How bad is an off-centre chamber?

[sackot]

Hoping someone can offer me hard data on this.

Yesterday I brought home a NIB .222, Remington 700 BDL.

I had a look at it with a borescope. Crown not great, something that looks like corrosion pitting on one side (but under the blueing) and something similar in the end of the bore. I can cut half an inch off and recrown it, though this will mean that if I later thread for a silencer I will lose the front sight, not the end of the world.

Chamber-- oh dear. The leade is off centre. On one side, the lands arrive at the lip of the neck, slightly tapered but still at about half-height. On the other, the throating part of the reamer has cut into the bore, and the lands start a little way into the bore. I suppose that means the chamber is 1-2 thou off, whether eccentric or skewed I don't know how to tell.

Now, some background so a US reader can understand how big a quandary this is. I live on a small island near Ireland and England. The nearest simile I can think of for the problems of importing this gun and having it put on my certificate, serial number and all, is that of doing the paperwork and building a silencer. I don't want to start again if possible.

I also think that it's a while since Remy have built this in .222, so there is probably no option to swap it, it will either be put up with it how it is, or make a fuss, get a refund, start again from scratch with a fair chance that I will simply not find another.

My inclination is to shoot it and see how bad it is, but this will make it harder to send it back. The barrel is not floated, there seems to be an intentional pressure pad in the region of the sling swivel lug, so I don't expect it to shoot well until I start hacking the stock and fiddling with the 100lb trigger pull, whereupon I've voided any warranty.

Can anyone tell me that
a) They saw the same but the gun shot reasonably OK anyway.
b) They saw the same and the gun would not shoot until it got rebarreled.

I've pulled up a few threads on the web which suggest that this is not unusual for Remington, though it seems to be potential flame bait to say so. Maybe this means that someone has experience of the results? I can't make up my mind whether this is simply equivalent to a couple thou of runout in the ammunition, maybe not benchrest but no big deal.

[scb]

Does your borescope have the ability to take pictures? The one we have at work takes digital images (jpgs). If it does send them to Remington and ask them what they are going to do to make this right. If yours doesn't I'd find someone that does. Of course you want to do this before you start cutting on it. From your description it sound like the likely hood of this shooting "well" is very small.

[JSnover]

New-in-the-box and it needs corrective surgery? I had a bad experience with a NIB Buffalo Classic. It looked fine but I had to use all of the windage in the rear sight to get on paper at 50 yards. Long story short: send it back.

[tomme boy]

All of the Remington rifles are this way. They will send it back the same way or the next one you get will be the same way. It's not just Remington that are this way.

[Artful]

I don't think it will give optimum accuracy but your not trying for bench rest records are you.
I'd shoot it first and see if it groups well enough to satisfy you.
I might make it harder to return to a retailer but
Remington shouldn't have an issue if sending back to one of their warranty stations.
Heck call them up first if you want and see what they say - set it back and rechamber for you?
http://www.remington.com/pages/support/parts-information/international-authorized-repair-centers.aspx
ENGLAND
REMINGTON OUTDOOR (UK) LTD. T/A
SPORTSMARKETING SMK
Commerce Way, Whitehall Industrial Estate
Colchester, Essex CO2 8HH, England
Phone #: 011-440 1206 795333
Fax #: 011-440 1206-792679
Contact: Luke Nash
Email: eric@riflesmith.co.uk

[HotGuns]

Shoot it and see how it does. It may not be the issue that the bore scope makes it out to be.

[country gent]

Call Remington voice your concerns over what your seeing and such. IE off center chamber to bore, damage crown at muzzle, excepdtionally heavy trigger pull. ( The forend pressure point is Standard for remington 700s. They will ask how it groups and more than likely tell you to shoot it and get back to them. I wouldnt shoot reloads as most manufacturers dont approve use of on general principle. Buy a couple boxes of remington factory ammo and use that to test. Manufacturers normally wont fix replace with out its grouping being known. Unless ity is a saftey issue.

[oldred]

No matter how anyone tends to sugar coat it this thing is a bad deal from the start, if shooting it first is going to create problems with the return don't do it because it's going to be a poor shooter and you can bet on it! There is no way you should have to accept a defect like that with a new rifle and this thing SHOULD be returned since rechambering is the only viable solution, words of encouragement will not help the poor accuracy one bit and an inaccurate 222 700 BDL is next to useless!

