I will be interested to see Underclocked range results and in the field impressions of the rifle. Roskoe has some real good comments about the rifle. If they are supported by Underclocked, this could be a good rifle to recommend.

Be careful tinkering with this trigger. The same spring that controls the hammer also provides resistance against the trigger/sear. Anything you do to reduce the trigger spring tension is going to lighten the hammer fall. I left the spring alone and played around with the sear angles and engagement depth. This was fairly touchy stuff.

Will do Roskoe. What you did was pretty much my plan of attack. Were you able to improve your trigger pull?

Mine is here - so first impressions:

Genesis Revelations

Got my slightly used Genesis by mail today. The box felt so amazingly light that I wondered if there was a rifle in there. A guy gets used to the way Whites are usually shipped and those other boxes just get lighter.

The rifle certainly has a modern appearance! The receiver area is a bit hard to describe but is a near-gloss black and slick looking finish over some sort of very lightweight alloy. The stainless steel barrel is matte finished and outwardly looks much like any other stainless muzzy barrel. The two piece stock on my sample is a plain black synthetic with what appear to be permanently affixed inserts(?) to provide grip at both sides of the forearm and pistol grip. Without destroying them, it would be hard to say just how those inserts (if they are inserts rather than appliqués) are installed. They are reasonably attractive in a grayish color that has a leathery grain and rubbery feel. The stock should be easy to grip even in wet weather. The buttstock is hollow and will benefit greatly from a stuffing of packing foam. It wears a rubber recoil pad that is somewhat poorly fitted but should be at least functional. The rifle weighs 7 pounds 3 ounces on my ofishul DFK scales. (actually fish scales)

The barrel has decent sights attached... fiber optic front that is superior to the one provided on Whites in that it has 3 metal retaining bands around the brittle red fiber stick. Should be much more resistant to breakage and is very comparable to the fronts used on some TC rifles. It appears to be a single unit (rather than ramp and insert) that is held in place by a single, unhidden screw. The rear sight is an abbreviated ramp which would not appear to offer a great deal of adjustment but, if of proper height, would not be a problem. The ramp has the typical adjustment mechanisms incorporated. The rear has a small green fiber optic in a short U-shape which forms two green dots, one to either side of the shallow U cut of the actual sight. Were I able to use open sights, these would do nicely and are superior to those found on many others. The barrel is also drilled and tapped and will accept mounts made for CVA round barrels or the Traditions Yukon. The Traditions website is now offering mounts and other supplies for the Genesis.

The barrel measures exactly 28" from one end to the other, 26.5" ahead of the breechplug, and 26" if both the plug and the ~.5" of non-rifled section at the muzzle are subtracted. I suppose that is intended as an easy loading feature. At least that non-rifled section is shorter than most that use such "innovations". The rifling, while much deeper than on a White, is not as deep as I had expected and looks to be 8 quite nicely done pairs of lands and grooves. Per a quick slugging with a .504 diameter bullet, it looked like the micrometer indicated .501 for a land to land measure. The bullet was insufficient diameter to get the groove to groove measurement. I will have to take more time later to properly slug the bore. I do not like easy load (or QLA) barrels as those unrifled sections of bores can havesubstantial negative impact on accuracy if not done near perfectly. Such designs also make it difficult to examine the crown area to see whether it is distorted in some way. But we'll see.

The barrel wears two thimbles for ramrod retention. The thimbles are significantly thicker walled than most and appear to be of some synthetic closely matching the action finish. They are not so bulky as to be unsightly and function well. The ramrod is of black anodized tubular aluminum of insufficient length due to the length of the barrel underlug. An attempt to provide additional length was made by including a roughly 4" long section at the end which must be completely unscrewed, then reversed and screwed on to the now exposed thinner section it covered. Even with that extension, the rod is not full length. It is poorly done, IMHO, and the ramrod found on the CVA Optima would be a marked improvement. I might just get an Optima rod if I keep the Genesis long term.

The rifle points and comes to the shoulder nicely. The stock's dimensions are obviously proportioned for scope use as natural alignment for me is above the iron sights considerably. Those that choosethe provided sights may experience some difficulty in that regard. The action cam appears to need a bit more than 3/8" clearance beneath any scope to operate freely so it would seem choosing HIGH rings would be the correct choice both for that consideration and stock fit.

