M14 Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Has anyone seen this? Not a great picture, but mind you it is a severe PITA to get an autofocus camera to bring the detail out where I want it. The lines run lengthwise(straight) with the bore(they do not follow the rifling). They are more pronounced in person, but without a better camera(borescope), I can't get a picture to do it justice.

This is on my Socom and they've been there since I've purchased it(last fall, may 2013 build). I'm having a rough time getting consistent groups and it's a job to clean this pig. Just curious if anyone has seen this.

Edit: I've tried a few products to remove them thinking it was some sort of fouling early on, but 800 rounds later, they haven't changed a bit.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
Every bore has tool marks, it's not possible to produce a bore without tool marks. The intensity of or severity of tool marks is a factor of the condition of the tool and/or the skill of the machinist.

I've tried a few products to remove them thinking it was some sort of fouling early on, but 800 rounds later, they haven't changed a bit Actually those tool marks change slightly with every round fired through the bore but only oh so slightly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patchhound

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
What products did you use in the past??
Besides the general round of powder solvents (tetra, Butch's Bore Shine, Shooters choice, Bore Tech Products) I used JB non embedding bore cleaning compound. The imperfections I'm seeing are as perfectly straight as I can tell, right across the grooves.


Every bore has tool marks, it's not possible to produce a bore without tool marks. The intensity of or severity of tool marks is a factor of the condition of the tool and/or the skill of the machinist.
I agree. No matter what, there is going to be an artifact of using tools to shape metal. However, with my eyes, this is the only rifle I have that I can see them. The picture really doesn't do justice, but imagine a bunch of black lines running lengthwise instead of nice shiny grooves. I spent about an hour dinking around trying to get a good picture. I was ready to give up and move on when the last one started to show what I was seeing with the naked eye. My equipment is pretty antiquated.

Been meaning to post on this for quite some time, but I hate trying to illustrate something without some sort of picture.

Actually those tool marks change slightly with every round fired through the bore but only oh so slightly.
Again, you are absolutely correct, however in my thoughts, if it was some sort of fouling the severity would change over time (either better or worse). I was trying to illustrate my train of thought to eliminate fouling as the suspect.
 

·
In the gilded halls of Valhala
Joined
·
13,515 Posts
is this the precipice of the rabbit hole one dives down upon purchase of a borescope?

we have an old endoscope at the office but im afraid open the case...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 · (Edited)
What kind of groups are you getting? If it's 3-4" with milspec ammo and iron sights then it is normal.
3-4" would be an above average day working up handloads(everything from 125s to 165s. I've done better, but not consistently. Milspec was pretty bad(I don't even want to say, but that was only with the plastic stock). I've been playing with stock fit and I'm confident in that (finally). Used a Leupold VXR 3-9 on basset to eliminate any inconsistencies that I incurred with the irons. Honestly, the scope helped a little.

Long and short of it, I've been experimenting with modifications (one at a time) to see if there is any change. I'm to the point now where I'm starting to look at the parts I can't change. Hence why I'm putting this up for comment.

Also why on Earth are you using all those cleaning solvents?
Not all at once. I'm not afraid to try a new(or old) snake oil once in a while to see if it is more effective. That's how I've come to the cleaners I use now. After the first 100 rds, I would try something different after each outing to see if anything had an effect on marks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
is this the precipice of the rabbit hole one dives down upon purchase of a borescope?

we have an old endoscope at the office but im afraid open the case...
Hehe. Was talking to my dad tonight about going in on one(bore scopeRNGR1). But that is out of my budget this year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,966 Posts
Sounds perfectly normal to me. If you want better the surest way is to sell the socom and purchase something more accurate. Sticking with the M1A I see guys put loadeds and national matches up on here for 1500 every now and then, otherwise for gas guns the 308 ARs have phenomenal accuracy potential. And of course a bolt gun like a savage in a mcmillan for 1200 they are F class accurate.

Otherwise shoot ball ammo and be happy that you have a short, handy 308 w/20rd mags.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
160 Posts
At the risk of creating another Sh!t storm controversy, there is a product out there that can possibly address your tool marks issue. This Sh!t storm gets resurrected every couple months with strong feelings on both sides, but here goes.....

The David Tubbs company makes a series of progressively finer bullets embedded with an abrasive grit. Shooting the entire series of 5 grits (5 bullets per grit) polishes the inside of the bore. see here: http://www.davidtubb.com/final-finish-bullet-kits

With respect to your original posting I get the idea a sucking vortex has brought you into the Rabbit Hole of interior bore status. It would be my suggestion that you not use the Tubbs product to merely satisfy your curiosity of cleaning up tool marks inside the bore. Rather I suggest you shoot the gun and determine, based upon accuracy, that you'd care to polish the interior of the bore to improve accuracy, not merely visible tool marks. I can speak of personal success using this product on my Scout Squad.

And now let the negative comments decendth upon me....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patchhound

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 · (Edited)
FWIW, my loaded bedded in a mcmillan was able to get into the 1.5MOA thread and my barrel has a hideous bore just like that.
That was what I was curious about.

This isn't my only M1A, just not satisfied yet with the results yet. I'm not expecting NM quality. But off of the bench, I feel with a tailored load I should be crowding 3 MOA(consistently) provided I do my part. I'm just digging for information one issue at a time.

I base my goals on experiences I've seen here. I may get there, I may not. Guaranteed, it will be some work and I'll learn some tricks either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,981 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
With respect to your original posting I get the idea a sucking vortex has brought you into the Rabbit Hole of interior bore status.
Honestly, how it looks has been a mild nag(I can be kind of pickyGI1). Only posting now because I'm not entirely satisfied with performance. Should I try anything on my own to remedy the bore, I may PM you with questions. Can't say I'm there yet.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top