[sackot]

Thanks to all for the suggestions.

> Does your borescope have the ability to take pictures?

No just a standard hawkeye, unfortunately. I don't think I'll find anything better on my little island. I remembered that I had a USB microscope which has a field of view more or less the same as my borescope objective, so was briefly full of hope yesterday that I might get pictures with that, but after an hour of fiddling got nothing but round white discs-- it seems that the microscope lens or ccd lose almost all the contrast from the picture.

>Long story short: send it back.

Yes, my initial reaction from a consumer justice point of view--

> All of the Remington rifles are this way.

But this comment rather agrees with my more cynical/pragmatic mindset.

> Heck call them up first if you want and see what they say - set it back and rechamber for you?

Thanks for the information, Artful, I've just been acting on it. The email was out of date but I phoned and found out what gunsmith they use for warranty repairs, and I've now emailed him for an opinion. I'm hoping the fact that I tried this first will stand me in good stead if I shoot it and then need to return it.

> Shoot it and see how it does. It may not be the issue that the bore scope makes it out to be.

Just what I'm hoping. I'm waiting on scope rings and better weather, then I'll find out.

[tomme boy]

Remingtons accuracy standard is like 4 or 5 inches at 100 yds so don't expect it get rechambered if it shoots better than this.

[JSnover]

Remingtons accuracy standard is like 4 or 5 inches at 100 yds so don't expect it get rechambered if it shoots better than this.

Really? I assumed it would be better.
I've never fired a new Remington. My favorite is a 700 in 30-06, which shoots about 3/4 moa but the previous owner had it 'smithed.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I read what you said about your borescope experience, however are you really sure what you think you saw, was what was actually what is there? :veryconfu

I doubt you could see .001 runout even if you tried really hard. Also you may be seeing a machining burr as opposed to an out of concentricity situation.

My reason for saying this is I am curious how a chamber can be reamed "off center?" A chambering reamer has a pilot on it that is the same as the bore diameter less a .001 or so for turning clearance. The operation is done on a lathe so the barrel is turning and the reamer is stationary.

Reamers in production set ups like a barrel making operation would be ran in a "Floating Reamer Holder" This tool allows the reamer to float "axially" (parallel to the bore) so that it will find it's own way and center itself in the hole as it is introduced. The pilot hole drilled into the bore for the step in the chamber would also follow the existing hole.

If the reamer was cocked at an angle then the reamer would single point bore the hole (like a boring bar) which would again be concentric to the bore.

I can see how this condition could conceivably occur if the chamber was done by some rube in his garage, but being done on relatively modern machinery in a state of the art factory which makes hundreds of barrels a day it is pretty difficult to imagine your scenario. If the bore was not concentric to the OD of the barrel then it could conceivably throw everything off.

Not saying it couldn't happen but I would have to see it myself before I believed it. There are too many other things that could be going on.

I personally think you should get a second opinion and definitely shoot the gun before you jump off this cliff. If it doesn't shoot well then send it back.

Like they tell me all the time (I'm from California) If you don't like the gun laws you have over there then maybe you should move or elect representatives that will change those laws into something a little more reasonable. Your laws make CA look like 1900.

Randy

[Artful]

Remingtons accuracy standard is like 4 or 5 inches at 100 yds so don't expect it get rechambered if it shoots better than this.

I've never seen that anywhere - do you have a link tomme boy?

- most guns I observed on range days with average once a year hunters may have shoot groups like that
but if benchrested with sandbags and an experienced trigger puller behind it,
most all factory bolt guns with factory ammo averaged inch and half or better at 100 yards.

[nekshot]

this reminds me of the phrase "what you don't know can't hurt you". Shoot and I bet you will be surprised how good it is.

[MBTcustom]

I read what you said about your borescope experience, however are you really sure what you think you saw, was what was actually what is there? :veryconfu

I doubt you could see .001 runout even if you tried really hard. Also you may be seeing a machining burr as opposed to an out of concentricity situation.

My reason for saying this is I am curious how a chamber can be reamed "off center?" A chambering reamer has a pilot on it that is the same as the bore diameter less a .001 or so for turning clearance. The operation is done on a lathe so the barrel is turning and the reamer is stationary.

