Gunsmith bedded stock - cant remove action

[Wapiti1]

It isn't floating on the pillar, the bottom of the wedge/recoil lug is seated fully against the pillar.


If you know someone who was a 700adl, gradually tighten the front trigger guard screw and cycle the bolt. It is very easy to lock that configuration up. When there's unsupported load, the only thing that can cause a torque wrench to not click while being turned, and then click at the preset, is the tension of the material bending to that load. That means there's stress in action.

My point is still true. The modulus of steel is double that of any commonly used stock composite material or wood. How much is that stock deflecting in order to load the receiver enough to deflect?

Jeremy

 

[sndmn11]

My point is still true. The modulus of steel is double that of any commonly used stock composite material or wood. How much is that stock deflecting in order to load the receiver enough to deflect?

Jeremy

Enough to bind an action. Enough to where guys worry about bedding a rifle. Enough for there to be specific instructions on torque values for poorly bedded rifles. There's and endless amount of reasons why precision and accuracy are founded in how stable the action is throughout every task.

 

[wapitibob]

Why is there so much epoxy in there if it’s just floating on the pillar?

In my regular joe opinion, for the most part, bedding is simply filling up the air space. Prior to bedding, the action should be touching nothing but the tops of the 2 pillars. You could leave it at that point but I bed the sides of the lug to prevent slight rotation at the shot. I add the rest of the bedding to fill the voids. Cosmetic in my opinion.
I no longer have bedding in front of the action that would touch the first inch of the barrel, and I no longer wrap tape on the barrel to center it in the stock barrel channel. Tape on the barrel always induced some stress; just no way to hold it centered in the channel without doing so. It doesn't take anything to induce stress when the point of contact/leverage is 20"+ down the barrel.
This last bedding job I did shows < .003 movement when loose/tighten the front screw and an indicator on the stock forearm/barrel. Not great but "within spec" according to my smith.

 

[TaperPin]

Brilliant.

When someone puts a Howa/Vanguard in a chassis or pillar beds the action, guess what part of the recoil lug is in contact?


View attachment 861556
View attachment 861557
View attachment 861558

Yep, that’s where a pillar rests.

Bed it how you like, it just doesn’t make it more accurate. All the howling about how wrong I am, yet I’m basing my opinion on actual tests on target, and you want to show a picture as some kind of proof, as if pictures are as good as groups on target.

The smiths that I’ve known that install pillars on Howas, heavily relieve the front and sides of the lug to allow someplace for any debris scraped from the bedding on assembly to escape to. Just like with straight bedding, the downside to bedding the bottom of the lug with a pillar is debris can get trapped which definitely effects accuracy. Your pictures seem to show you don’t believe that ever happens. You’re allowed to believe anything you like, but I’ve fixed a few guns with debris in the lug, enough I simply don’t have the same optimism you do.

 

[sndmn11]

Yep, that’s where a pillar rests.

...The action screw goes through the pillar. It has to pull against a solid and not air.

 

[TaperPin]

...The action screw goes through the pillar. It has to pull against a solid and not air.

Sure. If someone wants pillars they should install them anyway they want.

Aluminum doesn’t shrink, but bedding compound does as it cures, so the pillar will be proud of the rest of the bedding compound a little. Anytime two metal surfaces come together it’s good to at the very least check the contact pattern between the two with Prussian blue and decide how much contact is ok. If the receiver is held up with a little circle of aluminum near the center of the pillar I don’t see that as a win. Scraping an uneven pillar to better match the bottom of the lug or receiver isn't hard, but most times it’s ignored and simply assumed to be ok. It’s quicker to leave the pillar below the surface and bed over it so the bedding makes more even contact than metal on metal that hasn’t been hand fitted. Super smooth pillar tops are interesting because every time a rifle is fired the receiver moves against the aluminum ever so slightly causing fretting on the surface of the aluminum that a magnifier of some sort can pick up.

With my shooting buddies I offer to bet lunch their hunting rifles won’t shoot any worse if we raised the receiver off the pillars with cereal box shims, but no takers. They like ‘em and there’s nothing wrong with that.

 

[sndmn11]

It’s quicker to leave the pillar below the surface and bed over it so the bedding makes more even contact than metal on metal that hasn’t been hand fitted.

You're chasing your tail rather than admitting you don't know what you are talking about. The crux of your original statement and your current statement are contradictory.

The tiny flat on the bottom of the lug will cause problems when crap gets into the bottom of the lug recess and holds the receiver off the stock.

Even contact on the bottom of a Howa lug or float it?

On a traditional action like a R700, would a person float around the action screws and bed the bottom of the lug?

Are you familiar with how a chassis distributes force at certain points on an action and alleviates force in all others? If so, why would the concept be reversed in traditional stock?

