Borden bumps.

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by 4ked Horn, Jan 12, 2004.

  1. 4ked Horn

    4ked Horn Writers Guild

    Messages:
    1,519
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    I was hoping that someone would be nice enough to give me the long version of what "borden bumps" are.

    I read about them on the borden rifles website and on the nesika bay website but all it says is that they are there to reduce up the clearance on the bolt to receiver fit.

    I emailed borden rifles and got an equally vague response.

    Precisely where on the bolt are they located and how does a .0005" clearance help anything? It is my belief that if it ain't touching then it ain't touching. I always thought that it was contacting surfaces that held rounds tightly in the chamber.

    Thanks
     
  2. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    To explain let's back up to your average action like a Rem 700. With a round in the chamber and the bolt closed is the position we are concerned with. Like this the sear spring is pushiing up on the sear which is in contact with the angled surface of the cocking piece. This is forcing the back of the bolt up in the action. Can be as little as 0.001" or as much as 0.007" give or take a little. Reason is the Rem bolt is around 0.690" in diameter, while the raceway in the action is 0.705" roughly. This provides clearance for dirt, etc...
    The Borden bumps are on the bolt behind the lugs and I think in front of the handle also. Using the same Rem #s for simplicity, they make the bolt 0.704" in diameter. That way in the locked up position, the sear/CP can't push the bolt out of square with the bore axis more than 0.0005" unlike the standard Remmy bolt being pushed out of square by several thousands. Clear as mud?
     

  3. halfbreed

    halfbreed Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    54
    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Chris Mathews, actually that was very clear, This site has been very helpful for the learning curve.

    thank you, John
     
  4. 4ked Horn

    4ked Horn Writers Guild

    Messages:
    1,519
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Chris thanks for your reply. You hit the nail on the head. I did a google image search for borden bumps and came up with this page- http://www.snipersparadise.com/tsmag/Feb2001.htm

    The bigest bummer is that for some reason none of the pictures would open up for me but now I have a better idea what they are and why a "clearance" dimension is important on a bolt lock up.
     
  5. Brent

    Brent Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,537
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    If you didn't know, the 700 can be bushed front and rear to accomplish the same thing.
     
  6. FatBoy...

    FatBoy... Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    284
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2002
    Last time I spoke with Kevin Jenkins, he installed the bushings on the Rem bolts as well. Thing is, it pushes the price of the Rem action to that of a Nesika. Why not just start with a Nesika or a BAT, or one similar?

    It seems that these would make the rifle less reliable under field conditions. For my purposes, I don't see the bushings or Borden bumps making any practical differnce.

    For the bench rest crown, this may be very appealing.

    FatBoy...
     
  7. Brent

    Brent Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,537
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Chris,
    I don't understand the no clearance while woking the bolt statement you made? The bushing takes up extra clearance but still leaves some, and when the bolt is worked the bushings at the rear are actually withdrawn from the bolt bore completely and the original bolt body clearance forward of the bushings has plenty of clearance. I don't like the idea of bushing the front end tho, I think you're just asking for a binding condition just as soon as the bolt is withdrawn far enough that the rear bushings leave the bore. If it were me, I'd build up the rear bolt body with a Tig in several spots and turn it back down to the exact diameter it needed to be. All one really needs is maybe a bump on top and two on the bottom to keep the bolt centered in the cocked and uncocked position both. I haven't asked Dave yet what he'd charge me to put the bumps on, but he agrees it's a better idea than bushings and would take a lot less time.

    I agree, I don't like the idea of anything soldered either, soft or siver. Bolt handles included. I like the bumps design that leaves clearance for grit to escape into.

    I don't see the need to have damn near zero clearance on the "whole" bolt body itself, except for fast cycling on a bench gun, just the opposite in the field is what I want.

    How much "accuracy" is gained by this mod? I've got no idea, but I do think it's slim to none. If the bolt body allows the lugs seat square when sear spring pressure is released and the bolt face is paralell to the lugs, the thrust from the casehead is more than enough to seat the lugs firmly upon firing, thus no out of square caseheads ever develop. JMO at this point.

