I had the pleasure of seeing this first hand at the IWA show last month in Germany. They had it tucked away behind closed doors.
The new Match 54.30 is the next generation of the legendary ANSCHÜTZ Match 54 barreled action.
Email below arrived this morning from Anschutz along with the first released photos.
Greetings,
This past March at the IWA fair in Nuremberg, Germany, we debuted our newly designed Smallbore Match Rifle; the 54.30.
Today we would like to present to you some detailed information about this newly designed match rifle.
Our new Match 54.30 is a considerable evolution of the legendary ANSCHÜTZ Match 54 barreled action.
The new smallbore Match 54.30 action distinguishes itself by following items:
- Basis for the new rifle is the well known and reliable ANSCHÜTZ Match 54 action.
- The loading port was moved 30mm rewards and was reduced in size by 18%.
- These changes increases the stiffness of the receiver.
- The closer location of the loading port allows for less movement when in position and an overall improvment in shooter ergonomics.
- To accomodate the closer location of the loading port, the bolt and the firing pin were reduced in length by 30mm.
- The weight of the firing pin was also reduced, thus resulting in velocity increase of the firing pin and a shorter lock-time.
- The overall accuracy has been improved by a newly designed ANSCHÜTZ Match chamber.
- Unlike match actions in the past, the new Match 54.30 features a threaded receiver and barrel connection. This change removes stresses in the chamber area and further increases accuracy.
- The new Match 54.30 can be installed into all available stocks which fit with the ANSCHÜTZ round match actions such as the 1907 or 1913.
- Like other ANSCHÜTZ products, the Match 54.30 features a maintenance - friendly and long lasting overall construction.
- Very competitive pricing.
Additional details about the ANSCHÜTZ Match 54.30 are included in the enclosed attachement.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us through our website or dealer network.
GeraldC wrote:Big question.Does it have 6 o'clock firing pin?
No. It is at 12 o'clock. The 6 o'clock firing pin was not proven to be significantly better at the "improvement" is within the margin of error of top grade match ammunition.
ken
1813benny wrote:The 6 o'clock firing pin was not proven to be significantly better at the "improvement" is within the margin of error of top grade match ammunition.
ken
Ken,
You able to provide more background where this was proven?
In one of Calfee's many ramblings, he stated the improvement was around 3% over the 12 o'clock configuration. This is in the white noise region of measurable performance with rimfire ammunition.
In other writings by Calfee, he discounted the benefits of another potential process that ironically he said only yielded a 3% improvement.
It really boils down to psychology. If one is convinced it is necessary to have the 6 o'clock pin then by all means go with the latest BR action and a custom build.
Regards
Ken
1813benny wrote:The 6 o'clock firing pin was not proven to be significantly better at the "improvement" is within the margin of error of top grade match ammunition.
ken
Ken,
You able to provide more background where this was proven?
Thanks
Peter
Actually Mike Ross, several years ago, spent quite a bit of time testing the six o'clock firing pin to the 12 o'clock position and found there was absolutely no advantage. Two additional bits of info, Mike Ross has a 1st class testing facility, 50 yd tunnel, probably the best built system to secure and test a rifle and an annal meticulous mindset. He had also partnered with Tony Gilkes to build several actions including a Gilkes/Ross rimfire action that actually could be used in either a 6 or 12 o'clock position. I assure you the man had no bias, just looking for ways to improve accuracy. So I guess a follow up would be a question for you, "Do you have facts that support the advantage of the 6 o'clock position?"
1813benny wrote:In one of Calfee's many ramblings, he stated the improvement was around 3% over the 12 o'clock configuration. This is in the white noise region of measurable performance with rimfire ammunition.
In other writings by Calfee, he discounted the benefits of another potential process that ironically he said only yielded a 3% improvement.
It really boils down to psychology. If one is convinced it is necessary to have the 6 o'clock pin then by all means go with the latest BR action and a custom build.
Regards
Ken
Thanks Ken. From what I've seen of Calfee, I take anything he says with a pound of salt.
rbs wrote:
Actually Mike Ross, several years ago, spent quite a bit of time testing the six o'clock firing pin to the 12 o'clock position and found there was absolutely no advantage. Two additional bits of info, Mike Ross has a 1st class testing facility, 50 yd tunnel, probably the best built system to secure and test a rifle and an annal meticulous mindset. He had also partnered with Tony Gilkes to build several actions including a Gilkes/Ross rimfire action that actually could be used in either a 6 or 12 o'clock position. I assure you the man had no bias, just looking for ways to improve accuracy. So I guess a follow up would be a question for you, "Do you have facts that support the advantage of the 6 o'clock position?"
rbs, I am aware of Mike Ross and Tony Gilkes. Is the details of the testing done by Mike available?
In response to your question, I've actually haven't seen any conclusive proof that proves or disproves an advantage of the 6 o'clock position hence my curiosity. The best I've seen was done by Dr Geoffrey Kolbe http://www.geoffrey-kolbe.com/articles/ ... ng_pin.htm. In his experiment he did find a difference but his sample size was too small to say that the difference was statistically significant.
Peter_Scant wrote:In response to your question, I've actually haven't seen any conclusive proof that proves or disproves an advantage of the 6 o'clock position hence my curiosity. The best I've seen was done by Dr Geoffrey Kolbe http://www.geoffrey-kolbe.com/articles/ ... ng_pin.htm. In his experiment he did find a difference but his sample size was too small to say that the difference was statistically significant.
I think the experimental error in Kolbe's setup is so huge it masks any real data.
If he's right and at 19" travel peak pressure is no longer relevant to final velocity, in the case of a pistol peak pressure would be highly relevant with eg a 4" barrel.
His results give a standard deviation on pressure of ~20% of the mean value.
If ammunition were giving me a standard deviation of 20% of the muzzle velocity out of a rifle I'd call it garbage, the worst 30 year old Russian ammo I've ever tried gave me an SD of 8% from a pistol.
I don't think I'd expect this out of Tenex.
I'd guess friction effects, and an accelerometer likely used near the limit of its sensitivity - since the rig was designed for .308 Nato - ~11 times the momentum - would be masking useful information.