Reamers in production set ups like a barrel making operation would be ran in a "Floating Reamer Holder" This tool allows the reamer to float "axially" (parallel to the bore) so that it will find it's own way and center itself in the hole as it is introduced. The pilot hole drilled into the bore for the step in the chamber would also follow the existing hole.

If the reamer was cocked at an angle then the reamer would single point bore the hole (like a boring bar) which would again be concentric to the bore.

I can see how this condition could conceivably occur if the chamber was done by some rube in his garage, but being done on relatively modern machinery in a state of the art factory which makes hundreds of barrels a day it is pretty difficult to imagine your scenario. If the bore was not concentric to the OD of the barrel then it could conceivably throw everything off.

Not saying it couldn't happen but I would have to see it myself before I believed it. There are too many other things that could be going on.

I personally think you should get a second opinion and definitely shoot the gun before you jump off this cliff. If it doesn't shoot well then send it back.

Like they tell me all the time (I'm from California) If you don't like the gun laws you have over there then maybe you should move or elect representatives that will change those laws into something a little more reasonable. Your laws make CA look like 1900.

Randy

Believe it! You can see an off center chamber with a borescope very easily because of the acute angle of the throat. Just run the scope into the throat, and spin 360. A properly cut chamber will render a throat that appears as a band running through your field of view. An improperly cut chamber will appear thin/heavy/thin/heavy as you rotate the scope mirror.
While I agree that it seems crazy that an industry produced barrel could be out much at all, I'm here to tell ya that they are! In fact, I've seen better throat concentricity from old mill-surps than I have from modern rifles, and I personally hold that the throat/chamber alignment with the bore is paramount to accuracy.
However, I think that it's like any other form of precision: The closer you are to perfect, the more it makes a difference in how the rifle shoots. The further you get from perfection, the less of a difference it makes if one is slightly closer to being right than another.
Most rifles shoot like most rifles shoot, but it's much more common to find one that is an absolute dog, than to accidentally find one that has a perfect chamber. In fact, I've not seen it yet from a factory rifle.

That said, Remington used to make very satisfactory barrels up through the 80's that shot quite well, and the chambers and barrel dimensions reflect that. Not so much anymore. While it is still very common to find good ones, I'm seeing quite a few that have egregious hook in the bore, and horribly off center chambers. Almost like they were reamed at an angle (this is also very easy to see if you pull the barrel off a rifle and put it in the lathe. Just line up on the bore, and put an indicator on the chamber and prepare to be amazed......and not in a good way).

To the OP, if I were you, I would shoot the rifle and see if it is satisfactory to you. If not, send it back and ask for a better barrel. If it comes back no better than before (don't be surprised if it's not) then shoot it and see what it does for you. If it still sucks bird poopy rocks, then sell it and spend the money on a barrel blank and gun smith fees (be sure your smith knows how to properly ream a barrel accurately with a floating reamer holder etc. etc.)
In the future, take your bore scope to the gun shop with you, and inspect before you buy. Besides, it's fun to watch the guy behind the counter sweat while you look. LOL!

[tomme boy]

I can not post a link for the accuracy standard. But I have read it a couple times where people have sent the rifle in to have checked as it shot very bad. They sent it back and said it was within their standards. And that was with a target that measured 3.25" group. So believe what you like. But I can see them doing this.

Goodsteel. Are the chambers actually reamed. I thought I read somewhere the chambers were hammer forged. Then a finish reamer to final ream.

It is not only Remington that are like this. I was putting a AR15 together a few years ago before the Obama elections and I live really close to Rock River Arms. I drove there to pick out a stainless match barrel from them. Every single one of them had a off center chamber. If you looked down the barrel the throat looked like a C. It was deeper on one side than the other. Thats why it looked like a C. Nothing on one side. We went through about 20 barrels before I just said nevermind. They brought out the purchasing person and the head QC and said they never seen this before and it was going to be fixed as they have a accuracy standard that they put on every rifle they build. They thanked me and gave me the other small parts to me for showing them this. Never did go back for a barrel.

At the same time, I was in the market for a 308 win heavy barrel. I looked at 6 different Tactical Rem 700 models and they were all the same way. I ended up picking up a Savage action and had a barrel made for it. It was perfect.

