Hired Gun
Well-Known Member
Alright, my BS meter is about pegged and I'm going to have to vent a bit of my own. I'm no engineer but I do have good measuring equipment and know how to read it. I pointed this issue out a couple years ago and got poo pood the whole way. I don't remember for sure if it was this forum or another but there was a wiener stretching contest going on over grinding factory lugs verses aftermarket lugs. I mentioned I throw away stock lugs and got attacked by the guys with surface grinders. They were bragging up processing bags of stock lugs for their super trued actions and making good money selling them. I demonstrated I can flex a factory lug with my thumb. Even the .250" titanium bends almost as easy as the .187" factory lug. I pointed out that hardened .250" lugs were much stiffer and I was chastised for wasting peoples money. They contended the factory stamped Remington lugs were all a guy needed up through Lapua's.
A drilled lug does not weaken a lug in any way because the hole is not the same plane as the lug is under stress. As far as the hole weakening the action. I say yes but only slightly. The hole in the action is not anywhere near the other weak spots which is near the ejection port or at the corners on the feed hole. Even the scope holes at 12 o'clock have been known to allow cracks through them during catastrophic failure. The double pin lug with the holes at 4 and 8 o'clock seriously weakens a 700 action but it will usually never fail until you have a catastrophic event anyway.
I highly recommend Holland drilled lugs and pinning them to the action. I never use the .010" or more oversized lugs that are promoted by the cnc action truing crowd. That really weakens an action to arbitrarily open it up .010" oversize when usually .003"-.005" is plenty to get a 100% cleanup. I propose that a .250" lug fitted tight to a barrel tennon, void of threads or a thread relief, may offer even better support to the chamber area and further strengthen the entire assembly. This is why we never cut barrel threads on either end to a relief.
A 1.200 barrel shanks offers a little over 1/16" of lug support from the forces of recoil. I really prefer 1.250" shanks and if I was designing barrels I would be pushing 1.350" barrel shanks. Same size as the action on the back side of the lug.
As far as a lug over .250" weakening a stock more than a .200" thick lug; I can't agree or find any logic to support this little cut when less than one inch away the whole stock is cut away leaving less than 1/4" thick vertical walls for four inches to allow for a mag box. That weakens the stock far more than cutting for a lug. I also contend that thicker lugs resist flexing better and load the bedding more even than a thin lug which would be easier on the stock and bedding making it stronger. If anyone was concerned about it (which I am) they would be building single shots with no magwell in the stock or bottom feed ports in the action.
This issue is part of why I like the Mark 5 or Vanguard or better yet single shot custom actions with integral lugs to build on.
Sorry if it sounds confrontational but it's from the heart and not a teleprompter. I love you all.
A drilled lug does not weaken a lug in any way because the hole is not the same plane as the lug is under stress. As far as the hole weakening the action. I say yes but only slightly. The hole in the action is not anywhere near the other weak spots which is near the ejection port or at the corners on the feed hole. Even the scope holes at 12 o'clock have been known to allow cracks through them during catastrophic failure. The double pin lug with the holes at 4 and 8 o'clock seriously weakens a 700 action but it will usually never fail until you have a catastrophic event anyway.
I highly recommend Holland drilled lugs and pinning them to the action. I never use the .010" or more oversized lugs that are promoted by the cnc action truing crowd. That really weakens an action to arbitrarily open it up .010" oversize when usually .003"-.005" is plenty to get a 100% cleanup. I propose that a .250" lug fitted tight to a barrel tennon, void of threads or a thread relief, may offer even better support to the chamber area and further strengthen the entire assembly. This is why we never cut barrel threads on either end to a relief.
A 1.200 barrel shanks offers a little over 1/16" of lug support from the forces of recoil. I really prefer 1.250" shanks and if I was designing barrels I would be pushing 1.350" barrel shanks. Same size as the action on the back side of the lug.
As far as a lug over .250" weakening a stock more than a .200" thick lug; I can't agree or find any logic to support this little cut when less than one inch away the whole stock is cut away leaving less than 1/4" thick vertical walls for four inches to allow for a mag box. That weakens the stock far more than cutting for a lug. I also contend that thicker lugs resist flexing better and load the bedding more even than a thin lug which would be easier on the stock and bedding making it stronger. If anyone was concerned about it (which I am) they would be building single shots with no magwell in the stock or bottom feed ports in the action.
This issue is part of why I like the Mark 5 or Vanguard or better yet single shot custom actions with integral lugs to build on.
Sorry if it sounds confrontational but it's from the heart and not a teleprompter. I love you all.
