B
B SLAGLE
Guest
If you guys was going to build a new 30BR . What items would you go with I have a Bat modle B RLR action and a nightforce 12-42 BR scope. What else would you with ( twist, barrel, stock, reamer, bullets,triger?
You are going to have to watch youself with other components because the Nightforce is so heavy. Assuming you want to do a 13.5 lb gun you may need to use a LV taper barrel if you don't go with a lightweight stock. Then be careful to keep everything in balance. It's easy to get muzzleheavy if you use a light stock and HV taper barrel.
Other components, any good BR quality barrel from the vendors here, Jewell, Shilen or Kelbly trigger (your preference), for a stock hard to beat the Edge or Borden. I like BAT rings myself. Good luck --Greg
David Halblom
Flying Fish Fundamentals
I would forego the weight and the expense of the Nightforce and use a Leupold 45 or a Weaver 36 for a scope. Then a Roberson (Borden) stock, a Kreiger or Rock barrel, 17 or 18 twist. A Robinett reamer, 0.00 freebore, and 112-118 grain bullets on .975 or 1.00 jackets. That way you can get as much weight in the barrel as possible in a 13.5# combo
I'll echo Greg's comments on gun balance.
The 1.35 Model B BAT's go about 33 oz, as I recall. The scope is 36 oz. I'd nail down the stock next and let that determine what barrel profile you want for good balance. If you're going to build a HV gun, my suggestion is to have a stock made for HV, not a lightweight stock. If you pay attention to the barrel profile and length, you'll end up with a much better balanced rig than with a lightweight stock with weight added.
The Borden/Robertson, Bruno/McMillan and the Kelbly TMBR are all good choices.
For barrels...any of the good barrel makers. I've had good luck with Lilja, Rock, Kreiger and the defunct Kostyshyns. 17 and 18 twists work well with both the 1.00 and .925 long jacketed bullets, though I prefer 'em twisted 17 using the 1.00 jackets.
For a reamer, the .330 neck 'Robinett' reamer is the Gold Standard. Freebore can run from zero to around .035-ish. This is where things get bit specialized. The .925's are generally better off with the 'zero' freebore, while with the 1.00 long jackets I like some freebore length. You can have the reamer done with no throat on it and have the 'smith throat it seperately to match your exact dummy round. This gets the base of the bullet exactly where you want it in the case neck.
If you have a dedicated firefrom barrel, you can blow the necks out by firing the cases w/o expanding the necks to .30. This nets you a slightly longer neck length (by about .025-.030) than you get by expanding the necks over a mandrel. This extra neck length lets you get a bit more powder up the case neck...which may prove helpful when tuning the shorter jacketed bullets.
The plain vanilla 'expand and turn' Robinett reamer is never a bad choice......
Good shootin'. -Al
P.S. I have both a LV and a HV 30BR. Both are well balanced and there's z-e-r-o difference in performance. The LV gun moves a bit more, is all.
The 1.35 Model B BAT's go about 33 oz, as I recall. The scope is 36 oz. I'd nail down the stock next and let that determine what barrel profile you want for good balance. If you're going to build a HV gun, my suggestion is to have a stock made for HV, not a lightweight stock. If you pay attention to the barrel profile and length, you'll end up with a much better balanced rig than with a lightweight stock with weight added.
The Borden/Robertson, Bruno/McMillan and the Kelbly TMBR are all good choices.
For barrels...any of the good barrel makers. I've had good luck with Lilja, Rock, Kreiger and the defunct Kostyshyns. 17 and 18 twists work well with both the 1.00 and .925 long jacketed bullets, though I prefer 'em twisted 17 using the 1.00 jackets.
For a reamer, the .330 neck 'Robinett' reamer is the Gold Standard. Freebore can run from zero to around .035-ish. This is where things get bit specialized. The .925's are generally better off with the 'zero' freebore, while with the 1.00 long jackets I like some freebore length. You can have the reamer done with no throat on it and have the 'smith throat it seperately to match your exact dummy round. This gets the base of the bullet exactly where you want it in the case neck.
