338 lapua Build advice sav 110/stevens 200

[NFG]

No, No, No, Yes...several times specifically in the "olden days" when we didn't have all this "good" information available at your finger tips...it was pretty much the only way to to actually find out just how far "way too far" was.

I see I posted the wrong Lazzeroni caliber...I had considered the 10.57 at one time for a rechamber (way to pricey for this cheap ol' boy) and it stuck in my mind, I was refering to the factory available (at one time) Lazzeroni cartridge...Sorry.

I was asking questions and positing arguments specifically to extract/elicit usefull information... NOT to get in someones face...seems history keeps repeating itself...questions many times are misconstrued if asked of an "authority figure"..."Do what I say..."My way or the highway..." or in this case " "you don't know nothing..." unless you fall into a certain catagory and have "proved" it...and using negatives to prove a positive is live and well and continuous in "etherland".

The problem seems boils down to pressure and what the Savage action is perceived/engineered??? to be safe at...

Again...I ask the question...rhetorically, of course... "If the Lazzeroni Warbird was once chambered, and seemed to work OK...WHY was it discontinued??? Was it because of "CATASTROPHIC FAILURE", because it was an expensive, proprietory cartridge, it kicked the HE** out of anyone shooting it, the consumer base was too small to continue offering it, engineering problems...OR the lawyers got involved...pretty much moot now.

Whenever the word "catastrophic" rears it's head you know the lawyers aren't far behind.

I think I did make it clear that "I DON'T RECOMMEND ANYONE DOING ANYTHING THAT IS UNSAFE AND I MAKE CERTAIN WHAT I DO IS SAFE TO BEGIN WITH"...I wasn't telling ANYONE to build, or it was OK to build a 338 Lapua using a Savage LA...besides "culpable negligence" would be the deciding factor here...If I or anyone built something dangerous and got wasted, it is on "our" heads...all the "Weasle Words" apply.

AGAIN...I was asking questions, positing arguments for SPECIFIC information...at least the insurance information came closer to a "specific" reason...not really what I was looking for tho'.

By the way...I may not be a "certified, licensed mechanical engineer" but I am fairly well educated and know the nuances of the "number system"...almost a "Welding engineer" but ran out of time and money before I could finish the degree...besides it really doesn't matter...I've know quite a few "self educated" or educated in the "college of hard knocks" that are fully capable of understanding "engineering first principles"...they, like me, weren't able to complete a "formal" education, but still seemed to function quite well in the real world.

I might also point out that Ruger, Remington, Mauser ALL have bolt bodies of 0.700" plus or minus a couple thou" and receiver chamber end OD's of 1.350" or smaller and all of them have been chambered for cartridges of the 338 Lapua size or larger and ballistic capabilities...in fact I can slide all those bolts into my Savage LA...they won't close because the bolt lengths are too short to fit into the bolt lug recess...maybe a magnum length bolt would, but I don't have a magnum length Rem, mauser or Ruger bolt to try...maybe someone might just for the informational aspect...so the bolt body argument, while having some merit can be easily argued.

I'm still looking for a SPECIFIC reason that can't be addressed in some manor.

My last post on the subject also, I can see this dog has been beaten to death and isn't very well received.

Luck on your projects.

 

[PEI Rob]

Savage Forum thread.
Are there any long action large shank Savages?

 

[NFG]

Looks like it wasn't my last post...

Thank You Rob, for the thread link...I read that one...I don't want to sound like a jerk, but most of the "stuff" on that thread was total and complete KRAP. I don't think any of those peole ever heard of a lathe or a mill and the ability of a machinist to do just about anything they want with a piece of steel. And they were referencing FACTORY parts for the most part anyway, or the "dire consequences rhetoric".

I think I have addressed ALL the issues that I could find presented in all the posts I read if you or anyone bother to look hard, with an mind open to all possibilities.

All the major ones boiled down to pressure, receiver/magazine length and the bolt face/lugs.

Here is a picture addressing the bolt face and the magazine length, for the project I an doing right now.