[MBTcustom]

Tomme boy, having never worked in the Remington plant, I can't say how they do it, but I see radial striations in the chambers which tells me that the barrels are reamed. However, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that that they ream them the same way they cut the threads in the actions: Strap it to a V block and run the reamer in there with a dandified drill press. (If you search through YouTube, you can actually find a video where they walk you through the Remington plant and you can see a lady ram a big honkin tap right into the top of a 700 receiver.)
Given that level of "manufacturing precision" it's not surprising that we see the terrible products.

The SPS series rifles are the worst for this. I've gone ten rounds with a SS SPS trying to get it to shoot. The client started by telling me I'm the second smith he's been to (gulp) and his rifle still doesn't shoot worth a dam. I didn't have my bore scope at that time, but I crowned the barrel, bedded the action in his fiberglass stock (previous smith got him out of the tupperware SPS furniture thank God) and lapped his lugs. After all that, I watched in disbelief as this 30-06 loaded with 165gr SMK's shot a 4.5" group at 100 yards!! I really couldn't figure it.
I bought a pulled Tikka T3 SS barrel off e-bay for $60 and married it up to the 700. The result was instant sub-MOA groups from the same loads.
I saved the barrel and scoped it when I got my Hawkeye. What I saw is exactly what the OP describes. The throat looked like a "C" as you so accurately described it.
Was that the issue that was causing the bad groups? How should I know! It was a janky *** Remington barrel, and it's sitting where all janky *** Remington barrels should sit: In a pile with a bunch of other janky barrels that aren't' worth throwing lead through.
Life's too short to spend even 15 minutes trying to make a bad barrel shoot.

[sackot]

Thanks to all for the comments, I appreciate it.

Randy said:
> I read what you said about your borescope experience, however are you really sure what you think you saw, was what was actually what is there?

I know exactly what Randy means. I've had my borescope for a couple of years, and I'm sure I've "seen" all sorts of things that weren't there. In this case though, it really does stand out like a sore thumb, just as Tim says.

If a smith cut a chamber for you, he'd have a piloted reamer most likely with interchangeable bushings in tenths, so no way it could go off centre in the throat. I was assuming Remington will have finishing reamers with fixed pilots of the correct nominal bore, so possibly they just run them long after they are worn out and don't bother to check or change them.

I had decided to shoot the gun, was just waiting on scope mounts and good weather, but my tactics seem to have backed me into a corner. I had emailed Remington's UK smith with much the same description I gave above, and asked whether if correct they would consider that it should be replaced/repaired, or whether my expectations were just unrealistic. I hoped they might enter some kind of helpful dialogue. Instead they just stated that I should send it in to be checked, no comment on my observations.

I fully expect the 'return the same one or another which is no better' outcome, but now feel that I have to do what they say rather than ignore it, in case I end up pursuing warranty later. I'm guessing it will now be a good few weeks before I can report back on the result.

[swheeler]

I would shoot it even after the call into the Remington UK gunsmith. It was shot before you got it, and never cleaned I might add. Shoot it, see how it groups, clean it up good and wait for the reply.

[Smoke4320]

Thanks to all for the comments, I appreciate it.

Randy said:
> I read what you said about your borescope experience, however are you really sure what you think you saw, was what was actually what is there?

I know exactly what Randy means. I've had my borescope for a couple of years, and I'm sure I've "seen" all sorts of things that weren't there. In this case though, it really does stand out like a sore thumb, just as Tim says.

If a smith cut a chamber for you, he'd have a piloted reamer most likely with interchangeable bushings in tenths, so no way it could go off centre in the throat. I was assuming Remington will have finishing reamers with fixed pilots of the correct nominal bore, so possibly they just run them long after they are worn out and don't bother to check or change them.

I had decided to shoot the gun, was just waiting on scope mounts and good weather, but my tactics seem to have backed me into a corner. I had emailed Remington's UK smith with much the same description I gave above, and asked whether if correct they would consider that it should be replaced/repaired, or whether my expectations were just unrealistic. I hoped they might enter some kind of helpful dialogue. Instead they just stated that I should send it in to be checked, no comment on my observations.

I fully expect the 'return the same one or another which is no better' outcome, but now feel that I have to do what they say rather than ignore it, in case I end up pursuing warranty later. I'm guessing it will now be a good few weeks before I can report back on the result.

sounds like you have taken the course of action based on remingtons response

[W.R.Buchanan]

Tim: Remington is one of the few major outfits that still makes their own barrels in house. They use WWI and II rifling machines.

