Do new rifles take time to get consistent accuracy?

[Obie73]

Do new centerfire rifles sometimes take a while to show their best out at the range? Ie, get good groups on paper?
Have a new Winchester 73 in 357 mag and took it to the range the other day, full of hope and expectation of good things. It has the 24" barrel. I've been shooting with a 20" barrel model 1873 and getting pretty nice groups with it.
However, was really surprised to find that the new rifle wasn't shooting well, and I tried 3 different loads. The third load was Federal factory ammo. All loads produced groups below my usual standard and I'm pretty convinced it wasn't me. I squeezed one shot off not realising there wasn't a chambered round and there was zero flinch. I felt I was shooting well in terms of technique. So I'm hoping that the talk of new barrels needing to be broken in before you see consistent accuracy is true. I did get two groups the other day that were pretty good (not as small as I had been getting them with the other 73 with a 20" barrel, earlier this year, but not too bad) but most of the other groups were all over the place. Not much fun to experience this.
Do you think I just need to be more patient?

[bladeracer]

Do new centerfire rifles sometimes take a while to show their best out at the range? Ie, get good groups on paper?
Have a new Winchester 73 in 357 mag and took it to the range the other day, full of hope and expectation of good things. It has the 24" barrel. I've been shooting with a 20" barrel model 1873 and getting pretty nice groups with it.
However, was really surprised to find that the new rifle wasn't shooting well, and I tried 3 different loads. The third load was Federal factory ammo. All loads produced groups below my usual standard and I'm pretty convinced it wasn't me. I squeezed one shot off not realising there wasn't a chambered round and there was zero flinch. I felt I was shooting well in terms of technique. So I'm hoping that the talk of new barrels needing to be broken in before you see consistent accuracy is true. I did get two groups the other day that were pretty good (not as small as I had been getting them with the other 73 with a 20" barrel, earlier this year, but not too bad) but most of the other groups were all over the place. Not much fun to experience this.
Do you think I just need to be more patient?

With high-velocity chamberings in modern rifles I haven't noticed any such "bedding in", they shoot very well straight out of the box. None of mine have got the thousands of rounds through them for me to say for sure whether they improve significantly at some point, the .204 has the highest mileage but is still short of 1000rds yet. With an old-school lever though I don't know. All of my centrefire levers were bought secondhand so were already "run-in", except the Marlin 1894 in .44Mag, but that only has a few hundred rounds though it so I can't say if it's ever likely to improve.

At 100m scoped off a bench I'm pretty happy if the pistol-calibre levers give me consistent 3MoA, about 90mm, with jacketed hunting bullets. They're not precision rifles, especially in pistol chamberings. They can be tricky to learn to shoot them well due to the two-piece stock design, the magazine tube hanging off the barrel, and the fact that you are supporting the rifle by the barrel when shooting. But since you already shoot well with one I would think you definitely have the hang of that already.

[Billo]

2 types of Factory 357 mag ammo worth trying that shot well in a few 357s I've fired

Hornady 140gr FTX nd the Federal 125gr JHP

Both produced a 3 shot group of an inch at 50m

[bladeracer]

2 types of Factory 357 mag ammo worth trying that shot well in a few 357s I've fired

Hornady 140gr FTX nd the Federal 125gr JHP

Both produced a 3 shot group of an inch at 50m

I really wouldn't read three rounds as being indicative of the rifle's ability. Shoot a ten-round group and you'll have a much better idea of what you can realistically expect. Or shoot five three-round groups then overlay them on one target.

The only factory ammo I've used in my levers are S&B .38 Special 158gn LRN (it was the same price as buying brass at the time), S&B .357Mag 158gn JSP (my mate's ammo), Federal American Eagle .44Mag 240gn JHP (my brass hadn't arrived), and S&B .30-30 150gn that I bought to measure velocity for a member here. I only shoot my own loads.

[Billo]

2 types of Factory 357 mag ammo worth trying that shot well in a few 357s I've fired

Hornady 140gr FTX nd the Federal 125gr JHP

Both produced a 3 shot group of an inch at 50m

I really wouldn't read three rounds as being indicative of the rifle's ability. Shoot a ten-round group and you'll have a much better idea of what you can realistically expect. Or shoot five three-round groups then overlay them on one target.

The only factory ammo I've used in my levers are S&B .38 Special 158gn LRN (it was the same price as buying brass at the time), S&B .357Mag 158gn JSP (my mate's ammo), Federal American Eagle .44Mag 240gn JHP (my brass hadn't arrived), and S&B .30-30 150gn that I bought to measure velocity for a member here. I only shoot my own loads.

Ammo is pretty expensive these days so 3 shots will tell all you need to know, after all a lever action is neither free floated or usually offering anything like the accuracy you can get from a rifle.