Again. This will be a 500 AR...loaded to 45-55 KPSI, but can be chambered to the 338 Lapua just as easily, WITHIN SPECIFIC CONSTRAINTS. The bolt face measure 0.600" ID, the "ring" measures 0.045". A simple grinding operation with a lathe, ANY machinist can do.

The magazine is a standard factory available 375 H&H length (3.60" max is what I used for my 375 H&H depending on the bullet and where I want to seat it, some are much shorter) from the olden days...still available today from the factory AND from Midway and (I think) as the 300 RUM mag...just needs some work opening/grinding the lips.

The 300 WM mag box has a max COAL of 3.44". I KNOW, I just measured one and have several and chopped up a few make longer mags. The only difference in the mags is where the ridges are positioned for the various shoulder points.

The matter of the number of larger diameter cartridge fitting in the mag is easily addressed for anyone who actually had worked with modifying rifle magazines or has done any kind of gunwork except for those sitting in front of a monitory and getting all their expertize off the net...besides you can load two Rigby sized cases down WITHOUT ANY mods in the factory mag or follower. If you want another cartridge down then things get a little more involved but not complicated and can be done by ANY with a modicum of manual dexterity.

The garbage about the bolt diameter and the lugs I covered in the last post. It is pressure dependent anyway. Anyone look at the SAMMI MAP pressure for the RUM AND the LAPUA cartridges??? If you haven't, please do!!!, then understand that the pressure is adjustable.

The issue of cartridge length is nothing but seating the COAL to work through the mag, bullet OAL length dependent, OR another magazine can be made...relatively simply...the action is capable of a max COAL of 3.8 - 3.9" with a few SIMPLE mods.

AND AGAIN.

I AM NOT ADVOCATING ANYONE DO THIS CONVERSION...ANY KIND OF CONVERSION TO/FROM A FACTORY RECEIVER/CARTRIDGE CASE IS INHERENTLY DANGEROUS...JUST THAT IT IS EASILY POSSIBLE AND SAFELY ACCOMPLISHED CONSTRAINED BY CERTAIN PARAMETERS, THAT SHOULD BE FULLY UNDERSTOOD BY ANYONE INVOLVED IN THE WILDCATTING OF A CARTRIDGE OR A RECEIVER...OR ANYONE RELOADING FOR THAT MATTER.

I apologize(somewhat) for being short and direct...I really get fed up with some of the armchair gunsmiths "Re-Petes" blowing fertilizer all over the place and claiming to be "experts"...I've been doing this wildcatting "stuff" for over 50 years and working with the Savage since the early '60's.

I don't claim to be any sort of Savage "expert", but I sure the **** check out the facts, empirically, with my own two hands and brain, BEFORE I do something or say something can be accomplished. I try to give direct factual answers to direct questions and expect direct FACTUAL answers to questions I ask. Of course I blow it sometimes and when I see that, I own up.

What I got wasn't anything like that, more like being placed in the position of a dependent child and a lot of "stuff" that wasn't germain. I'm a long way from being ANY dependent.

I will post pictures of the final product, targers and ballistics date, for anyone interested, on Accurate Reloading - Big Bore forum under Savage 500 AR probably sometime late Jun or July.

Luck on your projects.

 

[geargrinder]

NFG, I believe you are the one that is not being open minded.

The thread that Rob posted contained very sound advice from the most prominent "Savage Expert".

Fred said.

"I get this question 15 times a week. The short answer is no, the Savage action was never engineered for cases that big. I have discussed this with several engineers and custom action builders, that all came to the same conclusion. A case of that size needs a .750" diameter bolt, and a 1-1/8" barrel shank, minimum.
I know from personal experience on a gun that I built for myself that after less than 100 rounds, it experienced lug set-back. There is not enough surface area on the bolt lugs for that kind of pressure, let alone enough to provide a cushion for over pressure.
There are several custom action makers that will build express actions for those class of cartridges. Probably the most reasonable is Stiller's Precision firearms. Sako made some in .338 Lapua, in a tactical rifle.
The .338 Lapua seems to intrigue alot of shooters that "must have one", but I would suggest before you jump in with both feet, find someone that has one and beg to shoot it first. You might change your mind about what fun is all about."

