Titanium vs steel actions

Cody3754

FNG
Joined
Nov 19, 2021
Messages
7
What are the pros and cons of titanium and steel actions? what applications would I want either?
 
The only thing bad I heard about a titanium action, is that if the action and or the finished rifle isn't built correctly in time a "chatter" will appear during the cycling of the bolt. I've never met anyone with a titanium action that has this problem though, so maybe what I heard is BS, or maybe it was true and one point in the past. A titanium action will be a few ounces lighter than an all steel version.
 
Only benefits of titanium is less weight.
And better corrosion resistance for the titanium if it's being compared to blued steel.

I wonder if anyone's making magnesium or the lithium-aluminum alloy they make AR parts from.
 
Some claim that titanium can flex with magnums. There are several steel actions dang near the same weight from Defiance, Bat and a few others. Bat also has an Aluminum action.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Small sample size but I have a Fierce Edge (stainless action) and Fierce CT Edge (titanium action). Both are the same in terms of length, bolt face etc. and the stainless one runs much smoother than the ti one. Almost but not quite like a sticky feeling and I only notice it when pulling the bolt to the rear or pushing it back forward. Both bolts are stainless and DLC treated. It's not really an issue, the ti action just needs a little more grease on the bolt body to smooth the feel out some. I haven't noticed any other difference other than the weight.
 
The only downside to the titanium actions is that they are all Remington clones. If that is a downside to you. Otherwise, current manufacture function well, and work great. Early ones could be sticky, and inconsistent as the machinists learned to work with titanium. Most complaints are hold overs from long ago and don't apply today. Just like cast verse forged.

Aluminum actions are sleeved with steel and are usually relatively heavy being sized similarly to a size 9-10 shoe. The point of the aluminum isn't to save weight per se, it's to allow the largest possible footprint in the stock for stability and bonding. Most don't even have a recoil lug, since they are bonded to the stock. It's kind of used to save weight in this application, since a steel action of the same dimensions would be very heavy and the rifle wouldn't make competition weight. Seekins is the only one that I've seen use it for weight saving in a small footprint platform.

I would choose the action based on features, and ignore the material. A nitrided carbon steel action is nearly as corrosion resistant as a stainless action. Titanium is always going to be more corrosion resistant, but honestly, it's a silly argument since it's the only titanium part, and the rest is a mix of steel and aluminum. Rust on the barrel is just as annoying as rust on the action.

Jeremy
 
I haven't seen a steel action as light as the Pierce Titanium.


Ya, and it weighs more than a lot of steel ones. Not sure how they managed to do that.
My Pierce ti action was 23.5 oz with rail and lug. My Vampire is 24.7 oz.
 
My Pierce ti action was 23.5 oz with rail and lug. My Vampire is 24.7 oz.
I mean it really just means Bat doesn't care about weight in the design. To have an aluminum piece weigh more let along anywhere near a Titanium piece is insane. There's strength considerations, but Aluminum is 40% lighter than titanium. And some of the new alloys are even lighter.
 
I mean it really just means Bat doesn't care about weight in the design. To have an aluminum piece weigh more let along anywhere near a Titanium piece is insane. There's strength considerations, but Aluminum is 40% lighter than titanium. And some of the new alloys are even lighter.
Maybe, but for 1 oz I sure like the feel of that Bat over that Pierce.
 
Last edited:
Titanium is more brittle than steel and stainless, however, I have never heard that negatively impacting an action. So I would consider it a relative weakness.
Based on what data? That is not a correct statement. With no knowledge of the specific alloy or heat treatment used, there is no basis for comparison. What physical properties constitute brittle and under what conditions?

That is just too broad a statement with nothing to qualify it.

Jeremy
 
Based on what data? That is not a correct statement. With no knowledge of the specific alloy or heat treatment used, there is no basis for comparison. What physical properties constitute brittle and under what conditions?

That is just too broad a statement with nothing to qualify it.

Jeremy
Science very often uses generalizations and I was simply generalizing the available scientific data you can easily google. But hey, many people don't like the truth. But also take notice of that last sentence, which is pretty telling.
 
Science very often uses generalizations and I was simply generalizing the available scientific data you can easily google. But hey, many people don't like the truth. But also take notice of that last sentence, which is pretty telling.
With no knowledge of the heat treatment or alloy used for each, your initial post and this one are both misleading at best. Knife blades don't have the same properties as gun barrels, but their both steel.

Steel could be more brittle, or titanium could be more brittle. Temperature also matters since steel, carbon and stainless, go through a ductile to brittle transition at low temp (the temp depends on alloy). Titanium does not.

It's a misleading statement about the material. However, this is not the place to debate the merits of each.

Jeremy
 
With no knowledge of the heat treatment or alloy used for each, your initial post and this one are both misleading at best. Knife blades don't have the same properties as gun barrels, but their both steel.

Steel could be more brittle, or titanium could be more brittle. Temperature also matters since steel, carbon and stainless, go through a ductile to brittle transition at low temp (the temp depends on alloy). Titanium does not.

It's a misleading statement about the material. However, this is not the place to debate the merits of each.

Jeremy
You clearly misunderstand the scientific term "generalization".
 
Ti tends to be "sticky" it doesn't play well dry. It offers incredible weight to yield in comparison to just about everything else....but given the stock bedding in today's rigs, how much do we need?

Ti gets bonus points for cool factors and it's corrosion resistance is king....but again, not a lot of guys drop the kind of scratch it takes to get in the game with one to treat it like they are mad at it.

In general, if the smoothness of a model 70 with the safety on is your goal... skip the Ti. If you want bang for the buck, skip the Ti.
 
Back
Top