[bladeracer]

Ammo is pretty expensive these days so 3 shots will tell all you need to know, after all a lever action is neither free floated or usually offering anything like the accuracy you can get from a rifle.

Three shots will put you into the ballpark for zero, but if you actually want to know what sort accuracy you can realistically expect from it you need to shoot a lot more than three rounds. If you really can't bring yourself to shoot a single ten-round group, shoot four or five three-round groups then overlay them on top of each other for a realistic idea of the actual group size.

The fact that they don't shoot 25mm groups is why you need to be sure you are zeroed to the correct mean point of impact. If you zero to a three-round group that happen to all be in the edge of the potential group area then your zero will be off. If you can only hold your shots in a five-inch circle say at 50m when shooting offhand in the field then you don't want to be zeroed 50mm off-centre.

[Wapiti]

I can tell you one thing that's gospel, if 3 shots don't give you a happy face, don't waste your money firing 10.

People have always argued about how many rounds to fire to establish a firearm's "average" accuracy, and I see online squabbling to the point of keyboard hauntings, but what's the point?

It's a Winchester 73, not a target rifle with free-float barrel, stiff stock, cartridges developed for consistent ignition and consistency blah blah. You have wood contact everywhere, barrel bands or magazine tubes inside timber forends, all the things that make a rifle struggle to be consistent as it heats up and moves.

And I'll just throw this one in, years ago, when the very credible Guns 'n Game magazine was in print, there were not just a few proven instances in articles where rifles slowly "settled in" after 50, 100, sometimes more rounds fired and with good cleaning regimes. And these blokes lived daily with firearms on farms and tested them professionally in their spare moments when not working the land. If these blokes say it is a fact, it is.

Another thing that, for me, is irrelevant is where the 5th, 6th whatever shot goes. I couldn't give a crap. The real prize is the cold, clean first shot, maybe the second or third that when fouled, shoots close to that. After the first shot if missed, your target is doing the bolt.
If I shoot a 3-shot group when testing that shows huge promise, I'll let the barrel cool down while I go back to the shed, load another 3 of the same with exactly the same dimensions in the shoulder and bullet jump, and fire this 3 from the magazine. No cheating by waiting 5 mins between shots. If this does the same thing a 3rd time with the 2 cool-downs and resetting up the rifle 3 times, cold to hot, it's going to work just fine. Sorry, but nobody could put forward a good argument that this 3-shot group regime is wanting in any way. It's torturing consistency-wise way more that firing 10 shots in a row, watching your heat sink, only once.

[bladeracer]

I don't disagree with any of this.
I have found .22LR's certainly "improve" from new over the first thousand rounds or so, but I haven't found this with my new centrefires. But perhaps rifle barrels and ammunition have changed since those old shooters proved this to be fact? Not everything stays the same.

If you measure your firearm's accuracy by group size then you need to fire enough shots to have good data, if you measure your firearm's accuracy by it simply placing its first round precisely where you want it, then a single shot is all you need. But you also have to zero your firearms differently. The first you fire some groups, measure the mean point of impact and zero to that point, the second you would fire a cold shot, let the rifle cool right down, fire another cold shot, and so on until you have enough data points to measure a mean point of impact for cold shots, then zero to that point.

The issue for me with only firing three rounds in a rifle that might only group three or four minutes is having enough data points to get a good zero. With a three-minute rifle, it will put a bullet somewhere within about 45mm of where you aim it at 100m. So, you fire a round and it hits 45mm high-right from point of aim. If you already zeroed it then you can confirm it's still zeroed and go hunting. But if you zero the rifle to that one shot, and it happens to be the low-left round in your potential "group", then you're actually zeroed about 90mm high-right. For close-range chest shots on medium game it's probably near enough not to matter, but I think most of us like to be a bit more certain than that. Ammo is expensive, but still cheaper than a lost deer.

I can tell you one thing that's gospel, if 3 shots don't give you a happy face, don't waste your money firing 10.

People have always argued about how many rounds to fire to establish a firearm's "average" accuracy, and I see online squabbling to the point of keyboard hauntings, but what's the point?

It's a Winchester 73, not a target rifle with free-float barrel, stiff stock, cartridges developed for consistent ignition and consistency blah blah. You have wood contact everywhere, barrel bands or magazine tubes inside timber forends, all the things that make a rifle struggle to be consistent as it heats up and moves.

And I'll just throw this one in, years ago, when the very credible Guns 'n Game magazine was in print, there were not just a few proven instances in articles where rifles slowly "settled in" after 50, 100, sometimes more rounds fired and with good cleaning regimes. And these blokes lived daily with firearms on farms and tested them professionally in their spare moments when not working the land. If these blokes say it is a fact, it is.