Why are you ignoring his advice?

I'll admit I am just an armchair gunsmith as well, but I'm fair with math. Since the RUM case heads are about 15% smaller by area of the Lapua, wouldn't you need to reduce the case pressure by 15% to maintain the same safe load on the lugs?

 

[PEI Rob]

NFG, I have 3 mills and a lathe at my home shop and yes I have built a .338 Lapua on a Savage. The machinist work is very simple, no doubt about that. I make no time to argue with those that deflect the truth. Take the info provided as you like. Here's another piece of advise for you to do whatever you like with. That is a Beryllium Copper extractor in the pic that needs to be modified, I'd get a new steel one and modify that instead. Oh yes, fairly sure the crosspin is not installed in that bolt assembly in the pic but if it is, you have more work to do if the rear baffle is in its detent.

Shoot safe,
Cheers,
Rob

 

[jcoop]

I have been on the other site mentioned for a few years. I have received a bunch of "that can't be done" answers also. My favorite one is the whole "You can't retrofit an accutrigger to the older action". Why because I heard someone said it wont work". Or "The factory said not to do it". Well the factory also says not to change a barrel, but everyone does it. I have retrofit that trigger to the older actions like 9 times now, it is quite easy. Don't get me wrong I love the ss site. I kind asked the same question as you with the same points you pointed out and got the same "informed answers" you got. I have only talked to 2 people that have tried and they were both successful, and have yet to hear of one failing. Not saying it should be done, just saying.

 

[geargrinder]

I don't think anyone said it could not be done.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

My VW bug will go 100mph, but that doesn't make it a Porsche.

 

[NFG]

I think I have a very open mind, you just don't see it, yet. I did this flame job for a reason. Many of my jobs have been solving problems of some sort, in many fields. I ask questions, present rebutals, get hard nosed and in your face specifically to cut through the usual rhetoric and usually for safety reasons. Directness isn't well received especially if tinged with a little color, and I have to try several ways sometimes to get what I want. By the way, Rob, the bolt head information was excellent work and I for one thank you,

My getting "in your face" did glean me some information...I fully respect Fred's expertise and certainly do not ignore it. I was looking for that specific information or quote, asked for something like it specifically, but nothing was forthcoming. Fred didn't say what/where/how the lug setback happened, just that it happened and was probably tired as heck of the continuing questions. I understand now why the short response to my email. I was scratchin my head because I have conversed with him several times over many years.

I know the extractor is Beryllium Copper and "maybe" should be made of steel, time will tell. I had no problem with the magnums I shot, 7mm, 300, 375 H&H and 416 Taylor, the same extractor has been through all those and well over 1000 rounds. The Rigby case seems to work OK so far but that, again, will take some time. It is also a simple matter to turn a few thou' off the rim if needed later, OR just to use Lapua brass which was designed for 20KPSI higher pressure anyway.

And, Yes the pin was in the hole and was the same bolthead I started with way back when, with ALL the magnums. All I did was pull it out of the receiver and stack it on top of the mag box. The receiver I'm going to use is a newer one. I've done a bit of chopping and chewing on the "older" old one.

I KNOW there is not a lot of support area in the receiver for the lug thrust, it doesn't take much more than a look inside one to see that, BUT,.

I thought about this today while I was out ratting, came back and ran some simple area calculations, bolt lug area, case head area, Lapua 68KPSI pressures over that area just for my edification.

There is no problem with the bolt lugs. Using steel shear data for mild steel at the lowest psi level of 47,5KPSI for the area of ONLY the lugs, not including the bolt handle area, the lugs could support 1.57 times the amount of pressure generated by the 68KPSI, using the bolt handle area the level increased to 1.82 times. I KNOW the bolthead steel has a MUCH higher shear rating than mild steel, so if it works with mild steel it will work with much better steel. Just a straight forward pressure/area calculation. Goto Varmint Al's for a REAL bolt stress analysis, and some good information.