If you have a dedicated firefrom barrel, you can blow the necks out by firing the cases w/o expanding the necks to .30. This nets you a slightly longer neck length (by about .025-.030) than you get by expanding the necks over a mandrel. This extra neck length lets you get a bit more powder up the case neck...which may prove helpful when tuning the shorter jacketed bullets.
The plain vanilla 'expand and turn' Robinett reamer is never a bad choice......
Good shootin'. -Al
P.S. I have both a LV and a HV 30BR. Both are well balanced and there's z-e-r-o difference in performance. The LV gun moves a bit more, is all.
Last edited:
jackie schmidt
New member
I have my own 30BR reamer, it has a overall length of 1.550 to take advantage of the way I make my cases. I blow them out rather than necking them up. The resulting case retains much of the originol 1.560 length of the originol Lapua 6BR case.
Aside from that, every thing else is standard 30BR fodder. .330 neck, 112 BIB's, 18 twist Krieger, zero freebore. I do use a LV taper barrel with all of the "straight" left on with my own 5.5 ounce tuner.. Most do not even recognize it as a LV profile. The stock I used is a Robertson BRX that is purposly built with extra material for HV. It weighs about 36 ounces. The action is a Farley, with the 10-60 March, the Rifle weighs one ounce under 13.5 pounds.
I do believe using the LV profile and heavier stock results in a better balanced Rifle. The thing does shoot quite well......jackie
Aside from that, every thing else is standard 30BR fodder. .330 neck, 112 BIB's, 18 twist Krieger, zero freebore. I do use a LV taper barrel with all of the "straight" left on with my own 5.5 ounce tuner.. Most do not even recognize it as a LV profile. The stock I used is a Robertson BRX that is purposly built with extra material for HV. It weighs about 36 ounces. The action is a Farley, with the 10-60 March, the Rifle weighs one ounce under 13.5 pounds.
I do believe using the LV profile and heavier stock results in a better balanced Rifle. The thing does shoot quite well......jackie
Last edited:
Dick Grosbier
Club Coordinator
Stick with the 12-42 BR Nightforce, there is a reason why it is the most popular high end scope in Score shooting.
You have the right Scope and Action get yourself a 17twist barrel some 112 Bib or 115 Euber bullets, I use McMillan Edge stocks but must admit the Robertson stocks as sold by Jim Borden look and work great. Jewell trigger and a Randy Robinette Zero Freebore reamer and you have it all.
You have the right Scope and Action get yourself a 17twist barrel some 112 Bib or 115 Euber bullets, I use McMillan Edge stocks but must admit the Robertson stocks as sold by Jim Borden look and work great. Jewell trigger and a Randy Robinette Zero Freebore reamer and you have it all.
Last edited:
B
B SLAGLE
Guest
Hey guys how much weight could I save if I went to a Panda action over the Bat ? Or would I be better off staying with the Bat? I am going to go with a HV Kelbly TMBR stock with a LV barrel Brux or Kregier in a 17 twist, Robinett reamer .330 neck zero freebore, and have it throated for my exact round. Where would be the ideal spot to have the base of the bullet in the case neck?
E
eww1350
Guest
Lee...you have a PM in reference to the stock...
P1ZombieKiller
http://www.P1ZK.com
I would call Ronnie Long, and let the master put together one of the best shooting guns you have ever shot.
J
jazzy
Guest
I know nothing at all about Gary Long but I do know Ronnie Long. In fact I have 2 rifles built by him in 30 BR. Both shoot better than I can shoot them.
W
Wlouie
Guest
AND at the risk of getting something started here, I think Ronnie Long was very instrumental in developing the 30BR and may very well have built the first one. Some of you older guys very probly have more accurate historical facts than I. The fact remains ....Ronnie Long can, and will, build you a very accurate rifle.
jackie schmidt
New member
Louie, there was a 30x1.5 years ago. The concept is nothing new.
