WyoHunter1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2015
- Messages
- 221
Sounds expensive for a Howa. Can you get the same thing in a custom for the same price or close?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Action fluting/scalloping/thinning
- Thread starter ntsqd
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
A howa is a cast action, I wouldn't be looking to go nuts with a milling machine in it especially for what little you'll gain.
If your serious about getting down to 5 that stock has to go, likely you need to get the lightest stock possible in a flat top then send it and your action and bottom metal to one of the guys who do custom in letting, that should knock a pound of then get the rest on the barrel and lop it of, those are the two biggest weight shaving areas and if you don't take all the weight out of those two first your just ****ing in the wind and not really serious about getting light!!
If your serious about getting down to 5 that stock has to go, likely you need to get the lightest stock possible in a flat top then send it and your action and bottom metal to one of the guys who do custom in letting, that should knock a pound of then get the rest on the barrel and lop it of, those are the two biggest weight shaving areas and if you don't take all the weight out of those two first your just ****ing in the wind and not really serious about getting light!!
ntsqd
Well-Known Member
Do you know this for a fact? Not that I've looked far and wide, but this is the first that I've seen it mentioned. None the less, the front bridge is off-limits to any mass reduction. Too much to lose if you get it wrong there. The rear bridge has some margin in it.A howa is a cast action, I wouldn't be looking to go nuts with a milling machine in it especially for what little you'll gain.
Stock is open, but as I've previously stated the barrel length is fixed at what it is. I'm not concerned with just light can I get it with no constraints other than legalities and wallet thickness. The 5 lbs. target is the result of a long ago series of conversations with the man who it is more or less a tribute to, that spurred me to build it now that I can afford to do so. Within what I'm willing to do if it falls short of making it under 5 lbs. then so be it. It's a dandy rifle right now and is well suited to the task it was built for as-is. Lighter would just be better.If your serious about getting down to 5 that stock has to go, likely you need to get the lightest stock possible in a flat top then send it and your action and bottom metal to one of the guys who do custom in letting, that should knock a pound of then get the rest on the barrel and lop it of, those are the two biggest weight shaving areas and if you don't take all the weight out of those two first your just ----ing in the wind and not really serious about getting light!!
J E Custom
Well-Known Member
Tried a search and didn't find anything on this. Build is a Howa Mini LW bbl in 7.62X39, goal is under 5 lbs. scoped and slung. Probably not going to get there, but that's the goal. Obviously not a LR precision rifle, more of a CA A Zone "Hiking up steep hills with a rifle" sub 300 yd. rifle. Not a lot to work with in this tiny action, but it already has a hollowed-out Boyd's on it (forearm shortened ~2" for esthetics), Leupold 2-7x LW in Talley AL mounts, and Ti action screws because I could (https://monsterbolts.com/products/6...orx-button-head-caps-screws-iso-7380-din-9427). It's at about 6.5 lbs. now, which is why I doubt that I'll reach 5 lbs.
The barrel is a pretty light profile now and as best as I can infer is the original design length for the cartridge. I'm more than a little hesitant to flute it, but I know I could find another couple ounces by doing so. Same with shortening it except that's just not going to happen as I like the esthetic balance of barrel length to forearm length that I have now.
However, There is some meat in the action that I suspect could be fluted/scalloped/thinned w/o grossly affecting the action's rigidity. Obviously the front bridge is off limits. As is the scope mount region of the rear bridge. What about the sides of the rear bridge? What about the squared-off flat belly of this action where there isn't a pocket for the mag? It is about to get pillered so I don't need that flat belly. Anyone done this sort of thing or had it done? I'm down to a war of ounces, a little here, a little there, etc. I have kidded about thru drilling those Ti action bolts......
There are many ways to lighten a rifle and with what you have described. I would shorten the barrel to 18" or 20" and not flute an already light barrel. I also don't recommend removal of any receiver
metal. bolt fluting is ok as long as it is not over done.
Composite stocks are not my favorite but they are the lightest stocks. Light weight scope bases and rings will save some weight as long as the cartridge is not to powerful. Scopes and stocks are the easiest way to save weight without sacrificing accuracy.
Even with the light weight rifle the 7.62 x 39 wont need a muzzle brake so that will save you some weight.
J E CUSTOM
ntsqd
Well-Known Member
Barrel is a LW profile 20" length now, not going to shorten it. To give an idea of the profile the muzzle is .571" OD, chamber region is 1.097"OD. Bore is ~.310, so muzzle wall thickness is roughly .130"
Bolt body is .617" OD and about 3.9" between the rear of the lugs and the front of the handle. Not a lot there to start with. Thinking to model it and the action in SolidWorks, then apply my best guess about fluting and see what the software predicts for weight loss.
I'm slowly removing all brakes on rifles, this rifle won't get one. Very early-on in this project I pondered Mag-Na-Port, but long ago ruled that out.
Talley says the rings are 4 oz.
Leupold says the scope is 8.5 oz.
As a degreed Engineer I see no issue with whittling on the rear bridge of the action and some of the underbelly of it. Not a lot there in the first place, so the gain will be small. Front bridge is off limits, too much stress there to be able to whittle on it and not cause a drastically bad problem.
Bolt body is .617" OD and about 3.9" between the rear of the lugs and the front of the handle. Not a lot there to start with. Thinking to model it and the action in SolidWorks, then apply my best guess about fluting and see what the software predicts for weight loss.
I'm slowly removing all brakes on rifles, this rifle won't get one. Very early-on in this project I pondered Mag-Na-Port, but long ago ruled that out.
Talley says the rings are 4 oz.
Leupold says the scope is 8.5 oz.
As a degreed Engineer I see no issue with whittling on the rear bridge of the action and some of the underbelly of it. Not a lot there in the first place, so the gain will be small. Front bridge is off limits, too much stress there to be able to whittle on it and not cause a drastically bad problem.
