Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Gunsmithing
Squared and Trued 700 VS Blueprinted
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Susquatch" data-source="post: 1612797" data-attributes="member: 31264"><p>Sorry, don't agree. Adding shims does not constitute blueprinting an action. Adding bolt shims is at best a bandage that just happens to work. But I never do it. If the original bolt does not fit properly I install a new one piece bolt from PTG Specified to the fit as determined by application. Bench is tighter than hunting. Don't want close tolerances on a hunting rifle since dirt, temp expansion, and even freezing moisture can destroy a mission critical function. I use 2-3 thou for bench rifles and 4-6 thou for field rifles.</p><p></p><p>Reaming out a bolt raceway can hardly be called blue printing. </p><p></p><p>I believe the term blue-printing probably originated back in the early days of automotive racing when engines were re-built to original factory blueprint specifications. I don't think anyone today still uses real blueprints since that is an old chemical process used to copy original drawings before we had digital methods.</p><p></p><p>If Remington actually has dimensional specifications, I've never seen them, and I doubt they even follow them anymore. </p><p></p><p>In my mind, truing, accurizing, rebuilding, and even "blue-printing" (as some use the term) is really all about getting all the parts concentric to the bore line since this us the best way to reduce irregular stresses that affect exact shot-to-shot repeatability. How a smith does that is up to them. I personally believe that the best way to do that is to square the action and lug faces, and internal threads to the raceway, ensure that the bolt, it's lugs, and the bolt face are axially concentric and/or square to the raceway, using precision parts like the recoil lug and trigger, and precision cutting the barrel tenon, threads, and chamber to the bore centerline.</p><p></p><p>However, the fact is that it's consistent repeatability, not concentric perfection that defines an accurate rifle. If everything happens exactly the same for every shot, the rifle will be as accurate as possible. Concentricity is just the best way we smith's know to achieve the consistent repeatability ends.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Susquatch, post: 1612797, member: 31264"] Sorry, don't agree. Adding shims does not constitute blueprinting an action. Adding bolt shims is at best a bandage that just happens to work. But I never do it. If the original bolt does not fit properly I install a new one piece bolt from PTG Specified to the fit as determined by application. Bench is tighter than hunting. Don't want close tolerances on a hunting rifle since dirt, temp expansion, and even freezing moisture can destroy a mission critical function. I use 2-3 thou for bench rifles and 4-6 thou for field rifles. Reaming out a bolt raceway can hardly be called blue printing. I believe the term blue-printing probably originated back in the early days of automotive racing when engines were re-built to original factory blueprint specifications. I don't think anyone today still uses real blueprints since that is an old chemical process used to copy original drawings before we had digital methods. If Remington actually has dimensional specifications, I've never seen them, and I doubt they even follow them anymore. In my mind, truing, accurizing, rebuilding, and even "blue-printing" (as some use the term) is really all about getting all the parts concentric to the bore line since this us the best way to reduce irregular stresses that affect exact shot-to-shot repeatability. How a smith does that is up to them. I personally believe that the best way to do that is to square the action and lug faces, and internal threads to the raceway, ensure that the bolt, it's lugs, and the bolt face are axially concentric and/or square to the raceway, using precision parts like the recoil lug and trigger, and precision cutting the barrel tenon, threads, and chamber to the bore centerline. However, the fact is that it's consistent repeatability, not concentric perfection that defines an accurate rifle. If everything happens exactly the same for every shot, the rifle will be as accurate as possible. Concentricity is just the best way we smith's know to achieve the consistent repeatability ends. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Gunsmithing
Squared and Trued 700 VS Blueprinted
Top