    From what I gather, the BAT and some of the other customs are machined too tight to be 100% reliable in the field, that's the impression I get from people who own them anyway.

    When Dave puts this 30-338 Lapua in the stock for me, I'll have him put the bumps on my bolt and find out what he has to charge to do it.
     
  8. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Brent,
    I agree with everything you said. Most smiths who sleeve Remmy bolts do it front and back, hence the no clearance thing. Actually a better way than tig would be have hard chrome spattered on for the bumps.
    Chris
     
  9. qkshot

    qkshot Active Member

    Messages:
    36
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    it would seem like a guy could file a ellipse
    onto the sleeved bolt with the major dia being where the bolt locked and the minor being set for bolt cycling.

    there was a article in ps shooter sept issue i believe and the gun smith mentioned bolt sleeving changed gun accuarcy from a 1/2min
    to 1/4min wiht nothing else being done
    just a thought
     
  10. Brent

    Brent Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,537
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Chris,
    Do you feel the chrome thickness would be controlable? Machineable if it was too thick?

    I'm not sure plating a section at the rear would be thick enough, this would be a better alternative than soldered/epoxied on bushings if it was, or you could build it up with several treatments.

    Still I think, the bumps would be better than a tight tolerance full circle build up.

    Fluting the bolt in this area in the right places, then plating it is an idea, if you can control the plating thickness and get it thick enough. Nickel or chrome, that would be nice and hard. Flashy though.

    I breifly read that PS article, one in the rag mags on bushings here recently too. I don't see how one could claim .25 MOA increase in accuracy with such a mod, who knows, it just don't add up to me tho. They did say they did it with "two" rifles (3/4" to 1" rifle down to a 1/2" rifle), no other things done. Well, they also said they only guarantee 3 shot 3/8" groups heavier recoiling hunting chamberings, that's with ALL the accurizing they do to them. It seems they don't have that much faith in their findings that "it" alone adds that much accuracy, or they attribute it to "most" of the improvement in the total accuracy job... I don't particularly like the way they cut the receiver threads either.

    Bushing it, or what ever certainly can't hurt accuracy and that's the only reason I'd do it. There's a better way than bushings IMHO though. I never was too impressed with the design, or putting them in the front. Ya never know though...
     
  11. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Brent,
    Bushing a Remmy does not give any clearance whilke working the bolt. The Bumps do, only coming into play when the bolt is closed. Besides, I don't want four pieces of metal soft soldered to my bolt to fail and they will fail under feild conditions.
    Fat Boy is right- it's not cost effective either.
     
  12. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Brent,
    The spattering can be controlled to my understanding. Then trurned down. Marty at Badger and I have talked about it several times and he said that's the way he would do it. The chrome could be bead blasted and tefloned also.
    As far as accuracy, I build rifles that average 1/4 MOA on trued up Remmy actions, no sleeves, bumps etc... I seriously doubt they would turn them into 1/8 MOA by sleeving them.
    Build a ton of rifles on Nesika's with the Borden bumps. They shoot 1/4 MOA also. Although the BR gun I built last week in .222 is holding in the ones during break-in. The bumps are good, but they will wear down...
    Small part of the big picture.
    Chris
     
  13. Brent

    Brent Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,537
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    I think the harder platings would be good, but if the spattering bonds like some platings I've seen on items, I'd be concerened about it peeling of flaking off is all.

    I know a guy who does coatings and platings, but he sends the plating jobs out some place so I'm not sure he's got that much insight on the bonding/flaking machining end of it to really know what to expect.

    It'd be nice to get 1/8 MOA from doing this. Reality? I doubt it's even close.

    It would be nice to know how much it adds to accuracy, if any, but to me, the only way one could test it is with 5 or more rifles trued and with everything else perfect and showing a consistant base line agg, otherwise what have you really learned?