- Location
- calgary alberta
8x40s so most rails will need to be opened up to fit. The holes are in the usual places, just bigger, why , who knows.
700P 338 Lapua
- Thread starter DRAGONSLAYER
- Start date
8x40s so most rails will need to be opened up to fit. The holes are in the usual places, just bigger, why , who knows.
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
OK, I'll bite, I know you're biased against the Sako mod. That's a given, so let's be fair.
The three rings have now been sacrificed by Rem with this new gun. So is the AR type extractor safer due to the small pin that it's held by? Is the very thin bolt head wall safe enough for case failure? One can always do an AR mod if this is the best way to go? No problem for me.
At what pressures did those cases fail in the BR community? If it was a 6PPC I can imagine the 60,000lbs + pressure they love to use. What was the cause of the case failure to be fair as I've not read about it?
Under normal use I've never seen a Sako mod blow or injure anyone, but I also don't use cases that are weak or drive pressure beyond their use. From experience I've shot many thousands of rounds and have witnessed others do the same with those bolts. That's a hard testimony of success!
If we assume that the new bolt that Rem has now designed is only held by the strong Lapua case, is it not headed toward the same fate as you described?
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
I have used Rem brass in 7RM and the 300RUM. It works surprisingly well.
My 300RUM enfield shot 1/2 min consistently at 200yds. On paper at 1000m at a fun shoot, it did 7". Last year, it had no problem keeping up with other boomers at the mile.
Brass used from the same lot. A few basic tweaks and loaded up. At normal RUM pressures, it even held up to over 6 reloads. I have used once fired factory testing ammo with excellent results. Who knows if they came from the same lot.
My experience with the 7RM brass was even better. Once fired, basic sorting and loaded up.
In a Krieger Stevens, the only group shot on paper at 1000m was 2 5/8" for 3rds (Osoyoos fun shoot). In general plinking, it was consistently accurate as much as any other rifle I have had.
Same batch of once fired in my hunting Savage was sub MOA out to 900yds. Took a pretty good beating too.
Weighing brass as a measure of consistency is wrong....sorry but it doesn't indicate anything about case volume. The assumption that the outside of the brass is the same thus volume must vary if cases don't weight the same is completely wrong.
I weighed a bunch of once fired RUM brass that I had fireformed and had good accuracy with. Their weights were all over the place.
However, their volume was dead on. That is what matters - internal volume and elasticity/neck tension.
Extractor grooves have zero influence on brass accuracy and variations in machining here can cause a large case like the RUM to vary by a gr, sometimes more.
Check concentricity and case volume after fireforming. Then confirm by shooting it to ensure bullet release is the same.
I have used brass from every major manf and have never found one brand superior to another. The Lapua brass can take a beating in some cals.
But so can WIN...
Rem is not as tough as either of these but a fair bit better then Norma.
YMMV.
Jerry
PS, I am not surprised they went with a #8 bolt for the scope base. I have heard it done on purpose by many to ensure durable performance in a tactical rifle. Of course, it is overbuilt but so are all the mega steel parts so fashionable these days.
But if can't survive being run over by an Abrahms.....
My 300RUM enfield shot 1/2 min consistently at 200yds. On paper at 1000m at a fun shoot, it did 7". Last year, it had no problem keeping up with other boomers at the mile.
Brass used from the same lot. A few basic tweaks and loaded up. At normal RUM pressures, it even held up to over 6 reloads. I have used once fired factory testing ammo with excellent results. Who knows if they came from the same lot.
My experience with the 7RM brass was even better. Once fired, basic sorting and loaded up.
In a Krieger Stevens, the only group shot on paper at 1000m was 2 5/8" for 3rds (Osoyoos fun shoot). In general plinking, it was consistently accurate as much as any other rifle I have had.
Same batch of once fired in my hunting Savage was sub MOA out to 900yds. Took a pretty good beating too.
Weighing brass as a measure of consistency is wrong....sorry but it doesn't indicate anything about case volume. The assumption that the outside of the brass is the same thus volume must vary if cases don't weight the same is completely wrong.