The problem is with the very small area of support at the upper and lower area inside of the receiver. When I looked at that a little harder, it dawned on me and I finally understood the whys of the problem. NO ONE mentioned that little bit of data and I missed it by looking too hard at other possibilities. Those two very small and thin cresents of steel and the small support area behind the bolt head are all you have between you and oblivion.

BUT, again, no one was bothering with looking around, just defending the **** out of something they didn't really know anything about or didn't state directly, or read or heard something from some "authority". I guarantee it is hard to extract specific, exact information "nicely" sometimes. Mostly I see "opinions" without proof or empirical data to support it.

And Fred was certainly right about the "fun thing". The 338 Lapua is definitely NOT for many. Not a lot of friends want to shoot any of my really BIG bores and don't EVEN trot out the 12GaFH.

What I was attempting to present and didn't quite get across or wasn't understood because of the defensive posture AGAINST a "338 Lapua in a Savage", was several facts: (not the first time or the first forum either)

You DON'T have to load to the 68KPSI Lapua pressures ALL the time.

You DON'T have to load to the 3.8" factory COAL.

The Savage receiver doesn't need much in the way of 'smithing.

And there are many ways to de-pelage a mink.

You DO have lots of latitude when it comes to COAL, pressures, powders,etc., but many DON'T or won't experiment or understand how to. I used to make people totally crazy when I was benchresting, had a nice group going and started shooting flies off the target or started shooting some loads I wanted to check out. Never could understand that, THEY got the tin cup and the pats on the fanny. But I got the information I wanted, which was much more valuable to me.

I ran some 338 Lapua case data through my "Load from a Disk" and found I could get a 300 grain Sierra MK going at 2700 fs at about the same pressure as a 300 WM, 54KCUP/64KPSI, at 3.6" COAL, and by single loading, 2800 fs at 3.8" COAL, and almost 2900 fs at 4.0" COAL. Or a 250 gr Sierra MK at almost 3000 fs at the same pressures, at 3.6" COAL, all with a 26" barrel with Retumbo powder. That is very close to the Lapua loads I found in several manuals and online. Well within the capability of the Savage.

If I wanted to actually build a 338 cal rifle using a Lapua case(notice I DIDN'T say the "other" politically incorrect phrase) on the Savage LA and stay withing the 64KPSI limit, I would go to a 32" barrel, load out to 4.0", single load and get 3200fs or pretty close. And If I were doing such a thing I WOULD use a 32" bbl otherwise why bother, a RUM or EDGE would work just as well, and a 338 WMis much cheaper yet and equally as effective. My 338-06 isn't all that far behind and it has killed everything I ever pointed it at.

This information is what was missed by most people because they depend on reloading manuals, I think, and they don't quite understand all the nuances of reloading and wildcatting and get defensive, defending a position to the hilt almost blindly and don't know or forget that there are MANY ways to get to where you want to go without going by the "usual" methods.

Geargrinder: Actually the RUM case head is 17.5% smaller using the AREA size. The % of reduction would be the AREA of the heads A=Pi x radius squared= 0.224/0.2715 = .825 -(-1) = .175 x 100 = 17.5% and not necessarily. If your concern is staying within a specific pressure on the bolthead then it would be one way to think about it and a safe way to establish some sort of pressure ratio, but the RUM's MAP is already 4KPSI below the Lapua, same as the 300 WM's. Cutting the Lapua pressure by 17.5% would be putting the RUM pressure around 56 KPSI. Nothing to sneeze at but quite a ways below MAP.

Yeah and it doesn't mean it shouldn't. I had one of those "Things" that would do the same, VERY scary when you got past 75. Hahahahahaha

The concern is not always the lugs. In the Savage case and also on the the other receivers of similar design is the steel support cresents where the lugs abutt. You have to look at the lug support areas to see if they are large enough to handle the added pressure IF you want to push to 68KPSI. You DON'T need to push if you feel it is unsafe, but you can STILL have a 338 cal rifle, use the Lapua case and use a Savage action, "but I didn't say that and I was never here".

