mikegideon

  I've poured beer into folks from every part of those islands. None of them mind it cold.

  No kidding. Don't wanna load up a bunch more PMAG's just because ole' Alex speculated wrong again. 

:clap:  God bless him.

  Don't pay any attention to him. He makes fun of midgets too. He's a mean man  :rofl:

  Can't miss him. He's wearing a white shirt.

  Here's the deal. When you find a frozen possum in your driveway, it's time to go get the nest :)

  That's a good idea for somebody that changes stocks.

  Yep. Something to knock in the hammer and trigger pins, and either a box cutter or some knee pads :)

  If you wanna get technical, "no comment" is actually a comment :)

The story wouldn't have ever gotten legs if Obama wasn't a true girlie man...

They dead to me.

From Bill Alexander Hisself...   The original 0.292" was a PPC rifle produced by Scott Medeshia and which required the necks to be turned to remove the doughnut from swaging up the neck. The 0.300 actually predates the 0.295" and follows a series of minor chamber experiments with conventional free bores and varying neck diameters.  The 0.300" was proposed once it was seen how the Mauser and subsequently Enfield throats worked ( at the time we were not aware of the Enfield pattern). The trick to accuracy is the centre the bullet in the bore and if the chamber is loose and the case small with a large projectile then hold the projectile not the case. The compound throat nips the bullet to centre while the larger neck diameter and length is more tolerant to misalignments.  We actually draw the 0.295" neck after the 0.300" and tested it fairly extensively. It provides no enhancement in accuracy, was picky on ammunition and was abandoned for this reason. No further development was undertaken so things like max case, min chamber were not worked out. It did not offer the possibility for future growth such as the steel case ammunition might bring. Returning to the OP, Les Baer builds a superb rifle and while his chamber now differs, it is extremely accurate. I do not view this as anything more than a difference of opinion and given what he was trying to do makes a fair amount of sense.  Grendels did not demonstrate the problems seen with the clone chambers when the Hornady ammunition arrived, because it conformed to the given dimensions intended to fit the chamber. The chambers have not deviated from the original design at any time during production which now spans over six years.

  264 LBC   http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?1214-Grendel-or-264-lbc

  That would be the second one. There's a roll pin in the forward assist assembly as well, but they usually come assembled. Same deal with the ejector roll pin in the bolt. I was only counting the ones you have to put in.

The info is out there on arfcom and the Grendel forum.

  Yep. I used any punches on my first lower. :) You're right. Only 2 roll pins on the whole rifle. None if you're buying an assembled upper.

  You gotta be careful that they're cutting true Grendel chambers. There's another reamer out there that folks were using when Alexander arms was still sitting on the Grendel name. Satern will tell you it's the same, but there's conflicting info. The difference is in the throat. A SAAMI Grendel round will work in either. Read up and proceed with caution.

Brent,   I ordered the other upper receiver vise block too, so we're covered either way. I actually bought it because I didn't want to risk marring the finish on the upper, even if the clam shell fits.

  BTW... I think I may go with that barrel you found, unless availability changes before I get ready to order.

  I'm going to send David a PM when they start shipping. I always notify him, even though he'll know the deal when he sees my name on the order. He knows how to get in touch with me.

  You have come to the wrong place. :) I figure we're just getting started

One of my Facebook posts from a few days ago.

  Maybe.They don't require a lot of force. I can see the two piece lasting forever without mushrooming.   Something else... you need a BRASS hammer. A Stanley framing hammer ain't the right tool either.

  HA! You always beat me to the punch. Not this time, buddy  :rofl:

  No. Roll pin punches have a little tit that keeps them from slipping off the pin. The starter punches have a hole, so the pin can be held in line with the force of the hammer blow. I bought the roll pin punches after my first lower build (I think).    The starters are GREAT. You can start a pin in 1 or 2 taps. I bought those when I started my last build, and then kicked myself for not buying them when I bought the roll pin punches. There's just nothing better than the right tools.   http://www.cabelas.com/product/Lyman-Roll-Pin-Punch-Set/1535073.uts?productVariantId=3365177&WT.tsrc=CSE&WT.mc_id=GoogleProductAds&WT.z_mc_id1=03606699&rid=40&channel=GoogleBaseUSA&mr:trackingCode=8ABC2E4F-655B-E211-BA78-001B21631C34&mr:referralID=NA&mr:adType=pla&mr:ad=34214267951&mr:keyword=&mr:match=&mr:filter=58018411271&gclid=CNCUz7SisroCFURp7AodnlwAXw   http://www.amazon.com/Ar15-Roll-Pin-Starter-Punch/dp/B0083UUOOG