Shooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What year did Marlin start using the Microgroove in there Guns?.......................Marko
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Microgroove rifling is objectionable and should be removed as a manufacturing process. Cut rifling is far superior. Do you work for Marlin, Jack?  I can see why you would want this removed then.To describe microgroove rifling and not use some form of manure as a comparision is difficult to put in a form of a sentence. Marlin uses it , because it is a much cheaper process than cut rifling. Micro groove rifling is even worse with cast bullets. Almost ineffective. Marlin started cutting rifling ballard style in 45/70 guns and most cowboy guns, and you know what, they all shoot so much better, it leaving people scratching thier heads. It is a crying shame Marlin doesnt cut all thier barrels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Note From Administrator

Sir,

We here at Beartooth Bullets do everything in our power to provide our users with a quality board and atmosphere. We live up to our slogan, "Real Answers To Real Question". In keeping this commitment we have formed a team of knowledgeable, forgiving, and objective moderators. They spend a lot of time here keeping things running smoothly, and I would ask that everyone show them the respect and gratitiude deserved.

If there is a problem with one of the moderators, please feel free to send myself an email, [email protected] is my personal, and I will look into any issues there may be. This is a family site, we discuss even the hottest topics with civility, so let's stay rational, and if there is a problem, please email me.

I have edited this post because of the threatening content contained herein.



<!--EDIT|Alex Stanton|Feb. 18 2002,08:43-->
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
WHCKMSTR1,

Much of what you speak is believed by much of main stream shooters. However, right here on our own Beartooth we have disproved this. When proper care is taken, and quality cast bullets used, the Micro-Groove system performs, if not superior to, equal to the ballard cut rifling.

Please take the time to read through some of the major break-throughs we've encountered here at Beartooth Bullets when dealing with the Micro-Groove rifling.

Our FAQ, about three quarter of the way down. http://beartoothbullets.com/faq/index.htm

Tech Notes: http://beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/19

And compare the group results from the ballard to the micro-groove here (about half way down, large chart): http://beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/28

Take a look at the charts below:

<table border="1" width="455"><tr><td width="411" colspan="3"><p align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="2">Test Load For .444 Marlin:</font><font face="verdana,arial" size="1"><font color="#800000">.44 Caliber 325g WLNGC/56.0g H335/WLRP/Remington Brass/C.O.L. 2.570"</font></font></td></tr><tr><td width="92" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">Bullet Sizing Diameter</font></td><td width="155" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">Group Size Marlin 444S (Micro-Groove)</font></td><td width="186" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">Group Size Marlin 444P (Ballard Cut Rifling)</font></td></tr> <tr><td width="92" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">.428"</font></td><td width="155" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">4.64"</font></td><td width="186" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">4.28"</font></td></tr><tr><td width="92" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">.429"</font></td><td width="155" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">4.26"</font></td><td width="186" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">3.97"</font></td></tr><tr><td width="92" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">.430"</font></td><td width="155" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">3.56"</font></td><td width="186" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">3.34"</font></td></tr><tr><td width="92" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">.431"</font></td><td width="155" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">2.18"</font></td><td width="186" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">1.87"</font></td></tr><tr><td width="92" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">.432"</font></td><td width="155" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">1.22"</font></td><td width="186" align="center"><font face="verdana,arial" size="1">1.17"</font></td></tr></table>


In that last tech note listed, tests show that with the micro-groove we achieved a 0.344" goup... nothing for anyone to sneeze at!

Also, I would ask that we please try to stay on topic in the future, and let's try to answer the original question this gentleman asked. Marlin began in the early to mid 70's with the Micro-Groove Starrbow, I'll see if I can find you a date.....

Best Regards,

Alex Stanton



<!--EDIT|Alex Stanton|Feb. 18 2002,08:26-->
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Too All,
          I have never Had a problem with Marlins
Microgroove Barrels shooting Hard Cast. If you properly condition your barrel and stay with reasonable velocities in plain base bullets they should shoot fine. With Gas Checks they seem to shoot better with very little to no leading.

Now the Winchester Big Bore 94 in 444 thats another story but still writing it.

Alex,
      I'm in no hurry for the info........Marko
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I had a 1894 44 mag marlin and its accuracy was mediocre at best. 4'' groups at best. It had micro groove rifling. I thought Hornady bullets would work better 'cause they are .430 as opposed to .429 as most  jacketed 44 bullets. I have seen more than one 35 rem and 30-30 model 336 with micro groove  also turn in 4'' to 6'' inch groups at 100 yards with your standard factory fodder and modest scopes. I have a 1895gs and a friend of mine has a 1895s  both with ballard rifling and they shoot 2'' or less at 100 yds. I also believe Micro groove got started in 72 or 73. Any self respecting barrel maker cuts thier rifling. Your testing was done in a manner to get the most out of the microgroove , most people in the field will not get those kind of results with cast bullets in a microgroove barrel .Marlin admits that ballard rifling in these recent offerings of cut rifling is to get better results from cast bullets. it gets better results from jacketed ones as well. If micro groove is so great maybe you should sell Shilen ,Hart, Lliija Schnieder and Douglas your data, they could save a ton of money and make serious target shooters happier. Micro groove is a less accurate and cheaper rifling process .
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
In my experience there are no really bad shooting Marlins regardless of the rifling method used. There are only bad shots who blame their equipment. In my area both Marlin and Winchester lever guns are very popular and on average show about equal accuracy by a wide variety of hunters. Some guys' 50 yard "groups" barely stay on a paper plate target, while others' at 100 paces almost require calipers to get an accurate measurement. If Microgrooved rifles were so bad the Winchesters would show a distinct advantage in accuracy. They do not in my experience. If anything, just the reverse.

