my own range with covered bench and berms, gongs and target boards at 100, 257 and 380 yards plus some interesting field shooting oportunities. I will have a wood stove set up in the shooting shed by this coming fall also. Some other guys here you would like also.

[Four Fingers of Death]

Sounds like the place to visit 45 2.1!

[Larry Gibson]

Like I said, let's not drop this. Only the details remain to be worked out!

Larry Gibson