No Recoil Lug - What say ye?

[MontanaRifleman]

Ahh. Now I see the pics of the receiver.

It looks to me like the boss around the front action screw is the recoil lug, provided that the boss extends down into the recess shown in the top side of the lug. The barrelled action would drive the boss against the recess in the recoil lug, and then the recoil lug would drive back against the slot in the stock, located forward of the front action screw. No?

Not the way I understand it from the rep at Beretta. Maybe I misunderstood but I sure hope not because then we are back to square one. I believe there is supposed to be a tongue that fits in to the slot in the receicer... or else why the slot? Why not use the slot if it's there? Don't answer that question Now I am very anxious to talk to the guy tomorrow... will probably be losing sleep.

That's what I conclude from your photos. The front action screw boss contacts the back of the milled out section in the lug, and then the lug transfers that backward force into the stock where the angled end of the lug is engaged down and against the back of the recess in the stock. What do you think?

The boss fits loosley in there. I dont think it's designed to take that load. That is a very small area to absorb that amount of shock, especially for a peice of aluminum. I would think it would eventually crack.

I think I better understand J E Custom's post on your Sako action now that I've seen the photos.

Maybe this is what JE was talking about... I hope not.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I seem to remember a review of the sako 85 and the recoil lug was an L - shaped thing that was secured by the front action screw and went forward and down into a recess in the stock. It was was not permanently attached to the stock or action.
Perhaps someone forgot to put it in?

check this link www.sako.fi/pdf/specs/85HunterSS.pdf

It might help (I can't open it because of internet filters at work)

Stu.

Stu, you were right. It was there and it looked like plastic to me. Hopefully the one I have is not the one intended for this rifle.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Well, I got the bad news this morning. Paul you were right

Back to square one. I am thinking I want to get a piece machined that will fit into the slot of the receiver and integrate some sort of pillar system.

Ideas are welcome.

 

[NesikaChad]

I've skimmed over this thread so if this ends up plagiarizing someone else or being redundant I apologize.


There's two photos that caught my attention. One is the one showing the tang of the rifle and the other illustrates the tang inlet on the stock.

There's only one rifle that I know of that shoots worth a **** with two recoil lugs. A double lug national match M-14. I had one of these during a two year stint on a post and station rifle team while in the Marine Corps.

Your Sako appears to me to have the same thing in function and it's been my experience that bolt guns should only have one. If that inlet feature touches the action on the bottom (the "V" shaped part) then I'd have to speculate this is not a good thing. If I were tinkering with this gun I'd relieve it to ensure they didn't contact. Especially if this is a "sewer pipe" plastic stock. A guy might pull it off with a synthetic or a laminate, but I'd guess a big no on plastic.

JMO.

Now I'm going to sound like a hypocrite a little so get your torches ready.

I just built an 1.470" diameter Nesika for myself. It's a single shot in 308 with a barrel that started out as an NHRA Pro Stock dragster axle. (K, not really, but it's a big ol betty at 30" long and 1.25" OD for the whole length.)

I was "lazy" and didn't tape off the tang of the gun when I bedded it. It's a 1:1 fit and it's TIGHT going in. My 300-338 Lapua Magnum is done this way also. both are house O fire shooters but they are single shots and the actions are rather robust so that may very well be why I'm getting away with it.

If I were building this gun from a box of parts I'd whittle off the little boss on the bottom, fit a "real" lug between the barrel and the receiver and restock the gun accordingly. Not the cheapest route for sure but I'm pretty sure it'd be just fine.

Regardless, good luck.

Chad

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Chad,

Thanks for the input. I thought about removing the action screw boss, but if I did I would loose half the threads for the screw. The boss has to stay. I thought about a "real" lug between the barrel and receiver also but if you look at the pics of the stock you will see a bulkhead between the forearm and the aluminum insert. This is where the receiver and barrel meet and the bulk head would have to be removed and I'm not sure what that would do to this stock? On careful inspection of the tang, there is a very small gap between the receiver and the stock, but I'm not sure about the action screw boss and the lower tang inlet. There does apper to be evidence of rubbing on the sides of the rear boss. So it appears that *maybe* all the recoil does actually get transferred by the front action screw boss.

Right now plan "A" is to get a piece machined to replace the existing aluminum lug with a SS one that will fit into the slot under the receiver and relieve any load on the boss. I wonder if pillars would help in this stock? This may be a plastic stock, but it is grade "A" sewer pipe material. It is very rigid and I dont detect any signs of compression. When holding by the grip, I can't noticably twist it by trying to manually torque the forearm.

Plan "B" is a custom inleted McMillan stock with a "real" recoil lug and pillars.

Plan "C" is a custom match grade Lilja 3 groove barrel in 6.5mm-WSM

Thanks agian for all the input and if anyone thinks I'm nuts dont be shy to tell me

mark

 

[Pdvdh]

I'd get a snug fitting plate of stainless steel, set it in the recessed slot of the receiver and tack weld on each side of the action. If it's a snug then a weld on each side of the receiver should be plenty to keep it held securely in place. I would leave each side of the recoil lug recessed slightly on the sides of the action prior to welding so the welds wouldn't extend out past the sides of the action any significant distance. If a little weld hung out, it could be ground back down to flush with the sides of the action.

