Does not follow...

[Netpackrat]

Are the barrels chrome lined? Became if not, they're full of shit.

So, it looks like I have a meeting Saturday in Queens...

Looks to be nitrocarburized.

[Netpackrat]

Here's what it said exactly:

FINISH:
A proprietary Nitride (QPQ) Surface Conversion Process has been performed on this barrel that makes all surfaces extremely hard.

PROs:
• Increased barrel life
• Increased corrosion resistance
• Durable wear-resistant finish

CONs:
Attempting to modify this barrel will probably ruin your tools, so better hope we got it right (we did).

Calls for 100 pound feet of torque... I'll have to decide just how important hitting that is to me, since my action wrench doesn't have any provision for attaching a torque wrench. Google gives a lot of varying answers and it doesn't seem to matter a lot as long as you get it tight.

[HTRN]

Well, you can always take some material from the shoulder, and considering what some of the inserts available can do these days..

[Netpackrat]

No need. Barrel is in, headspace is good.

Ran into a couple of snags. The first is that the screws included with the Warne bases are too small for the threaded holes in the action, so I need to figure out if those holes are bigger than usual, whether I can get bigger screws and still use the bases I bought, or what. Remington/AAC sold the complete rifles with a 20MOA canted base, which I think is just stupid for an intermediate cartridge, but they may have used a bigger than normal screw size.

Second, remember last year when I was having all kinds of trouble with my Aero upper on my SBR and misalignment with my can? That turned out the be caused by barrel threads that were too long for the flash hider slash mounting device, and it wanted to bottom on the muzzle, which was not sufficiently square for alignment purposes. I wound up putting .060" of shim under the FH to get it bottoming on the thread shoulder. At the time I chalked that up to inherent issues with trying to get 2 different manufacturers' products to work together.

Turns out, the AACholes' own barrels have the same problem with their own mounts, in that it wants to bottom on the muzzle face instead of the shoulder. Since their stuff is presumably intended to be used together and correctly align one of their cans with the bore, it may be okay but I need to dig my can out and check the alignment like that still. Otherwise I will be ordering more shims.

[HTRN]

It sounds like they used 8-40 screws on the action, which is just completely retarded on something like a 300blk.. A 458 Lott? Sure, but this size catridge? Sounds like another case of engineering being overidden by Marketing...

[Netpackrat]

Yeah, that was kind of my take as well. A 20MOA (which is what the factory built rifles came with) base held on by oversize screws, on an action marketed as the "micro" 7 chambered in an intermediate cartridge. Fairly stupid any way you look at it. Now I need to buy new screws and a counterbore from Brownells. Good thing I hadn't placed the order for my action screws yet. Still don't have the stock yet anyway.

I torqued the mount onto the muzzle and checked can alignment with my Giessele rod, and it seems to be good, but all the same I ordered a Gemtech shim pack from Amazon so I can get it seating on the shoulder instead of the muzzle face. One of the shims in the pack is supposed to be thick enough so I won't need to stack any like I did with my BLK SBR last year.

And of course, the can doesn't lock up tight on the mount, so it displays the usual AAC 51T rattle that wrecks accuracy in my other rifles. Out of the now 5 rifles I have that can accept my SDN-6, the can only locks up tight on one of them (the BLK SBR). Naturally, that is the only one out of the bunch that doesn't see a degradation in accuracy or significant POI shift with the can installed. Hopefully I will have my Saker in a month or so. I already have the 51T MAAD unit for it, which seems to lock up nicely on the mounts I have tried it on. Won't know for sure how much better it works until I can add the weight of the can though.

[Netpackrat]

After taking some measurements and examining the available hardware, it appears that the 8-40 screws have the potential to fuck me if I don't want a one piece rail with a 20MOA cant. Pretty sure I can't use the Warne bases I bought since they are pretty thin to begin with, and the holes for the rear base are in the way of the cross slots, so the counterbores have to be fairly deep for clearance with the screw heads. Research continues....

[HTRN]

Have you tried contacting Ken Farrell? He can probably supply you with a 0MOA scope mount, provided you can live with a picatinny rail setup.

[Netpackrat]

Thanks, I had run across his site the other day but forgot about it. I see he does make a 0moa base for the seven, and it's made out of steel unlike the others I have found, which I like. I guess if I go that way I need to contact him about one pre-made for the 8-40 screws, since if I am spending that much I don't want to rebore the holes myself. A $30 set of Leupold bases I don't mind WECSOGing as much. Which is an option, since I like the Redfield style mounts that Leupold now sells as their own. Wish they made a one piece base like the actual Redfield base I have on my other Model 7.

[dfwmtx]

I'm considering re-organizing my ammo stash. When I bugged out of DFW for my new AO, I was just shoving ammo into cans willy-nilly, no concern for organization. Since then sometimes I've been looking for certain calibers/bullet-types for family, and I end up digging thru almost all of the ammo cans trying to find what I'm looking for. So this time I'm planning to re-organize by caliber; one caliber per box, no mixing. Question though; should I buy the plastic ammo cans or go with the metal military style?

Also trying to think of other things to Google today because I don't want to do my usual perusing of political websites due to the election.