Flat on bottom of Rem 700?
- Thread starter Mram10us
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Funny. I brought that up and got a bunch of "it's not safe to weld..." "it needs heat treated again". My mentor welded a lug to a receiver a long time ago and it worked fine. I recently welded a Remington lug to my tc compass switch barrel. Works like a champ
Alex Wheeler
Well-Known Member
I have a preference for flats on bedded actions, for glue ins, it doesnt matter. Flat surfaces resist the twist, same with bedding the sides of the lug. If you clearance the sides of the lug, then all thats left to resist the twist is the screws. Screws are for clamping, they should not be used as a recoil surface. Hunting rifles are not the best platforms to test or see the finer accuracy points in. Theres just too much other noise involved.
What parts of the lug do you tape?
The one I did back then was a 722 and it's now on barrel number five.No issues.
Alex Wheeler
Well-Known Member
It depends on what I want to achieve. On a integral lug or a dual pinned lug that actually fit tight you can bed the sides of the lug if you choose. A non pinned or only single pinned will have enough play in that you will need to re-bed if you ever re barrel, so you need side clearance. But I avoid using such actions. You will see a lot of very firm opinions on lug clearance, front back sides, ext. Im am fairly confident most have not done the testing for themselves to see what helps or hurts. I recommend doing this testing for yourself with a rifle accurate enough to see the differences.
Last edited:
I've always done tape on the bottom and sides with no testing of other methods. I got to thinking about just the bottom of the lug so wanted some experienced advice on that.
What do you mean? Twisting doesn't happen? I haven't seen it, but that doesn't mean much
Like many aspects related to building an accurate rifle, there's debate...
No doubt there is rotational force exerted on the barreled action due to the bullet spinning down the bore.
The point of debate, is whether or not this is significant.
My take, is that 99.9% of rifles and those driving them are incapable of realizing the difference at the target (myself included
)For the top tier of benchrest shooters, where .001 in group size can matter, perhaps a different story.
I'm not in the BR game, but it's my understanding that conventional pillar bedded actions are still used (and winning) by some, not all are glued-in.
A lot of focus in online forums on minutiae that's largely irrelevant for the vast majority of rifles and shooters IMO, but hey, it's interesting discussion. To me, there's a difference between a DIY'er that's not paying a smith to do the work- to dot every "I" and cross every "T" that's possible, whether it's efficacy can be realized, or not.
For me, it's different when it comes to paying customers. I won't recommend any work that I don't feel will translate at the target for any given customer- obviously, a "typical" hunting rifle vs. a true long-range hunting rifle, vs. true precision rifles have different criteria- and costs.
JMO, YMMV.
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply Sir