I was told this by Mark Gurney of Ruger as Ruger makes the majority of barrels for the rest of the industry. Ruger does hammer forging but the chamber is not part of the rifling procedure. The chamber is reamed after the fact as a 30 cal barrel blank for example could be used for a variety of cartridges.

I have reamed quite a few holes and I am fully aware of ways that a reamer can go out of alignment with a hole, but the shape of a bottle neck style reamer is going to help it go into the hole strait, and is going to require a significant amount of "I don't give a ship," to alter its path very much.

What I could see as a real possibility, is chambering a barrel blank where the bore is off center to the OD and when then running the reamer hard up with no floating capability. The reamer would still "try" to follow the hole but would be forced out of concentricity by the off center hole and as such would flex and bore one side of the hole wider than the other side. Thus would be at its worst at the throat.

OK,,, you talked me into it.

Randy

[swheeler]

tack-driving game-dropping machine built with everything you love about the Model 700, including a hammer-forged barrel,

from Remington ad

[Screwbolts]

By brothers favorite long punch on the farm is the take off 22/250 barrel from his 700. It takes a beating being used as a punch and is holding up very well for that purpose.

Ken

[sackot]

So finally, at long long last, I can report the result of this.

I sent the gun to the UK Remington service centre, as they told me to, so they could look at it.

It took four months and 160 pounds (about $250). They were competent and helpful but very slow, despite repeated calls and emails. This may be because they were also handling all of the UK 700 trigger recalls.

One of the staff read out the internal report to me, and the gunsmith confirmed exactly what I had told them already, ie off centre chamber, machining marks in bore near muzzle and poor crown. They said that Remington give no guarantee on machining tolerances, but do give a guarantee of accuracy, so they took the gun out and shot it, and it met Remington's standards (which will be why I had to pay for it all). I asked just what those standards were, so that I could report it back here. They promised to find out and get back to me, but never did. They also quoted the tester as saying the rifle "was a keeper".

The gun came back with a test card showing a 0.7" three-shot group. I don't put much faith in three shot groups, unless I'm just checking zero after storage, but it made me a bit hopeful.

It arrived back in late October, and the weather here has been so bad I've only just had the first chance to try it out myself. I started with jacketed, 40gr Vmax. Mine are handloads, they had used Norma but the same bullet. Then I tried some cast, NOE 22-055



122887122888122889


.
Groups pictured are at 50yd, this is what I happen to have available in the farmer's field behind my house. The first group was with FL-sized, allegedly once-fired brass. The vertical stringing must have some solution, if not for that, it would have been excellent. Next group, two days later now using the fireformed and neck sized brass, still vertical stringing, and actually slightly worse in the horizontal. Finally, 12 shots with cast, pretty appalling.

Cast was with NOE 22-055, wheel weights plus 2% pewter, heat treated. Load was 11gr 2400, a starting load from the Lyman cast manual. I sized to 225, but have now slugged the bore and it's 225, so have sent off for a 226 reamer to make a sizer. I went cheap and ordered from China, so that'll probably be after Christmas.

These results are just preliminary, I've 5 or 6 types of 22 cast to try, and all the possible experiments with alloy and load, before I give up on that. The trigger is still set to lawyer-weight pull, which I must fix but I don't think was the sole reason for stringing. At first blush, it looks as though it might shoot OK with jacketed despite the crooked leade, but the cast is not exactly promising.

[DougGuy]

Wow sad. I would have tried to send the rifle back, or take it back where I bought it, and take home a Ruger.

[detox]

I once purchased a new Remington 700 chambered in 223 and barrel had the same problem as yours. Grouping was about 1" using jacketed. Gun has since been converted to 308 with shillen pre chambered barrel.

Before buying my last Remington 700 chambered in 223 I inspected the chamber, throat, crown, rifling using the Hawkeye bore scope and everything looked good. This gun shoots VERY GOOD.

[Zouave 58]

It sounds to me that this is a bad deal for you. It almost sounds as if a new barrel is in order or perhaps a UK gunsmith can turn the barrel enough to rechamber it with a concentric neck. You haven't mentioned if you can reload for the rifle and I assume you will shoot only factory loads. So long as the bullet does not excessively deform off center in the leade inducing excessive yaw in flight, then you may get lucky. Sorry this has happened to you and good luck with it!