Another thing that, for me, is irrelevant is where the 5th, 6th whatever shot goes. I couldn't give a crap. The real prize is the cold, clean first shot, maybe the second or third that when fouled, shoots close to that. After the first shot if missed, your target is doing the bolt.
If I shoot a 3-shot group when testing that shows huge promise, I'll let the barrel cool down while I go back to the shed, load another 3 of the same with exactly the same dimensions in the shoulder and bullet jump, and fire this 3 from the magazine. No cheating by waiting 5 mins between shots. If this does the same thing a 3rd time with the 2 cool-downs and resetting up the rifle 3 times, cold to hot, it's going to work just fine. Sorry, but nobody could put forward a good argument that this 3-shot group regime is wanting in any way. It's torturing consistency-wise way more that firing 10 shots in a row, watching your heat sink, only once.

[Fester]

Most accurate centerfires can group well from day one but they do get more velocity and settle in with a couple of hundred rounds.

If the ammo is not too exy, I like 5 shot groups as they tell a fuller story and if 1 flies because I pulled it, I still see the grouping with the other 4.

Short barrel levers and pistol cals are not in the same league so I just stay happy with what it will do at 50 or so without a scope.
If it prints 2" on average, I can be stoked when I get that odd 1" group with a couple touching from my Dirty-30 with it's Skinner peep.

[deye243]

With most of the aus barrel manufacturers in Oz and Frank Green in the us have all told me the same thing if it don't shoot buy 100 to 150 it aint going to...... now i am stipulating my kind of shooting which is way under MOA at 1000y+ .
In that over the years it has been maddco mab now tse and be buggered if at the moment I can remember the manufacturer of the 17cal barrels I used in the 80s he was a bench shooter and they were the smooooothest bores I ever had the pleasure of cleaning ........ even with the OLD GOOD hoppies no9 not the new s**t I have 2 big bottles it's crap now like most things someone gets crook so they sue everyone for ther own negligence.
Just put a chemical warning label on things and then let us look after our bloody selves .
So long story short yep they can take a bit especially if a savage barrel I have seen them things go from 2moa to less than .5 in 200 rounds and when you shove a hawkeye down the bore they still look the same which is a farrowed paddock and I have seen a LOT of savage barrels shoot like stink even with rough rifling so that is the black art of barrels.
Oh crap I'm posting novels like BR now

[wrenchman]

the 73 was never a tack driver you said it was a new gun shoot it some and get used to if also did you clean it before shooting the guns are shipped with a coating in and on them.
the gun is iron sight buck horn and is fine but its not a 3 x 9 scope some time the front blade can cover the target when you get far away from them and you might just need to get used to the sights.
if I sound like ass I m sorry I do not intend to also check the rifling and see what the twist is 124 might be to light out of a 20" barrel you are pushing 2000 fps you might want to go heavy like the 158 .
I do like lever rifles in 357 they can do a lot and have a lot of fun I have a Henry steel boy in 357 and hand load for it.

[Obie73]

Yes that's right, the 73's not a tack driver. I was comparing it though to my shooting with the 20" barrel 73, where I was getting smaller groups.
But I have to conceed that maybe the problem was me as it's been a few months since I was at the range. I thought, hey, new rifle, barrel 4" longer, groups are going to be smaller .... but, alas, not as simple as that. Have to learn to get used to the new rifle and find out what it likes.
The handloads I had were mid-strength with 140 gr Hornady XTP. The factory loads were pretty hot (so it seems to me) Federal 158 gr.
Am going to get some either 158 gr or 180 gr XTPs and try those next. Will start again next January.
I perhaps should have cleaned the barrel more. All I did was put some WD40 down it and then run a bore snake through it once. Maybe there was still grease or whatever down the bore but I did check it with a bore torch and it looked clean and shiny.
To sum up, I find shooting always more difficult than I think it's going to be. It's not easy to use those buckhorn sights and still see the target clearly. But I like using open sights.

[Obie73]

I might try those factory load Hornady 140gr FTX too.

Good to know that some barrels take about 200 rds to show their true potential.

[bladeracer]

I love the theory behind the buckhorn sight but I really just don't shoot well with them. I'm using them currently as a large ghost ring and just putting the bead in the centre, but I'm shooting very fast at fairly large targets at close ranges. I have to find time to shoot some groups on paper with the ammo I'm loading so it'd be great to group them at all three sight positions and actually measure the difference between them.

I'm currently using Berry's Hardcast 158gn RN bullets, simply because I have a heap of them. I started with 2.8gn of Trailboss making 675fps in the 20" 1866, so I dropped it to 2.3gn, making 610fps in the 20" 1866 and 530fps in the 24" 1892. But I dropped it further to 2gn making 540fps in the 1866 and 450fps in the 1892.