I weighed a bunch of once fired RUM brass that I had fireformed and had good accuracy with. Their weights were all over the place.
However, their volume was dead on. That is what matters - internal volume and elasticity/neck tension.
Extractor grooves have zero influence on brass accuracy and variations in machining here can cause a large case like the RUM to vary by a gr, sometimes more.
Check concentricity and case volume after fireforming. Then confirm by shooting it to ensure bullet release is the same.
I have used brass from every major manf and have never found one brand superior to another. The Lapua brass can take a beating in some cals.
But so can WIN...
Rem is not as tough as either of these but a fair bit better then Norma.
YMMV.
Jerry
PS, I am not surprised they went with a #8 bolt for the scope base. I have heard it done on purpose by many to ensure durable performance in a tactical rifle. Of course, it is overbuilt but so are all the mega steel parts so fashionable these days.
But if can't survive being run over by an Abrahms.....
Last edited:
You know - many expound about how well their Sako extractor conversions work on their 700's... you don't hear that much from the 8 million or more who have original 700 extractors, but they are working very well too. I don't understand why anyone would choose to alter a perfectly sound, strong, reliable action, just because they can do it... Many years ago it was first done only to accommodate using the PPC case in a 700... cutting the nose of the bolt back and getting the bolt closer to the barrel to support the weak design of the PPC case.
What also is not heard when the Sako style extractor conversion is done, is why only part of the Sako style extractor system installed? On the older two lug Sako actions, all the bolts have what many referred to as a bolt guide... in reality it is there to help block the extractor from exiting down the raceway if there was a catastrophic case failure. That feature is not added when everyone converts the 700... Why isn't it? I think it is because most people don't realize the safety aspect at all.
If one realizes the pros and cons of the conversion and makes an informed choice of what they want to do, that is their business. It is just sad to see "newcomers" think they need to convert their 700 extractor because they read about it or heard about it.... it's the "thing" to do... none of them heard about the bad side of it...
Badger sells the AR15 extractors for anyone looking to convert any Rem 700 LA bolt to 338 Lapua size face. I should have one in my hands any day now.
I was a little hesitant on using them with all the nay sayers out there but I think things have been cleared up quite nicely as to weather it will be safe or not. The biggest argument I heard from them was that if Remington doesn't do it, it can't be safe.
It will be interesting to see if there will be guys out there that will not shoot next to me at the range, like they said if I have a converted bolt.
Not so much a conversion as an upgrade now.
Dave
I was a little hesitant on using them with all the nay sayers out there but I think things have been cleared up quite nicely as to weather it will be safe or not. The biggest argument I heard from them was that if Remington doesn't do it, it can't be safe.
It will be interesting to see if there will be guys out there that will not shoot next to me at the range, like they said if I have a converted bolt.
Not so much a conversion as an upgrade now.
Dave
Loads cost are:-
1lb H1000 $30 - 67 loads = 45 cents.
Lapua bullets (Hirsch Precision) $67/100 = 67 cents each.
Match primers $4/100 = 4 cents
Lapua brass once fired $135/100 = $1.35
Lapua brass new (Hirsch Precision) $280/100 = $2.80
Cost per round (once fired brass) = $2.51 each.
Cost per round (new brass) = $3.96 each.
The costs for the next loads are cheaper by the cost of the brass.
It's considered a 1 mile caliber (in the right hands).
The first confirmed sniper kill with the Timberwolf was February of '07 by a sniper from the PPCLI. 1500 meters.
As soon as the snow has cleared I'll be trying mine at 1K.
The first confirmed sniper kill with the Timberwolf was February of '07 by a sniper from the PPCLI. 1500 meters.
As soon as the snow has cleared I'll be trying mine at 1K.
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
OK, fair enough on this point. When I next get home in 3 weeks, I'll examine my 700's and factory Tikka I own with the same extractor and see what the difference in actions, raceways and extractor installs. I'm trying to determine how this extractor can blow off backwards into your head.
