Modify Savage Action for MDT Chassis - WSM

[new2mud]

Yea....I think my length of cut is only 0.040" roughly....Not much, but I am freaked out that I'm going to scrap a receiver.

I didn't even measure. Just kept filing until rounds popped through the mag. Seriously—the freak out is much more dramatic than getting it done. And I was freaking out too.

 

[nksmfamjp]

cut and measure cut and measure repeat.

Agree. My plan is to take the barrel off the action, add Dykem all over the bottom. Then scratch out a length line and a centerline using a mag with the guts out of it.

Then I will probably start with a triangle file to set the depth and cut even with the round file. If cutting is too hard, I'll find a dremel bit and put it to work!

Then deburr and do some feed testing with 2.98" test rounds.

 

[DFHarley19]

I would like to see pictures of your work. A video would be awesome and I think I asked too much? Looking forward to your project! I do have Savage 12 6.5 Creedmoor and MDT ACC Chassis. That is why I asked!

Good luck!

 

[jasonco]

I would like to see pictures of your work. A video would be awesome and I think I asked too much? Looking forward to your project! I do have Savage 12 6.5 Creedmoor and MDT ACC Chassis. That is why I asked!

Good luck!

That won't be an issue with the Creedmoor case, even at it's longest loaded usable detachable magazine length. Anything past mag length and you're single feeding.

 

[nksmfamjp]

I would like to see pictures of your work. A video would be awesome and I think I asked too much? Looking forward to your project! I do have Savage 12 6.5 Creedmoor and MDT ACC Chassis. That is why I asked!

Good luck!

I'll take pictures, but video is out of my league!

 

[DFHarley19]

I'll take pictures, but video is out of my league!

That is what I though! Lol! No problem. Thanks!

 

[iflyskyhigh]

I'll take pictures, but video is out of my league!

Any updates on this?

 

[nksmfamjp]

Any updates on this?

I did it. I started by laying out exactly where the magazine touches off on the action. You have to let the mag touch the action at the outer corners to support the magazine, it seems. Removing the outer contact seem# like the mag would float and impact feed stability.

Then I removed the barrel to keep metal out of the bore. Then I cut along the centerline with a triangle needle file. Then, I cut to depth with the dremel and smoothed it up a bit with the dremel. Last, I broke edges and smoothed any slight roughness with the file. This isn't critical as this is a clearance cut, not a feed ramp cut per say.

Of course barrel reinstalled with GO/NOGO gages.

It turned out well and it feeds dummy rounds like a top. It is too cold to head to the range.

I kind of panicked and forgot to take pictures.

 

[new2mud]

I did it. I started by laying out exactly where the magazine touches off on the action. You have to let the mag touch the action at the outer corners to support the magazine, it seems. Removing the outer contact seem# like the mag would float and impact feed stability.

Then I removed the barrel to keep metal out of the bore. Then I cut along the centerline with a triangle needle file. Then, I cut to depth with the dremel and smoothed it up a bit with the dremel. Last, I broke edges and smoothed any slight roughness with the file. This isn't critical as this is a clearance cut, not a feed ramp cut per say.

Of course barrel reinstalled with GO/NOGO gages.

It turned out well and it feeds dummy rounds like a top. It is too cold to head to the range.

I kind of panicked and forgot to take pictures.

Glad to hear you got it done.

I radiused to smooth out a "feed ramp" on mine, but the rounds sit higher than that ramp when loaded in the magazine, that I don't think it was necessary.

 

[nksmfamjp]

I agree. Just need a small clearance cur for tips to pop through.

 

[tobnpr]

"Longer" ain't "better" with the .300 WSM as this article/testing demonstrates.
I wouldn't be so concerned about loading long- the results don't show any advantages to doing so.

https://loaddata.com/articles/PDF/3-Inch%20300%20WSM.pdf

 

[nksmfamjp]

"Longer" ain't "better" with the .300 WSM as this article/testing demonstrates.
I wouldn't be so concerned about loading long- the results don't show any advantages to doing so.

https://loaddata.com/articles/PDF/3-Inch%20300%20WSM.pdf

Sometimes I wonder who advices gunwriters.

There was a 50 fps difference between 24-26" barrels....that is not nothing....often the word magnum is only good for 100 fps, so 50 fps is something.

If you have an infinite freebore....or 0.25" in this article and 180 gr bullets, I'm not sure you can see the effect of short or long. I think the effect of this is much more prevalent with 220 VLD type bullets.

Interesting. Doesn't make sense.

I modified mostly to keep bullet tips from hanging up.

I wonder why the WSM benchrest match reamers have about 0.15" over SAAMI freebore.

 

[tobnpr]

I wonder why the WSM benchrest match reamers have about 0.15" over SAAMI freebore.

Probably, because this is what our "common sense" tells us. I don't know of anyone that shoots .300 WSM in benchrest competition, so if there is such a someone, they would be the one to ask.

I just completed a .300 WSM build. Planned on throating the SAAMI chamber deeper, but decided to stick with SAAMI after reading this and because it was preferable for the rifle to be able to shoot factory ammunition if the need arose.

After all, isn't that what we're supposed to do, to seat the bullet out in order to get maximum case capacity, which (supposedly) equals increased velocities?

Serious testing (strain gauges, Oehler lab-grade chrono) largely said "N/A" for this chambering.

My bottom line has always been this- what does the target say?

Quoting the essential line of the article,
Theories and logical reasoning sometimes go down the drain when you actually pull the trigger and record the results.

This, is what matters- and nothing else.

I found it interesting, so wanted to share the info for others interested in the short mag.

 

[nksmfamjp]

Well, I appreciate you posting it and have no good rebuttal. Thank you. I think part of the reason the data looks as it does is due to the shorter non-VLD 180gr bullets.

I wonder how it would look with 212gr VLD's or similar.

I don't have any side-by-side testing to show you though.