[Blackwater]

On the crown issue, here's something I've done quite a few times with surprisingly great results: I take one of those bullet shaped grinding points for your electric drill, chuck it up, and spin it against my belt grinder to shape it concentricly with the chuck. Then I take small squares of 400, worn 400, 600 and worn 600 grit wet or dry sandpaper, and form then into @ 1" or so squares. I fold them down the center once, then again 90 degreed to the first fold, and this forms a "pocket" when you place the point into it. Then I eyeball line it up on the muzzle, and hit the trigger to spin it about 3 quick rrrr's, reverse and do 3 in the opposite direction. Replace with the worn 400, then the 600, and finally the worn 600, and the bullets will fly out the crown with NO burrs to "grab" them and they'll fly straight - sometimes MUCH straighter than when they came from the factory. This is "rough" redneck engineering, I know, and I had to see a friend do it several times before I had the courage to try it on one of my own guns. I did a 10/22 once, and that alone - no other changes but this - turned it from grouping 1 3/8" at 25 yds. to nice, tight 3/8" (sometimes tighter) groups for 5 shots. That ain't no small thing when hunting small game. All it really does, if you think about it, is simply deburr the crown, and this has, in my experience, been sufficient to produce significant improvement in how many rifles have shot. We just don't get really great crowns from the typical factory sporter these days, and this simple, if seemingly TOO simple, technique has "saved" quite a few rifles from being traded off, and has turned some from sour shooters into very tight shooting rifles a man can be proud of - all with no other changes but the polishing of the crown. Pretty simple to try, and some Oxpho blue will return the color to the crown, too. I know of few techniques that have made as much difference in how rifles shoot, and it's pretty quick, simple and .... it just plain WORKS.

[Blue2]

I have been gunsmithing for a long time and building rifles--I have seen all of the issues mentioned and not just in Remington brand rifles. However to be fair I am often surprised just how well some rifles will shoot with the faults that can be observed in them. They are factory produced hunting rifles after all and not custom assembled firearms with match grade barrels. Most of us here on this forum will have experience playing with older military rifles with dubious barrels and they generally can be made to perform OK for recreation and minute of deer requirements.
I had one new rifle pass through my shop onetime that came from the manufacturer's Custom Shop. In 223 Remington. It would shoot half minute of angle with Hornady factory 50 grain varmint loads but the barrel was a mess inside. I could not imagine how this tube had been chosen for a Custom Shop rifle project. A regular customer would never see this as without a borescope it would not have been obvious.

[Clark]

I am just a putz that has rebarrelled 36 rifles for himself.
But I do have an interesting anecdote.
I bought a Rem700 take off 7mmRM CM barrel of Ebay for very little for amateur gunsmithing practicing.
To put it on a 1908 Braz Mauser I need to cut off the threads and cut the chamber ~ an inch deeper.
I cut off ~ 1" of the breech with a parting tool.
I did not de burr.
When the 7mmRM reamer went in, it started wobbling.
It never straightened out and wobbled all the way until it headspaced.
I put an indicator on it, and the chamber was out +/- 0.005".
I had initially dialed it in with a 0.0001" Intrepid test indicator.
As a joke, I took it to the range anyway with a number of other "good rifles" on 10-3-2009.123972
I only have 6 shots worth of data, but it was not what I expected at all:
7MM .284 DIA 162GR BIG GAME POLY CARB TIP moly coated
I paid 6.5 cents each as blems.
The powder is 62.8 gr H4350
The OAL is 3.34"
C) The [$33 Ebay] Rem700 take off 23.5" barrel, got the best stock, 1908 Brazilian Mauser action
8 pounds + scope
..1) 0.9" 3 shot group at 50y
..2) 0.75" 3 shot group at 100y

[paul h]

Sometimes it's best not to measure a gun before taking it to the range. I'm glad I don't have a bore scope as I'm sure I wouldn't like what I'd see! That said, I've had four newer production rem 700's, a 221 fireball, a .223 and two .243's. All of them are sub moa with handloads. I also have an older rem 700 .223 varmint rifle that I believe a "gunsmith" set the barrel back and re-chambered and the barrel axis is not parrallel to the action, I'd say if could extend a centerline through the action, and one through the barrel the tip of the barrel would be at least 1/8" off from the action centerline. But it'll put five shots into 1/2" at 100 yds.

That said, a friend had a model 7 that wouldn't shoot, and the barrel is noticeably bent, about 1/2 bullet dia off center.