I'm always interested in testing theories and I may just rig up a test 700 with said extractor, worn out barrel and try to blow that extractor up this summer. Of course done in test environment conditions with a long cord. I don't have a pressure tester, but lets load up a case to blow apart.
I'll also ask many US BR gunsmiths whom I know personally about this extractor and their experiences with it.
If this is a bad practice. I want to know and put an end to this argument. I would never advocate any practice as a gunsmith if I know that it's unsafe.
For comparison, not the best pic, but it's all I have ATM
Last edited:
- Location
- calgary alberta
This debate on bolt modification has raged for years, same crap as fluted barrels in my mind.
I agree with Dennis that millions of 700 extractors seem to work just fine. In 35 years of working on guns I can count maybe a dozen 700 extractor failures. I do not perform either Sako or AR type extractor conversions in 700 bolts, partly for the exposure to litigation and partly because I see no benefit in taking money I can't justify the value of.
Whether or not the safety issue is of significant enough concern, I doubt we will ever know. There have been cases of catastrophic failures where the cause of injury/death was facilitated the extractor conversion. Where the extractor became a projectile. Unfortunately after the fact it is hard to question the dead about their load or other variables.
I have had a Sako extractor bounce off my head during a failure of the extractor, this was in a newer Sako, they too seem to have decided to walk on the wild side, where litigation is a calculated exposure.
Most recently a new MRC 1999 action came aprt during test firing, I will forever have small bits of the action in my thigh. Any action can fail for many reasons, to alter a bolt needlessly is just inviting a higher potential for problems.
Is an AR15 extractor safer? I doubt it, they are easier to instal and do work well, hence the use of them in the new actions I am building.
In the end I believe that the installation of Sako or AR type extractors in any 700 bolt more often than not benefits the gunsmith more than the customer, same as fluted barrels, the only real winner is the barrel maker or the gunsmith who does his own milling. I have yet to find 1 documentable positive aspect to fluted barrels, but like the Ford/Chevy crap the debate rages on wildly with both sides obviously being right.
Jerry I agree that simply weighing brass does not indicate case volume, but it gives you an indication of whether it is a waste of time to volume test or check for concentricity.
Unless a person has alot of expensive measuring tools at hand to see what case thickness is from the inside, I can not see how a case that weighs, say 10 grains more or less than the next 1 does, yet has the same case volume could possibly be concentric on the inside. the material HAS to be somewhere.
It is pretty simple to make the outside concentric, hard to do the inside however.
Back when the Remington crap was all that was available I would weigh brass into batches, check outer concentricity, then case volume, then when I got 25 or 30 that were close from the original 100, load and fire form them, then start neck turning, annealing, and all the other BS to get decently accurate brass.
Now with time be far to valuable to waste on that I buy Lapua brass and weigh for batch consistency, check concentricity and load it.
The neck dimensions and variations in volume and weight are for the most part extremely low on the Lapua brass.
I am not a BR shooter, just like the best accuracy.
I agree with Dennis that millions of 700 extractors seem to work just fine. In 35 years of working on guns I can count maybe a dozen 700 extractor failures. I do not perform either Sako or AR type extractor conversions in 700 bolts, partly for the exposure to litigation and partly because I see no benefit in taking money I can't justify the value of.
Whether or not the safety issue is of significant enough concern, I doubt we will ever know. There have been cases of catastrophic failures where the cause of injury/death was facilitated the extractor conversion. Where the extractor became a projectile. Unfortunately after the fact it is hard to question the dead about their load or other variables.
I have had a Sako extractor bounce off my head during a failure of the extractor, this was in a newer Sako, they too seem to have decided to walk on the wild side, where litigation is a calculated exposure.
Most recently a new MRC 1999 action came aprt during test firing, I will forever have small bits of the action in my thigh. Any action can fail for many reasons, to alter a bolt needlessly is just inviting a higher potential for problems.
Is an AR15 extractor safer? I doubt it, they are easier to instal and do work well, hence the use of them in the new actions I am building.
