The 37 Remington had top quality barrels and were very accurate but the last ones were made about 70 years ago so they vary greatly in condition today. Cut rifling is precise but slow and expensive to do. Button rifling can produce excellent barrels but need stress relieved after the process. Hammer forging is usually done with factory produced rifles. It is fast and produces serviceable hunting grade barrels that wear well but usually does not produce target accuracy barrels. Any method can produce a great barrel but the odds of fine accuracy decrease depending on the method used in order. This is just my opinion, YMMV.

 

I posted due to the lack of accuracy that I am experiencing from this rifle, ( the reason I got a borescope). The lands of the rifling ( various places and severity) have areas that are not smooth and ridges that are parallel to the rifling. At the point of roughness, it is present in one land. There is no roughness in the other lands at that point in the barrel. I would think if tool chatter caused the rough area it would be present in all the lands.Also at places the width of the rifling varies. If,for example the rifling is 1/16" wide it will narrow to 1/64"
I have compared the rifling in this barrel to several other .22RF that I have. The model 37 is far worse than any other. The other rifles included a Savage Mk2, A Rem.512, H&R M12, Winchester M52, a CZ 452 and a Win. 1906.
The model 37 averages groups of 5/8 to 3/4" at 50 yards, benchrested. Ammo used so far have been: Eley Match, Eley Subsonic, Norma TAC-22, Norma Match, SK Plus and SK Rifle Match Plus CCI std. Vel.
I have cleaned the barrel with: Hoppes No.9, Bore tech Cameleon Paste, BT C4 , and Bore tec lead Remover.
I am going to give the rifle another chance when the weather breaks before giving up.