 

[KyleR1985]

In my regular joe opinion, for the most part, bedding is simply filling up the air space. Prior to bedding, the action should be touching nothing but the tops of the 2 pillars. You could leave it at that point but I bed the sides of the lug to prevent slight rotation at the shot. I add the rest of the bedding to fill the voids. Cosmetic in my opinion.
I no longer have bedding in front of the action that would touch the first inch of the barrel, and I no longer wrap tape on the barrel to center it in the stock barrel channel. Tape on the barrel always induced some stress; just no way to hold it centered in the channel without doing so. It doesn't take anything to induce stress when the point of contact/leverage is 20"+ down the barrel.
This last bedding job I did shows < .003 movement when loose/tighten the front screw and an indicator on the stock forearm/barrel. Not great but "within spec" according to my smith.

Can you show some pictures of how you’re measuring that movement/flex when you’re tightening down the action screws?

 

[Wapiti1]

Enough to bind an action. Enough to where guys worry about bedding a rifle. Enough for there to be specific instructions on torque values for poorly bedded rifles. There's and endless amount of reasons why precision and accuracy are founded in how stable the action is throughout every task.

My point is simple. Everyone focuses on making the stiffer part not move. The focus should be on stabilizing and controlling the weaker side of interface. If you really study how the stock moves in relation to the action and barrel, you'll see some of the advice given, not yours necessarily, is a bit off base.

Jeremy

 

[TaperPin]

You're chasing your tail rather than admitting you don't know what you are talking about. The crux of your original statement and your current statement are contradictory.

No they aren’t. I wouldn’t bed a recoil lug tight to the bottom regardless of where the front action screw is, but if you are going to do it, at least put some thought into doing it correctly. Pillars have been around for decades, there’s nothing new or magic about them.

 

[TaperPin]

On a traditional action like a R700, would a person float around the action screws and bed the bottom of the lug?

Are you drunk?

 

[sndmn11]

Are you drunk?

Nope.

What you are describing by floating the Howa lug and bedding the action is the same incorrect concept as floating a traditionally oriented action and bedding the lug. You're silly question communicates that you recognize the concept is incorrect.

The portion around the action screws needs firm contact regardless of what action it is, other areas need to be stress free.

 

[BBob]

Can you show some pictures of how you’re measuring that movement/flex when you’re tightening down the action screws?

This is the way it’s been done forever:

You are being redirected...

 

[wapitibob]

This is the way it’s been done forever:

You are being redirected...

yep

 

[wapitibob]

This is an interesting thread.

Question. Does the action distort to fit the stock and not the other way around? Do you think a fairly short heat treated steel receiver is less stiff than walnut, carbon fiber, fiberglass or a synthetic blend?

Hmmmm.

Jeremy

I should have answered your question; it can be either, both, or none, depending on the construction of the rifle stock, action, and pillar length.
Personally, I bed to btm metal to sit on the pillars and bed the action to do the same. Other than the sides of the lug, my bedding is simply filling the voids. There shouldn't be any compression or distortion at that point but as noted, I'm getting about .0025" at the end of the stock forearm so I have some, just not sure where it's coming from.

 

[TaperPin]

Nope.

What you are describing by floating the Howa lug and bedding the action is the same incorrect concept as floating a traditionally oriented action and bedding the lug. You're silly question communicates that you recognize the concept is incorrect.

The portion around the action screws needs firm contact regardless of what action it is, other areas need to be stress free.

You should bed your rifles however you want to. It’s ok if I don’t do things like you do. You’ll be ok. It’s nice to see you’re enthusiastic about proper bedding - hopefully that continues into testing accuracy before and after changes.

I’ll continue to avoid pillars, bed the actual bedding surfaces built into actions, and test accuracy before and after, just like I’ve done the last 30 years. Every time someone comes up with a bedding “improvement” I say show me the before and after targets. If it’s really an improvement the difference should stand on its own and not require any argument for or against it.

I’m not against improvements, the shooting sports should show improvements one decade to the next. Everyone wants to switch to epoxy over polyester bedding compounds, but I haven’t seen a 1/4 MOA or larger hunting rifle with targets to show it’s an improvement. Everyone is ga ga over aluminum bedding blocks yet a person can set them on a surface plate and measure distortion with nothing more than finger pressure, so it’s hard to take them seriously. As many pillars have be sold by gunsmiths as there are rifles. Drilling holes by hand and aligning pillars with hardware store bolts covered in drinking straws doesn’t quite meet the threshold of precision alignment. A full chassis is machined on the same plane, so at least those bedding points are likely to be on the same plane, although probably not all that well fitting to the receiver sides and I have yet to hear of people checking the squareness or contact pattern of the recoil lug mating surface with Prussian Blue. A clapped out CNC mill won’t make accurate parts, despite how cool they look. At least once a year someone puts a good shooting barreled action in a chassis and it shoots worse until it’s bedded.