I understand now why Savage went to the larger diameter barrel shank. I see now that the lugs and barrel were not the problem. By going to a larger barrel shank and keeping the rest of the dimensions OEM, Savage in effect increased the size of the abutments and that small increase was all that was required to solve the problem.

It would have been nice for someone with that information would have said "Wake up Jack, THIS is the problem" then explained it to me. And it would have been even nicer if I had opened my eyes a little wider and saw it for myself sooner.

The one very good thing about conversation is exploring all the little nuances and getting more opinions. The old adage about "MO' HEADS, MO'BETTA" certainly fits in this case, but you gotta be open to all possibilities, work them through using good data, get tough with the questions and answers, have a thick skin and don't defend a position to the death.

Jcoop: I think it reduces to the fact that some people always ask "why you do dat" and some say"why not, Cher, it be good" and go ahead and try. It's not a right or wrong thing. I have friends that continually shake their head at some of my projects. I just do many things for my own pleasure and my own reasons. Many very experienced old timey 'smiths let me look over their shoulders, listen to their conversations and let me touch now and then. I owe it to them to pass along whatever I can. Most of the time it is pretty hard getting past the wall.

I 'polojeyes for bean 1 o' dooes geyz.

Luck on your projects.

 

[Southernfryedyankee]

NFG I see you wrote you contacted SSS and Fred said he didnt recommend it. Fred deals, fixes, tweaks, rebarrels + everything fred does for savages only, that is his line of work, HIS business. I would think that someone of his knowledge and experience would want to point you in the right direction. If you still dont agree with him then build your rifle as YOU want it to be and take that risk. If you are still not convinced try contacting Kevin Rayhill at stockade gun stocks, he is also a savage man and his company revolves around savages. If he doesnt think its a good idea BELIEVE ME HE WILL TELL YOU IN HIS OWN KEVIN RAYHILL WAY. He is a great guy BUT str8 to the point and he WILL tell you JUST like it is and some people dont like that, if you want a second opinion contact him and of he doesnt recommend it then DONT do it. That will be 2 professional opinions for you. If you still need a 3rd opinion contact burger king, auto zone, or maybe even oasis pool supply because they will be sure to have the knowledge your looking for because the professional opinion(s) arent cutting it for ya.

 

[AJ Peacock]

NFG,

Good post re the lug support area. I have an Edge on a SA Savage (large shank), did you measure/determine the strength gain that the large shank reciever has over the small shank? (lug support recess areas)

thanks,
AJ

 

[NFG]

I see you still completely missed my points, Southernfryed. I don't dispute what Fred or ANY othe Savage expert has to say. I welcome their knowledge. And, I am perfectly able to understand the problem, NOW that I worked through it and see where it actually is located.

But none of that specific information came from the net or from Fred or from anyone else. I worked it out myself and posted most of the process while it was going on. Either you didn't read and understand or I didn't present it in an understandable form that you could understand. OR you're still in that "catasrophic/authoritarian" milieu. Re-read my last post, it's mostly all there AND the WHY of the problem. No flame or diss intended, or any of the other "politically correct" BS.

As I see it, the WHOLE enchilada could have been nipped in the bud or stopped in it's tracks IF Fred or one of the other experts would have simply stated the actual problem specifically, i.e., 68KPSI is too high a pressure for the Savage, AND the reason; It causes bolt setback because of the design of the bolt abutments or the lugs are too soft OR, whatever actually was the cause, NOT, just that the Savage just wasn't engineered for the Lapua cartridge. That response didn't satisfy people without knowledge because they kept asking, OR, those, like me, who have a very deep knowledge base and interest, and need a **** of a lot more than "You just can't do it, because". I didn't read any thing like this or was anything like it pointed out to me. Wish it had of been, It would have been very useful to me in many other ways.