I have owned a Model 336 .30-30 that gave 1.5" 3-shot at 100 yards with almost any 150-grain load, factory or handloaded. A Model 781 .22 bolt action was more accurate than the first couple of Ruger 77/22's I came across when that model was new. Both Marlins are Microgrooved. I don't know what more I can say.



<!--EDIT|Bill Lester|Feb. 18 2002,16:42-->
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Sir,

With the thousands of customers we have currently shooting our cast bullets in their micro-groove, the majority are getting results similiar to those presented here in these articles.

From what you have mentioned so far all of your experience with the micro-groove has been with jacketed. Perhaps you should try a properly sized, well designed and cast projectile in these guns. If you took the time to read through the information in my above post you will find that the fire-lapping process is a must in order to achieve the type of peformance shown. In some ways you are correct, and no one is arguing that the micro-groove is a cheaper process, and the ballard can produce tighter groups, however, what myself, as well as the others who have posted here are saying that the Marlin micro-groove's can be made to perform to the same level as their ballard cut when proper time and care is taken in load development.

Best Regards,

Alex Stanton



<!--EDIT|Alex Stanton|Feb. 18 2002,14:35-->
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Oh boy , micro groove rifling issue is hotter than a 300 weatherby  lite contour after 4 quick shots on the 4 th of July. I think the Marlin rifles with cut rifling are good guns. I wouldnt buy a micro groove gun. Hand most anybody who knows anything , a Marlin Micro groove & a Ballard , he will take the Ballard. If I just learned I had a micro groove gun, I would sell it at a gun show and get a Ballard. I would recommend to anyone wanting such a gun type ,a Ballard barrel. My favorite guns or keepers ,are weapons that can shoot most anything good and isnt finicky. I can say that about my 1895Gs. With a 5 moa Propoint it blows a 2.5 x 3'' 15 shot hole at 65 yds. with most anything I feed it. Marlins propriatary process is used by Marlin for no other reason other than it is cheaper. If Marlin has to pass $15.00 or 25.00 more to a gun to accomplish this ,fine, then all Marlin's would be better guns. K mart is torpedo'd , the whole Marlin rifle line will become more desirable with the cut pipes. Send all that micro groove equipment to Iraq , we'll get to blow it up in a few months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
To the original question, all Marlin (rimfire and centerfire) rifles were produced with microgroove rifling in 1954. They were a cut rifled barrel and Ballard rifling refers only to a profile NOT a method of producing the rifling.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,406 Posts
The only two Micro-groove guns I have ever shot both achieved minute-of-angle groups with factory ammo and no lapping, fiddling, tweaking, etc.

Just curious... what is your opinion of different rifling methods, ie., hammer-forged (Winchester, Ruger), button-rifled (Remington), broached (Bar-Sto), EDM (Glock?? HK?? ), etc..



<!--EDIT|MikeG|Feb. 18 2002,21:53-->
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I would love to see some out of box 336 Marlin's 30-30's shoot 150 and 170 factory loads 5 shot m.o.a. groups at 100 yards with a hunting magnification scope , with ballard or micro groove, now that bet would be easy money
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
342 Posts
My 30AS (you know, the cheapest of the cheap Marlins) in 30-30 shoots 150 grain cast Lee gas checked flat points into 2 3/8 inches at 100 yards all day. That is an average of ten 5 shot groups without throwing away and "flinches" or "flyers". I have done no load development at all. I bought a mould, a Lee die set (complete with dipper) a box of checks and a pound of 3031. Throw a scoop of 3031 into any old case, seat a bullet and shoot it. No telling what might happen if I tried to tune the combination.

Oh yeah, and I'm not a very good shot. The rifle is capable of more.

Whckmstr, you clearly have strong opinions on the subject, but saying microgroove barrels won't shoot is wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
2.5 inch groups is fine for a 100- 150 yd. deer gun. I get only slightly better with weighed charges ,ln a ballard rifled 1895 gs. with most any jacketed bullet on the market. My browning Bar 30-06 shoots 2 inch groups with 150 gr factory ,slightly better than that with 165's .Thats fine with me. Micro grove doesnt leave much of a land. the distance measured in .0001's  between land and groove is less on a micro groove than other rifle barrels by other manufacturers and processes. In essence , no bite . All i am trying to point out is if i am looking for the most accuracy out of a rifle, I would choose a gun with a more " BITE" in the rifling. Beartooth says sizing cast bullets .001 or .002'' larger to accomidate the microgrooves lack of bite by squeezing a bullet down the pipe to get better results. The result is more pressure , but a 2 or 3 grain lighter powder charge will offset this im sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
342 Posts
I agree, the distance between land and groove is smaller. But since there are more lands, the shear surface is about the same.

Now then... You're saying that your BAR with it's intrinsically more accurate design and a Ballard rifled barrel is 3/8" tighter than my Marlin? And you are using factory fodder against my shoddy reloads? That's not making your point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
whckmstr,
              IMHO, you watch too many cartoons, get in the real world! Any Rifling requires a Cast bullet to be slighty bigger. Have you ever seen a 16" Gun on a battleship? look hard at the rifling it looks like it's Microgrooved ( This used to be a Joke in the Navy ie: Battleships were floating Marlins )
Lots of lands and grooves just like marlins And I think they can hit a target around 20 miles or so.

Marlin used this type of rifling because they seen some advantages in it with Jacketed bullets and at the time very very few people shot lead bullets
so you manufactor what will sell.

Also, Hard Cast bullets shoot lower pressures, that is why you get higher Velocity with less powder.

If you are not conditioning your barrel on your brand new rifle you weather you shot Cast or Jacketed you are not getting the most out of your firearm.

Also, you need to be sure of your information before you responed to posts you have put out a lot of MIS INFORMATION..................Marko
 
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Top