In the end I believe that the installation of Sako or AR type extractors in any 700 bolt more often than not benefits the gunsmith more than the customer, same as fluted barrels, the only real winner is the barrel maker or the gunsmith who does his own milling. I have yet to find 1 documentable positive aspect to fluted barrels, but like the Ford/Chevy crap the debate rages on wildly with both sides obviously being right.
Jerry I agree that simply weighing brass does not indicate case volume, but it gives you an indication of whether it is a waste of time to volume test or check for concentricity.
Unless a person has alot of expensive measuring tools at hand to see what case thickness is from the inside, I can not see how a case that weighs, say 10 grains more or less than the next 1 does, yet has the same case volume could possibly be concentric on the inside. the material HAS to be somewhere.
It is pretty simple to make the outside concentric, hard to do the inside however.
Back when the Remington crap was all that was available I would weigh brass into batches, check outer concentricity, then case volume, then when I got 25 or 30 that were close from the original 100, load and fire form them, then start neck turning, annealing, and all the other BS to get decently accurate brass.
Now with time be far to valuable to waste on that I buy Lapua brass and weigh for batch consistency, check concentricity and load it.
The neck dimensions and variations in volume and weight are for the most part extremely low on the Lapua brass.
I am not a BR shooter, just like the best accuracy.
Last edited:
Sorry for the hi jacked thread...
The conversion using a Sako extractor never causes a blow up and will never enter into being a problem except when a catastrophic case failure occurs... and it is a big problem then as it becomes a projectile down the bolt race way with 70,000 pounds plus of pressure behind it. This would never occur with a factory 700 extractor. The case would simply be welded to the bolt. That is the reason I do not do the conversion. I believe if one is to advise a customer to do it, you would be liable. If you do it on the customers request, that liability may be diminished.
I managed to dig up two old references off Benchrest Central about injuries, I could not find the reference to a death, but I had read it before ... pasted below:
Following are two old posts from Benchrest Central where this topic has been covered quite some time ago.
jackie schmidt Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003Location: Houston, TexasPosts: 3872
JKob
Yes, I have first hand knowledge of a Sako Extractor in a Remington Bolt embedding itself in a man’s brain.
It was a unique circumstance. He was a left-handed shooter shooting a 243 Ackley built on a right hand action. One hot day at the range, he was shooting 70-grain bullets with a big dose of 4350. He decided to go to some (about) 100 grainers, but forgot to lower the charge. The case failed, and the Sako Extractor came right up the race way and into his head. It hurt him pretty bad. The case head was literally welded to the bolt face.
I guess that is first hand enough........jackie
Lou Murdica Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003Location: SKY VALLEY CA.Posts: 185
blow out
I had a Remington 40x in a 222 with a Sako extractor conversion have a catastrophic case head failure and blow the extractor out the port, break into pieces when it hit the back of the port and part of it is still in my head. If it was a left port I would be dead. I had glasses on and there was brass pit in them and my face was bleeding all around them. It was not a hot load but just a weak case they say.
As I said before - make an informed decision... why remove an existing, reliable extractor, greatly compromising the safety aspect - converting the strongest, safest bolt action ever made, to just another bolt action...
The conversion using a Sako extractor never causes a blow up and will never enter into being a problem except when a catastrophic case failure occurs... and it is a big problem then as it becomes a projectile down the bolt race way with 70,000 pounds plus of pressure behind it. This would never occur with a factory 700 extractor. The case would simply be welded to the bolt. That is the reason I do not do the conversion. I believe if one is to advise a customer to do it, you would be liable. If you do it on the customers request, that liability may be diminished.
I managed to dig up two old references off Benchrest Central about injuries, I could not find the reference to a death, but I had read it before ... pasted below:
Following are two old posts from Benchrest Central where this topic has been covered quite some time ago.
jackie schmidt Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003Location: Houston, TexasPosts: 3872
JKob
Yes, I have first hand knowledge of a Sako Extractor in a Remington Bolt embedding itself in a man’s brain.