If he/them/they had put that in a canned response to all the questions they kept getting, I guarantee after a few read it, it would have been scattered all over the net and EVERYONE with an interest in doing a 338 Lapua on the Savage, for ANY reason, would have gone on to something else, and NO more emails. I would have though about it more, said "Yeah, thats right, whoops, forgot about that", went on to some measurements, and continued on with my normal projects. BUT still, IF I wanted to do a 338 Lapua based chamber, I would have loaded to the pressure level required for the Savage action. No muss, no fuss, simple as pie.

But that didn't happen and this is the result. It is also the usual result of many other questions of the same kind relating to ANY conversion on many other forums. The usual amount of BS relating to limited knowledge, people not quite understanding or not fully reading or reacting to all the million and one other things we humans get all tweaked over, or just getting whizzed on for no apparent reason. NO flame or diss intented or implied or any of the other "politically incorrect" BS.

Just like jcoop said, most people in this business are just TOO conservative to step outside the boundary's and look at things from a newer perspectiv, let alone speak about it. Many are more mechanically inclined to do the work, but not necessarily machematically inclined to do the number crunching, or are not interested.

The old timers that taught me are long dead and there weren't all that many of them, and there aren't all that many like me left either. There isn't anything wrong with all the new technology, I love it, use it and I stay abreast of the latest innovations, but I think that technology has left out a lot of the "hard earned by sweat equity" things you learn by trial and error. Way to easy to design a new cartridge, have a reamer made, calculate all the parameters and come up with a rifle without getting your nose bloodied now and then. But it is very nice to be able to do it and stay clean. lightbulb


AJ:
How do you like your Edge.? What bullets/weights, powder, primer, case brand etc, and pressures do you run? What is the accuracy level and distances you shoot? That cartridge has interested me ever since I first encounted it. I almost did a 338 RUM many years ago when it first came out. Wanted a "REAL" varminter. I played with the 300 gr Sierras in my 338-06 for a while, but circumstances prevented me from getting anywhere else. Now the 50 cal has my attention, forget that puny 338 RUM "toy". You don't have any worries mate, as long as you don't get the pressure over 64KPSI MAP, which is SAAMI correct for a RUM based cartridge.

I also looked at the RUM case for doing several different large bores but had to settle for the Rigby/Lapua case to do a .510. The only other case close was the Jeffrey. 0.620" rim OD and it is just TOO big for the Savage although it could have worked by keeping the pressures down below 45KPSI, just as keeping the pressures down below 45 KPSI for the Rigby case works. The bolthead wouldhave lost it's steel rim completely.

One thing you can do for me is measure the OD of the large shanked receiver AND the bolt lugs, length, width and depth AND measure the thickness of the receiver segment where the bolt just entes the receiver chamber end. Those numbers would give all the information required to figure out the actual thickness of the segment. A picture of the large shank receiver ID looking into the end would be worth a thousand words along with the actual measurement . I could ratio the picture and extract a lot of information.

I don't have any specific numbers to go by and that would go a long way in understanding also. I don't think the bolt lugs/boltheads are any different that the small shank parts, at least from looking at available parts lists, there is NO designation as to large shank or small shank parts that I see in Midway or Brownells.

My numbers are - Large shanked barrel 1.12" OD, Small shanked barrel 1.055" OD - difference is 0.065". That would make the ID of the receiver the same as the OD 1.12"-DUH-do ya think Mac? and basically add the same amount to the depth of the bolt lug abutement which is 0.154" now, to say 0.220" thick.

Also I don't know exactly if the design of that section of the chamber end has been changed. You would have to do those measurements and comparisons yourself.

I boils down to a shear modulus calculation rather than just a simple shear yield strength calculation if all the other measurements are the same. You basically gained 0.065" x width x lenght, which would change the stress modulus numbers. By how much, I don't know. I didn't do a circle segment calculation either for that matter and that is what the "cresent" I was refering to, is. But eyeballing the segment, it looks to be slightly over 1/4 of the OD, roughly 100°. C=Dx Pi so that would be roughly 1.35" x Pi = 4.24x.30 = 1.27"w x .400d x .220h = .112 cu in roughly. Using 0.154h = 0.078 cu in. .034 cu in difference. Doesn't sound like a lot does it?