What most of us credit the later pioneers, (specifically Randy R), with is the concept of small weight, short 30 caliber bullets and ultra slow twist barrels, which openned the door for the Varmint for Score Rifle that is so popular now.......jackie
What most of us credit the later pioneers, (specifically Randy R), with is the concept of small weight, short 30 caliber bullets and ultra slow twist barrels, which openned the door for the Varmint for Score Rifle that is so popular now.......jackie
P1ZombieKiller
http://www.P1ZK.com
No. I was talking about Ronnie Long. He built my two 30BR's I have, and like Jazzy said, they can shoot better than I ever can. With that knd of confidence in my rifles, I have not only been able to elevate my game, but far exceed my expectations. The only draw back to having a Ronnie Long built 30br is I expect to win every single time I take it to a competition, and I'm dissapointed when I don't. I have ZERO doubts in my rifle and my set up. When I miss, it's all on me....
W
Wlouie
Guest
Jackie....just to clarify.....I did not mean to infer that Ronnie Long did it all. Nor did I mean any disrespect to Gary. I think Gary's performance at the range as a shooter AND gunsmith speaks for itself. As I understand it. there were a couple of guys other than Randy and Ronnie in on the "30BR project" who just happen to be pretty darn good shooters who helped "get it noticed" at registered matches. Not exactly sure who did what, but this "committee effort" sure as heck worked. I still shoot Randy's 112s. but I haven't exactly done them proud lately.
I know both Ronnie Long and Gary Long. I have shot in more than one registered IBS match alongside both and consider both to be good friends. I would not hesitate to shoot a match with a rifle built by either.
I know both Ronnie Long and Gary Long. I have shot in more than one registered IBS match alongside both and consider both to be good friends. I would not hesitate to shoot a match with a rifle built by either.
If you follow this link, you can read under 'The Development of the 30BR' a bit more about Ronnie Long's work with some of the original rigs. -Al
http://www.accurateshooter.com/cartridge-guides/30br/
http://www.accurateshooter.com/cartridge-guides/30br/
Jackie, the 'slow/light' concept was well worked out by the Hunter Benchrest shooters long before the 30BR VfS rifles entered the scene. Again, Randy Robinett was the guiding force behind that revolution, though it was all but ignored by the rest of the BR world. -Al
R.G. Robinett
"That'll never work."
Regarding the contemporary 30BR, Ronnie Long cannot be 'over-credited' - it WAS his idea! And, Ronnie either built, 'the first' 30BR rifles,or, fit and chambered the barrels - including the 'killer' MORRISON, for yours truly, on the [BORDEN TRUED] Time-Precision ALV HV platform.
The trench-work was conducted by 'SMOKIN' Joe' Entrekin and 'HUMBLE Henry' Rivers . . . though I get a fair amount of credit, my principal contributions were cheer-leading and providing the consumable goods.For those interested in some grass roots 30BR history, the link provided (above), by Al Nyhus, is worth checking into. At that time, I was fortunate enough to have had Dave Brennan, PRECISION SHOOTING editor, ask me to write an article, which, he subsequently published. At this juncture, I believe, that article, outlining the details of the 30BR project, providing useful information, and predicting success for the project, may be considered a tidbit of bench-rest history.
I just don't know either the title, or, the issue, to which the interested should be directed. RG
Last edited:
That article: 'Confessions of a Ballistic Idiot'
was published in the April 2002 issue of Precision Shooting Magazine.
Reading through it again, not only has the basic premise stood the test of time over the past nine seasons...but the predictions have proven to be dead on.
Good shootin'. -Al
was published in the April 2002 issue of Precision Shooting Magazine.
Reading through it again, not only has the basic premise stood the test of time over the past nine seasons...but the predictions have proven to be dead on.
Good shootin'.
-Al
R.G. Robinett
"That'll never work."
That article: 'Confessions of a Ballistic Idiot'
was published in the April 2002 issue of Precision Shooting Magazine.
Reading through it again, not only has the basic premise stood the test of time over the past nine seasons...but the predictions have proven to be dead on.
Good shootin'.
Al, ya see what happens when ya get 'old' - I even took credit for YOUR article, when I merely agreed to respond to your questions - shame on me!
RG