Then throw the Sako factory recoil lug away and glass & piller bed like any other normal recoil lug-equipped barrelled action.

If you leave the boss on the receiver because you feel the extra threads are necessary, then dremel tool out some glass bedding material around the boss after the glass sets up so the boss won't contact the glass bedding material and act as a secondary recoil lug.

I don't know if glass bedding compounds will bond to your factory Sako stock material or not. If it's more polyethylene extruded plastic than fiberglass, it may not bond very well. If the glass bedding compound doesn't bond well to your stock, you may want to drill numerous holes out into the stock around the recoil lug recess in order to improve the glass bond to the stock, and to help ensure the glass bedding remains intact.

I may try this with one of my Tikka T3s. If I only need to weld on each side of the recoil lug, I might be courageous enough to weld it myself with my wire feed Mig welder. Just keep a wet sponge nearby to cool the welds down rather quickly and act as a heat sink to keep the heat of welding from overheating the action.

This is the approach I've been considering with my Tikka T3s. My best thoughts to improve upon the factory recoil lug and bedding system. My T3 stocks are pretty chincy compared to the looks and sounds of your Sako stock. Mostly polyethylene & tupperware. Your Sako stock might be a keeper. I'm not so sure about mine.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I have thought about welding or screwing it on but it may be very difficult to weld it precisely to the receiver and fit in its already tight slot in the plastic. I'll talk to the machinist about that to see if he thinks it can be done. I still want to duplicate the existing angle because it all fits very snug, as though it were already bedded.

The more I mess around with this stock, the more impressed I am with it. From the grip, forward it is very solid, stable and rigid. With a bipod on it, I hung two 9 lb sand bags off the barrel just forward of the end of the stock and slid a piece of paper between the barrel and the forearm. I did the same with my HS Sendero stock and it faired about as well but no better. On a real warm day it might be a different story. When I put both hands together and squeeze the stock on both sides of the mag opening I get less than a 16th" movement. So I am thinking this stock may be a keeper. The question is whether or not to pillar bed it. My thought is to take one step at a time and see how it goes. I am also just now noticing that the bolt handle is touching the bottom of the slot in the stock and when I dry fire it bounces up slightly. Hmmm... I'll be getting a file on that.

 

[NesikaChad]

Should you decide to weld on this action might I offer this:

Make a mandrel from brass or aluminum that will fit in the receiver bore. Ideally it should be made so that it'll thread into the receiver the way the barrel does.

This is nothing more than a heat sink. I'm not saying you'll ruin your action by welding on it, I sometimes think folks get too carried away worrying about it, but doing it this way pacifies the paranoia demons and only takes a little more time to do.

Good luck.

C

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Thanks Chad, I might opt to have it drilled and tapped instead. First I'll just let it float and see how that works.


Mark

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Here is an update to this thread. This rifle has been sitting in the closet since this thread was started. A couple of months ago I got my smith to machine a new recoil lug with a lug that fits into the slot in the bottom of the receiver.

However, this did not solve the accuracy problem. I thoroughly cleaned the barrel and loaded up some sub max loads of RL17 and E-Tips and went to the range. I fired three 3 shot groups which averaged about 3" @ 100 yds

I think the problem is the barrel. Next phase, new Benchmark barrel and chamber to 6mm SAUM bedded into a McMillan stock.

Thanks much to those who made inputs to this thread

and...

Thanks to Beretta for all your help - not

 

[Varberger757]

This problem around the recoil - lug in Sakos/Tikkas is known quite a while and many are still wondering why Beretta (owner) doesn't solve the issue in a reasonable way for their customers. Many of these rifles in a calibre stronger than 308W are worn out on short terms due to the bed/support of their recoil - lug. It should be quite an easy operation to install something more durable. Maybe profits are an obstacle...

 

[angus-5024]

Im blown away that a high end manufacturer like SAKO is doing this. That is crap.
On the flip side I look forward to the pics of your new 6 SAUM!

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Im blown away that a high end manufacturer like SAKO is doing this. That is crap.
On the flip side I look forward to the pics of your new 6 SAUM!

I'm very surprised that SAKO allows a weak engineering design like that in their rifles. They cant be that dumb and I'm sure they're not that dumb. I'm sure someone in the food chain decided to cut some cost there. My smith poited out that the simple "L" shaped designed allowed them to mass produce the lug from a piece of extruded aluminum. Adding the additional lug to fit the receiver slot requires a lot more machining and wasted material. But how much more could it cost for a $1600 rifle?

Yeah, I chose the 6 SAUM because it was a lighter cartridge than the 300 WSM. Same bolt thrust but less recoil. I figured it would work better with that lug system they have,

The poor design is bad enough, but most SAKO's and Tikka's shoot well. But every now and then you get a lemon. What really ticks me off is Beretta's treatment of me.

 

[Outlaw6.0]

6mm-SAUM?


There wouldn't be some long skinny CEB's in the near future, would there be?
(how did the prototypes work anywho?)


Sounds like a very interesting cartridge.


t