It was a unique circumstance. He was a left-handed shooter shooting a 243 Ackley built on a right hand action. One hot day at the range, he was shooting 70-grain bullets with a big dose of 4350. He decided to go to some (about) 100 grainers, but forgot to lower the charge. The case failed, and the Sako Extractor came right up the race way and into his head. It hurt him pretty bad. The case head was literally welded to the bolt face.
I guess that is first hand enough........jackie
Lou Murdica Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003Location: SKY VALLEY CA.Posts: 185
blow out
I had a Remington 40x in a 222 with a Sako extractor conversion have a catastrophic case head failure and blow the extractor out the port, break into pieces when it hit the back of the port and part of it is still in my head. If it was a left port I would be dead. I had glasses on and there was brass pit in them and my face was bleeding all around them. It was not a hot load but just a weak case they say.
As I said before - make an informed decision... why remove an existing, reliable extractor, greatly compromising the safety aspect - converting the strongest, safest bolt action ever made, to just another bolt action...
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Here is a simple trick I use to quickly and accurately compare case volumes.
Must be fireformed brass and trimmed to length. Just don't knock out the primer.
Take a super fine powder like Win680 - no flake or extruded. You must use a very high density ball powder. Salt would also work I guess but I don't like mixing my food groups.
Pour into one case, tapping and tapping until no more powder will go in. Level with the neck. Use a funnel, dump into the next case, tap until it compacts down.
Is it the even with the case neck? Above? Below?
I accept on a RUM sized case 1/16" difference in height. That is a very small amount of case volume. In the vast amount of cases, the volume is BANG ON.
Using this, 50 cases can be compared in a few minutes. No mess, no fuss and you know these cases have the same volume.
I have been surprised to find some 'name' brand stuff fail this test.
Stopped weighing cases when I discovered that identically weight US commercial cases didn't have the same volume. If I am in doubt, I do this volume check. I know my volumes are right. I anneal as necessary so my tensions are dead on too.
Teeny tiny groups using US commercial and even surplus brass. I monitor and correct the areas that I see actually affect my accuracy. The rest I leave for when I am bored or just curious to try something new.
If having a certain type/make/shape of brass gives you that extra 2% mentally to get you on the podium. GO FOR IT....
Jerry
PS with fireformed cases, the necks are aligned with the bore even if the combustion chamber is a bit offside. Exploding powder under 65000psi trying to move up to 5500fps doesn't give a rip if the combustion chamber is a few thou out of alignment.
It can only leave the case one way and that way is perfectly aligned with the bore!
Must be fireformed brass and trimmed to length. Just don't knock out the primer.
Take a super fine powder like Win680 - no flake or extruded. You must use a very high density ball powder. Salt would also work I guess but I don't like mixing my food groups.
Pour into one case, tapping and tapping until no more powder will go in. Level with the neck. Use a funnel, dump into the next case, tap until it compacts down.
Is it the even with the case neck? Above? Below?
I accept on a RUM sized case 1/16" difference in height. That is a very small amount of case volume. In the vast amount of cases, the volume is BANG ON.
Using this, 50 cases can be compared in a few minutes. No mess, no fuss and you know these cases have the same volume.
I have been surprised to find some 'name' brand stuff fail this test.
Stopped weighing cases when I discovered that identically weight US commercial cases didn't have the same volume. If I am in doubt, I do this volume check. I know my volumes are right. I anneal as necessary so my tensions are dead on too.
Teeny tiny groups using US commercial and even surplus brass. I monitor and correct the areas that I see actually affect my accuracy. The rest I leave for when I am bored or just curious to try something new.
If having a certain type/make/shape of brass gives you that extra 2% mentally to get you on the podium. GO FOR IT....
Jerry
PS with fireformed cases, the necks are aligned with the bore even if the combustion chamber is a bit offside. Exploding powder under 65000psi trying to move up to 5500fps doesn't give a rip if the combustion chamber is a few thou out of alignment.
It can only leave the case one way and that way is perfectly aligned with the bore!
