Squaring receiver face by hand?

Discussion in 'Gunsmithing' started by stcummingsjr, Apr 18, 2011.

  1. stcummingsjr

    stcummingsjr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    102
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    I have a few project actions (rem 700) that will be hosts for left over parts that I have gathered over time. I'm looking for input on squaring just the receiver face with a tool like brownells "RECEIVER FACING CUTTER & PILOTS" rather than leaving the action alone before re-barreling? I'm not looking to squeeze every last bit of Bentchrest potential out of them, but would be happy gaining on what I have.

    I've read about dave Manson's hand trueing system, But did not want to spend that type of cash on hand tools, when I could put it twards tooling for a lathe. Is it worth just squaring the receiver by hand, cupled with a ground recoil lug? Or is it too small of a pice of the hole picture to gain any real world benefits

    I realize that there can be many factors which will lend to different accuracy potentials in a worked over action, And that I may never be able to account for this small of a step, but assuming no other details have been overlooked would facing the receiver by hand be a step in the right direction.

    Thanks steve
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2011
  2. J E Custom

    J E Custom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,260
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
    The key to a good truing of the receiver face is based on the center line of the action.

    If you use a tool that uses a piloted bushing in the back end of the receiver that fits, it will
    square up very close depending on how good the tool is. I prefer to use the Lathe but if you
    are not ready/equipped then the hand tools will work ok if care is taken.

    Also mic. the recoil lug to make sure that it is the same thickness all the way around. If it
    is not, replace it with a ground after market lug, or the action truing is a wast of time.

    Anything is worth the effort if it improves the performance and accuracy.

    Hope this helps.

    J E CUSTOM
     

  3. Fitch

    Fitch Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    478
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    How will you measure them to see if they are out of true to start with? How will you measure them to see if you made an improvement when you are done? If you can't measure them, you are doing nothing more than cutting and guessing.

    IMO., if you can't measure them to start with, you would be better off using them just like they are, or paying somebody with a lathe to true the receiver face to the bolt bore. Truing the receiver face is a 10 minute job if one has a lathe and a mandrel to go between centers like this:

    [​IMG]

    Fitch
     
  4. Fitch

    Fitch Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    478
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Deleted.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2011
  5. geargrinder

    geargrinder Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,972
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    I was under the impression that you should always true a Savage action in relation to the action threads and not to the bolt raceway like a remington. It's also done because you don't want to recut Savage threads. If you did, you'd never be able to use prefits.

    What's your thoughts, Fitch?
     
  6. stcummingsjr

    stcummingsjr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    102
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    "How will you measure them to see if they are out of true to start with? How will you measure them to see if you made an improvement when you are done? If you can't measure them, you are doing nothing more than cutting and guessing. "


    This was in fact what was driving me nuts and drove me to post. I usually can wade through and come up with a pretty solid answer on most stuff. *I have yet to hear/read of anyone using the hand squaring tool from brownells, ( as noted for good reason by fitch) *I can't get past that it was designed, maybe poorly to accomplish a squaring task- but as it has been pointed out...I will never really know if it did any good of not. Has anyone ( maybe back during your cheap sluming days:) ever try one for kicks? I would assume that if operated properly it can't make things worse... But I'll never know:)

    Thanks for walking me through this.
     
  7. sinarms

    sinarms Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    322
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    I made my Savage truing mandrel to go off of the lug and threads and has worked very well.
     
  8. J E Custom

    J E Custom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,260
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
     
  9. stcummingsjr

    stcummingsjr Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    102
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    J E thanks for helping me through it! I went ahead and ordered the facing tool. Mostly cuse I'm curious and would like to see what it's capable of. I have a RH barreled action in a 243 and one in 7mm that I will shoot as is, try the hand facer and document any change, then hopefully send to one of u smiths to check it's trueness. I'll have to send the facer along to ensure my ability to use it did not fall short. As a LH shooter I can use RH Stuff for a little learning without feeling too bad about
    It sacrifice. Thanks again
     
  10. Fitch

    Fitch Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    478
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Savages have a floating bolt head. It is a huge feature and probably responsible for their amazing accuracy with what I've seen are sometimes sorry looking barrel bores. I have several Savages. The only thing I do to them is true the front face of the receiver to the bolt bore. I do this because the recoil lugs are usually pretty true to the bolt bore and they control the bolt head. So I make the receiver face pretty much parallel to the recoil lugs which should assure the bolt face is square to the chamber.

    I've seen Savage actions with the threads pointing in all sorts of directions and as much as .025" eccentric to the bolt bore. With the barrel nut and recoil lug, the receiver face is the reference surface for where the barrel points. The tenon threads will move slightly in the receiver threads when the nut is tightened.

    I crank the nuts to a measured 125 ft-lbs with assembly lube on the threads to prevent galling.

    [​IMG]

    I've only chased the threads on a Savage once and that was as a favor for a buddy of mine who does his own barrels but was nervous about internal threading. I've left the threads on all of mine stock though I can fit a barrel to about anything because I machine and chamber my own.

    Fitch
     
  11. Bart B

    Bart B Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,483
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    The 'smith who's fit all my barrels makes a mandrel to hold receivers for truing up their face. It goes all the way through the receiver from the front and threads into the barrel tenon threads dedently tight. Turned on centers, if there's any misalignment between the boltway and tenon thread axes, it shows up quickly. And this lets the tenon threads stay at their factory dimension so barrel changing remains simple. Then the face is turned off just enough to clean it up.

    After squaring the receiver face, an end mil held in a threaded bushing is screwed into the receiver, the bolt (previously lug-lapped for full contact) is put in, closed, ten the end mil squares up the bolt face. End result is the closed bolt face is square with the tenon thread and chamber axis.

    A small amount of runout at the receiver bridge doesn't seem to be a problem. There was one pre-'64 Win. Mod. 70 receiver that passed around through several 'smiths and none could get it to shoot well with the same barrel that was great in several others. 'Twas only after one of them checked the tenon-boltway axis alignment that it was threaded quite crooked.

    Some 'smiths I've talked with say Ruger 77's are somewhat notorious for crooked tenon threads; receiver mounted scopes sometimes end up with the reticule almost at their limits. Remington and Winchester tenon threads are usually pretty good.
     
  12. abbyjhon

    abbyjhon New Member

    Messages:
    1
    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    thanks for info..........