Yes that's right, the 73's not a tack driver. I was comparing it though to my shooting with the 20" barrel 73, where I was getting smaller groups.
But I have to conceed that maybe the problem was me as it's been a few months since I was at the range. I thought, hey, new rifle, barrel 4" longer, groups are going to be smaller .... but, alas, not as simple as that. Have to learn to get used to the new rifle and find out what it likes.
The handloads I had were mid-strength with 140 gr Hornady XTP. The factory loads were pretty hot (so it seems to me) Federal 158 gr.
Am going to get some either 158 gr or 180 gr XTPs and try those next. Will start again next January.
I perhaps should have cleaned the barrel more. All I did was put some WD40 down it and then run a bore snake through it once. Maybe there was still grease or whatever down the bore but I did check it with a bore torch and it looked clean and shiny.
To sum up, I find shooting always more difficult than I think it's going to be. It's not easy to use those buckhorn sights and still see the target clearly. But I like using open sights.

[Fester]

I found the semi-buckhorns were good for melons at 30yds offhand like the lever was made for.
The peep had me shooting 50 yd groups.

I don't think it even likes shooting off the bench rests and I often just hold the for stock and rest my hand on the stand, can use the rear bag or just the shoulder.

[Obie73]

Do some rifles shoot better with a dirty bore? I put a bore snake down the bore once before firing it for the first time -- to wipe away any factory 'compound' as Winchester calls it. At first I couldn't get good groups at all but after 50 shots the rifle started to group much better. Then I sprayed WD40 down the bore and put the bore snake through it again. The groups opened up significantly again. My current plan is to try it without spraying any more WD40 down the bore. If I take this approach, is the barrel likely to rust between range visits?

[bladeracer]

Do some rifles shoot better with a dirty bore? I put a bore snake down the bore once before firing it for the first time -- to wipe away any factory 'compound' as Winchester calls it. At first I couldn't get good groups at all but after 50 shots the rifle started to group much better. Then I sprayed WD40 down the bore and put the bore snake through it again. The groups opened up significantly again. My current plan is to try it without spraying any more WD40 down the bore. If I take this approach, is the barrel likely to rust between range visits?

Yep, they can. I only clean the bore when accuracy starts to drop off.
WD40 is not a solvent or a lubricant, it is a Water Dispersant.
Spray solvent (not WD40) through the bore, patch it out until clean, then oil a patch and push it through the bore to leave a film of oil (not WD40) to protect against corrosion.

[Obie73]

Great, will do, thanks for the advice. When you say you only clean when accuracy starts to drop off do you mean that you don't put a patch, a pull-through, oil, or anything else down the bore between cleans?
Is it okay in my case to leave bits of unburnt powder in the bore between range visits? I use AR2207 and you can see some particles of it down the bore after a session at the range. If I can get better accuracy with a dirty bore I will do it. The only thing I care about is accuracy (with open sights, that is).

[Obie73]

Also, could you advise a good solvent to use? Thanks.

[bladeracer]

Great, will do, thanks for the advice. When you say you only clean when accuracy starts to drop off do you mean that you don't put a patch, a pull-through, oil, or anything else down the bore between cleans?
Is it okay in my case to leave bits of unburnt powder in the bore between range visits? I use AR2207 and you can see some particles of it down the bore after a session at the range. If I can get better accuracy with a dirty bore I will do it. The only thing I care about is accuracy (with open sights, that is).

Yep, nothing at all goes through the bore, unless I've been out in the rain, then I'll push an oily patch through it. When I start getting misses in the field or odd fliers on targets I'll shoot a group and if I'm not happy with it then I'll clean the bore. But I have no interest in trying to get Benchrest accuracy out my levers, they're for offhand shooting.

I personally don't have any issue with leaving residue in the bore but some believe the powder residue promotes corrosion, an oily patch through the bore would probably address that if you want to. There are a lot of right ways to clean firearms, but there are also a few wrong ways. Just do whatever works best for you.

The Uberti 1866 has had exactly 500rds through it now since I last cleaned the bore (I log every round I fire in each firearm). I'll probably put about 50 through it tomorrow and then I'm thinking of cleaning it because it really is bloody grubby. I wanted to put some blackpowder .38's through it before I clean it but I don't think I have time to play with those just now so it'll get cleaned sometime soonish. I cleaned the Rossi last week when I had to remove four squibbed bullets, it's had fifty rounds through it since but is still very clean. Both of these rifles I bought secondhand, the Uberti came from a Cowboy shooter so may have had thousands of rounds through it before I got it - one of the toggles was broken in two so I don't think it had been babied.