So far, so good (with some few minor exceptions a very satisfactory rifle). Now... the action. The best single descriptive word I can think of is spongy. The action feels spongy. The torch cam is not quite that, but does not seem to lock as positively as I would prefer nor does it seem to have any built-in compensation for wear of the locking feature. That may or may not prove a problem but it seems to me it would develop into a severe one after sufficient use and wear. At what point that might occur... who knows? Surely the once-a-year shooter/hunter would never have a problem but for someone that does a lot of shooting at the range, or someone that gets hung up on cycling that cam , I think it would cause issues.

The trigger-hammer assembly contains the real sponge. It's very simple in design with only the trigger, the hammer, two springs, and a trigger blocking button-safety contained in a synthetic housing that removes from the rifle via one hex-head screw. The entire assembly is very lightweight. More attention should have been given to feel and function of the hammer and trigger. The trigger pull on my specimen has a pull weight between 5 and 6 pounds and is not all clean nor crisp. Some sensation of creep is evident most all the time and even after the trigger releases, the rattle-trap sensation of sloppy tolerances and far too much motion is evident. The hammer cocks in a much longer arc than most, and feels "spongy" in doing so. Operation also does not seem totally consistent from cycle to cycle. I will have to take a further look at what might be done to improve that assembly. I have already had it apart and back together (easy disassembly/assembly) but have made no changes as yet. If anything, I believe the operation of the assembly would be improved by replacing the provided hammer spring (the one that drives it forward) with a heavier spring. Using a better alloy for both the hammer and trigger, one with more substance and weight, would surely give a better feel and a much better trigger function. There may be some benefit in adding spacers also.

That's as far as I've got with it. I do not believe the rifle is worth anywhere near the suggested retail price and anyone that pays that much for a Genesis is paying far too much. The rifle does have some good points and may prove to be a real shooter, but with the substantial negative of a poorly done trigger I find that very unlikely. [:-]

UC,

Great review. Looking forward to hearing how she shoots.

About your ramrod. Check to see if it is extendable. I just discovered the one in my Apex is. The jag end on mine is extends by twisting counter clockwise . . . I think.

Also, I am kind of thinking that the stainless Genesis and the stainless Apex barrelsare similar. First, the QLA in the Apex is a little bigger than the groove diameter. Seems to be of constant diameter though until its final rise into the rifling. Is the Genesis QLA of similar design? And BTW, thanks for the slugging info. (Also, damcl was asking the proper procedure for slugging)

One other thing. Are the lands of your Genesis narrower than the grooves?

UC

Thank you for your initial assessment - makes me feel a whole lot better and now really makes room for the Savage 93R17-BV I am after for Christmas...

The ramrod is only extended by the method described, unscrew 4" section, reverse and screw back on thinner internal part. The rifling groove to land ratio looks 1:1 to my eyes but...

SL, I was right back then. Don't know why I'm so happy about that.

Must say the Tyler Bormann is a great guy to do business with (and probably otherwise).

I'd bet the ramrod is quite similar to the Apex rod.

The width of the grooves in the Apex were probably twice the width of the lands. If yourGenesis barrelwere rifled that way, you couldn't miss it.

Very detailed review. I agree with comments about the ramrod. I have a Dewey rod I use for everything except reloading in the hunting field, so the factory ramrod wasn't much of issue. But it is a little short. I liked the tight manner in which it fit into the stock, with no rattles.

The "lock up" of the torch cam breech block on mine is tight enough to where I'm not worried it will hinge open in the field. But I thought about the detent and how time would probably cause this device to loosen up. Looks like you could just deepen the detent at some point in the future if this became an issue.

Trigger on mine was very clean and broke at about 4.5 lbs right out of the box. Later, I decided to stone the surfaces to a very smooth finish and the trigger got lighter - but it also developed a bunch of creep. It took me the better part of half a day to get rid of the creep. The design of the trigger is not one bit condusive to trigger modifications. I'm still thinking about isolating the hammer spring from the trigger spring. With this feature, the trigger pull could be adjusted to a very light pull.

I got rid of the rear sight right away and replaced it with a Williams WGRS peep sight. Also put a green fiber optic rod in the front.

Bottom line is that accuracy and function on mine was very good. I also have an Omega. For $50 less money, I though the Genesis was a pretty good value.

Just trying to describe what I see Roskoe. The Genesis trigger designhas been outdone in the past on toy cap pistols. But the proof is in the shooting and if she does a good job there that will be a major plus. Probably be awhile before I get to that point.

And I still think a HEAVIER hammer spring would help, bothwith the creep and the pull consistency.