But we are actually talking about "only" 4KPSI differential also, and a stress modulus section of roughly 1.27" x .400"x .034" additional support area.

Stress modulus is measure in Giga pascals, for steel that is 79 GPa or 11,148,000 psi and is defined as G=FI/delta-x X A, force times height divided by Delta x times Area

I have no way of empirically measuring tan theta without destructive testing, and about now I start getting headaches anyway.

The force would be the pressure over the bolthead, roughly 18.7KPSI for 68KPSI for a Lapua case, times the height divided by deflection delta-X times area.

The shear modulus is defined as the ratio of the shear stress divided by the shear strain. One psi is equal to about 6900 Pascals and a Gigapascal is equal to a billion times a Pascal, just add 9 more zeros after the last zero in 6900, 6 900 000 000 000 Pa. A GPa is equal to about 145,000 psi. Gets a little thick doesn't it. The deflection would be very small but because of the large numbers, but you need a piece of software to crunch the numbers, I don't have that software.

Besides, I lost most of you way, WAY back, and I'm not an engineer, just an interested party. If I had the money, the equipment, etc I would present the data to you for informational purposes ONLY.

The simple answer is that small amount is enough to offset the pressure differential.

It also boil down to the 4KPSI difference in pressure between a 300 WM and the 338 Lapua, and the difference in bolt head area presented to the bolthead and transfered to the lugs. That small amount, 0.0650" thicker, is all that was required to adjust for the pressure differential. That pressure differential is not a lot but just enough to cause the redazz in this case.

And I don't know for sure if the lug setback occurred on the lugs, on only one lug and maybe the lower abutment or on both the lug abutments.

It would really be nice, and it wouldn't bother me in the least, if someone with specific, actual empirical knowledge of WHERE it happen would come forward and just say "All you pontifications are sh**, HERE is what/where it happened...!!! THAT would settle the whole argument and point the way to a solution. Just as long as I KNOW for a fact it was someone who DID IT, and not some SFB trying to be funny. That still doesnt negate how I went about working through the problem without actually doing a destructive test on a receiver.

If you think of this whole thing simply as a tube within a tube within a tube, with one closed end, nothing esoteric, just a simple physics problem, the pressure occuring in mili-seconds, and one part being nothing more than a part in a hydraulic system or in this case a gas pressure system. Looking at it THAT way makes it a lot more understandable. That's what my old long dead math professors tried to pound in my brain. Reduce all the factors to simple physics problems and then solve.

My presentationis also simplistic and to get close to the actual numbers an engineering stress analysis would need to be run. I would do it if I had the bucks. Anyone really interested in this problem academically could probably pay Varmint Al to do it, he is an engineer and has the tools and software to do it.

Baring that happening, ALL the rest of the BS is just that, BS without a solution. All smoke and mirrors, and whisky talk around the camfire.

Luck on your quests.

 

[AJ Peacock]

NFG,

I'll take some measurements in a week or 2 and will pm you with them. Or pm me your email and I'll email to you. The Edge is shooting well, only shot it to 800yds though; getting 2750fps w/ the 300SMK in a 28" barrel. Have gotten sub moa at 800yds, can't tell you exactly how good yet, probbly 1/2-3/4 moa or so.

Running the default load of 92gr H1000 and cci250's in rem 300rum brass.

AJ

 

[edge]

Lilja has an article on re-chambering a 700 action for a .378 Weatherby.

Seems like a similar application, and his thoughts may be helpful.

Lilja Precision Rifle Barrels - Articles: 378 Weatherby Cases in the Remington 700 Action?

edge.

 

[geargrinder]

NFG,

Good post re the lug support area. I have an Edge on a SA Savage (large shank), did you measure/determine the strength gain that the large shank reciever has over the small shank? (lug support recess areas)

thanks,
AJ

I'll agree with AJ. You explained yourself very well this time and I realize that I agree with you more than I thought at first.

I'm glad you stuck it out on this thread, as I think there's been a great exchange of information that never happened on here or at Savageshooters.