Last edited:
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
Yes, I don't mean to hijack a thread also, but I also hate claims that are not backed up.
First of all, the 3 rings of steel is a fallacy to begin with and more aimed at advertising to sell rifles back in the day. Remington just blew that out of the water by introducing their new and "improved" AR-15 extractor conversion. So it looks like they will sell even more rifles in a newer caliber to make a few bucks again. No surprise there.
I did speak with a few BR gunsmiths who are well known and one writes in Precision Shooting Magazine and were around when the first Sako extractors and the new 22/6PPC hit the scene. Yes, many conversions of 40X and 700's were done to fit the cartridge case. None saw any deaths nor any extractor flying rearwards into someone's head and they saw 100's of these conversions as well as competed with them. The two I spoke with don't believe a Sako ejector will travel through the bolt raceway back towards the shooter. There is still a bolt shroud to prevent that. One said he saw one after a pierced primer and it had jolted free, but was just sitting there loose in the action.
The gas will still get around the bolt nose in factory Rem 700's easily as the clearance between bolt nose and the recess it turns in is generous, sometimes over .020. They both agreed that the original Rem extractor is completely strong by itself and the 3 ring design was built around that extractor. Since the Lapua Mag has arrived, there is not enough room to make the recess required to install the original extractor, hence a modified bolt and sanctioned by Remington.
What they did see was the case failure with the many .220 Russian cases that were quite common with the 70,000lbs PSI +. Since then better quality cases arrived and virtually ended that problem. They also have seen many custom actions which do not have the 3 ring feature, but a coned bolt and chamber recess to match and have Sako extractors or similar installed. In fact, that is quite common to see today.
Now I see two stories that have caused injuries and I have no reason to doubt those incidents and it surely looks like a piece of something smacked the back of the port and shattered causing the injury. Naturally gas and flecks of material will get past the bolt shroud, but the extractor passing through it?
Oh well, surmise your own beliefs and judge for yourself. All is good in the world and enjoy your new Lapua .338 Mag 700P. Looks like a fine rifle to me.
First of all, the 3 rings of steel is a fallacy to begin with and more aimed at advertising to sell rifles back in the day. Remington just blew that out of the water by introducing their new and "improved" AR-15 extractor conversion. So it looks like they will sell even more rifles in a newer caliber to make a few bucks again. No surprise there.
I did speak with a few BR gunsmiths who are well known and one writes in Precision Shooting Magazine and were around when the first Sako extractors and the new 22/6PPC hit the scene. Yes, many conversions of 40X and 700's were done to fit the cartridge case. None saw any deaths nor any extractor flying rearwards into someone's head and they saw 100's of these conversions as well as competed with them. The two I spoke with don't believe a Sako ejector will travel through the bolt raceway back towards the shooter. There is still a bolt shroud to prevent that. One said he saw one after a pierced primer and it had jolted free, but was just sitting there loose in the action.
The gas will still get around the bolt nose in factory Rem 700's easily as the clearance between bolt nose and the recess it turns in is generous, sometimes over .020. They both agreed that the original Rem extractor is completely strong by itself and the 3 ring design was built around that extractor. Since the Lapua Mag has arrived, there is not enough room to make the recess required to install the original extractor, hence a modified bolt and sanctioned by Remington.
What they did see was the case failure with the many .220 Russian cases that were quite common with the 70,000lbs PSI +. Since then better quality cases arrived and virtually ended that problem. They also have seen many custom actions which do not have the 3 ring feature, but a coned bolt and chamber recess to match and have Sako extractors or similar installed. In fact, that is quite common to see today.
Now I see two stories that have caused injuries and I have no reason to doubt those incidents and it surely looks like a piece of something smacked the back of the port and shattered causing the injury. Naturally gas and flecks of material will get past the bolt shroud, but the extractor passing through it?
Oh well, surmise your own beliefs and judge for yourself. All is good in the world and enjoy your new Lapua .338 Mag 700P. Looks like a fine rifle to me.
Last edited:
The three rings of steel is a working concept... whether you believe it or not. No other bolt action is a strong or safe in containing excessive pressure.
And I think Remington has made a poor choice in altering it for the Lapua case. Thankfully it is a case that you would be hard pressed to blow up.
I don't understand what you are referring to when you say, "but I also hate claims that are not backed up."
A clearance of 20 thou on most cartridges in a 700 action is not cause of concern. The web of the brass is still way up in the chamber. A much different story with the PPC case.
Custom actions are just that... custom, and the extractor is well thought out in the actions I have seen. Really no similarity to the inherent dangers of 700 conversion at all.
Oh well, surmise your own beliefs and judge for yourself and make an informed decision.
And I think Remington has made a poor choice in altering it for the Lapua case. Thankfully it is a case that you would be hard pressed to blow up.
I don't understand what you are referring to when you say, "but I also hate claims that are not backed up."
A clearance of 20 thou on most cartridges in a 700 action is not cause of concern. The web of the brass is still way up in the chamber. A much different story with the PPC case.
Custom actions are just that... custom, and the extractor is well thought out in the actions I have seen. Really no similarity to the inherent dangers of 700 conversion at all.
Oh well, surmise your own beliefs and judge for yourself and make an informed decision.
While there may be clearance between the Remington bolt nose and barrel breech counterbore, in the event of a catastrophic case failure the bolt nose ring expands. The bolt will be ruined; the sides of the boltface counterbore will be cracked. The casehead will be brazed to the boltface. I have observed this in a Remington 700 fired with an obstructed barrel. The bullet stopped in the bore, the casehead failed, and the gas was vented through the escape ports. The shooter was entirely uninjured, and only the receiver/bolt/barrel were ruined.
If you want to conduct experiments with a worn barrel and a string, you will learn nothing unless you can precipitate a casehead failure. You will probably write off the rifle in the process, but you will be able to observe whether or not ejected fragments would have been dangerous to the shooter.
Ejected fragments cannot come back through the bolt shroud, they can exit through the ejection port. The more serious of the incidents reported involved a left handed shooter and a right handed rifle, so his face was exposed to the ejection port.
Fragments are able to leave the rifle because when the bolt is locked, the new extractor is lined up with the right hand boltway.
There will be problems only if there is a casehead failure. The .220/6PPC case was unusual in that the casehead was thinner than many other designs. It is unusual for caseheads to fail. Thus is why unfortunate incidents involving inferior designs of actions are so rarely reported. The Remington action is superior from the standpoint of protecting the shooter is the event of a case failure. That is fact. If a case failure never occurs, no one will ever observe the difference in action design.
If you want to conduct experiments with a worn barrel and a string, you will learn nothing unless you can precipitate a casehead failure. You will probably write off the rifle in the process, but you will be able to observe whether or not ejected fragments would have been dangerous to the shooter.
Ejected fragments cannot come back through the bolt shroud, they can exit through the ejection port. The more serious of the incidents reported involved a left handed shooter and a right handed rifle, so his face was exposed to the ejection port.
Fragments are able to leave the rifle because when the bolt is locked, the new extractor is lined up with the right hand boltway.
There will be problems only if there is a casehead failure. The .220/6PPC case was unusual in that the casehead was thinner than many other designs. It is unusual for caseheads to fail. Thus is why unfortunate incidents involving inferior designs of actions are so rarely reported. The Remington action is superior from the standpoint of protecting the shooter is the event of a case failure. That is fact. If a case failure never occurs, no one will ever observe the difference in action design.
Last edited:
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
You actually did back up your claim with 2 injury stories later on in the thread. I'm cool with that. I don't know you and neither do my friends. What else do you want?
I don't think those Sako mods are going to stop because of the incidents or make history. I also learned a lot from those questions and info.
Hammerhead
Member
- Location
- Calgary, AB
I could be wrong on this one, but it is my understanding that the 700P in .338LM has been out for a couple years now in the US. It seems to me that if there were any significant problems with the rifle that Remington would have addressed it already and they would have either fixed the problem, or taken them out of production completely.
