Rem700 receivers

stubblejumper said:
And after Jerry explained your misconceptions as to why some people have the Remington extractor in their Stiller actions,as well as the advantages offered by the sako extractor,I think that we can put the issue to rest.

Thank you Jerry for posting.
Click to expand...

I thank Jerry for posting too... I believe he understands no one was criticizing his fine action.

But I do have to say I had no misconceptions as to why some have the Remington extractor in Stiller actions. That is just you trying to put words in my mouth... again...

I think you were misconceived.

I think we can put the issue to rest. ... or start an entirely new thread... please!
 
Jerry,

Sorry you had to be part of this. Not the way MOST of us would have liked our visit.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I really want a SS Drop Port Viper. They still have the Remington extractor do they not?

Cheers,
Rob
 
All the

drop ports have remington extractors. This is the one situation that the Sako scares me. In a RBLP Drop action, the Sako is in the bottom so the case will drop down. When the bolt is turned in, the extractor is at 90 degrees looking right at you through the left port. Benchrest guys are always known to push the pressure envelope, so I put the Remington in it. The thing you have to be real carefull with on the Rem extractor is bolt face depth. Never cut the end of the barrel such that it is more than .160 ahead of the face. Exposed web area here under high pressure will cause issues. The bolt face depth is .150 max on all our Rem ext actions, .135 on the rest of the BR's
 
This is not a case of a 700 bolt being altered but it clearly demonstrates the seriousness of a catastrophic case failure and why I will continue pointing out the flaw in converting a 700 extractor. I have no doubt an injury like this would not occur with a 700 extractor system. Even other manufacturers agree as to the safety of the 700 system.

A catastrophic case failure happened recently, and that could happen to anyone...

http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55200
 
Last edited:
http://www.benchrest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55200


Am I understanding that the accident occurred because the rifle was fired with a metal rod that had been used to dislodge a stuck bullet in the barrel?It also appears that the person was not wearing shooting glasses?

This happened recently, and it could happen to anyone...
Click to expand...

If the gun was fired with a metal rod in the barrel that had been used to dislodge a bullet,it will not happen to me,as I don't even carry such a rod with me either hunting or to the range,since I have never had a bullet lodged in the barrel of any gun.In fact,I don't even own such a rod.And I always wear shooting glasses at the range.

It appears that the accident was a combination of more than one safety infractions as most accidents are.

Furthermore,no one here can guarantee that the shooter would not have been injured with a different action,such as a Remington 700.
 
Last edited:
guntech said:
Can you read....?

I am more concerned with the 700 conversion... the fact that a lot of people do it thinking it is somehow better... and not understanding the superb design of the 700 is then totally compromised.

An informed choice...
Click to expand...

The reliability of positive ejection comes to mind the fact remains that the poor soul created an A Very Hazardous condition that lead to his demise ,The extractor failure was a result of his own hand.If you want us to believe that was a direct result of the Sako Conversion then Show us absolute Proof of your claim that it is truly unsafe .There are many things we do daily in our lives that can lead to our early demise that is the chance we take allthough we may try and minize the risks they are still present.
 
FWIW, I had a 700, .22-.250 varmint rifle brought into the shop that had been fired with a metal rod in the barrel.* The bullet stopped in the barrel.* The remains of the casehead were brazed into the boltface, which had expanded into the breechface counterbore.* Although the rifle was ruined, there was no apparent external damage, and the shooter was unharmed.* The breeching system worked exactly as expected.* I cannot imagine what the consequences would have been with a different pattern of rifle. The Remington breeching system is superior, in the event of a catastrophic case failure.Incidentally, I have an as new push feed Winchester 70 handing on the wall.* It was a 7mm Magnum, and was fired with a .30 cartridge, either a .308 or a .30-30.* Never did find out.* The bottom metal is gone, both sides of the stock in the breech area are gone, and the portion of the right hand locking lug which carries the extractor is gone.* This part of the bolt would have been at bottom dead centre, directly in front of the locking shoulder, so it would not have been projected back at the shooter.* Obviously there had been a great release of high pressure gas.* The bullet is not lodged in the barrel, so it must have been sized down from .308 to .284.* None of the flying pieces struck the shooter, and there was no one standing beside him.* Fortunately his left arm was not underneath the action area, where the bottom metal and magazine contents were projected.Here is something else to consider if contemplating the conversion of a Remington bolt...* The Remington system results in greater projection of the case from the barrel breech than in other designs.* More casehead sidewall is unsupported.* With the Remington system intact, this is not a safety concern.* Consider the comments above respecting casehead projection, in Stiller's post #63.* The Sako extractor is designed to function with a different casehead projection than the Remington.Of course there are those who will never fire a converted 700 with a plugged barrel, or with a badly overloaded cartridge, or with a cartridge that is going to experience a failure of the casehead.* These knowledgable individuals are capable of making informed decisions, and are content to live with the consequences.
 
You have more patience than I Dennis, good for you. I believe that those who "disagree" with Dennis on this are here to argue their misinformed point instead of trying to learn something. It isn't complicated at all and should not require any slide shows for someone to figure out.
 
I believe that those who "disagree" with Dennis on this are here to argue their misinformed point instead of trying to learn something. It isn't complicated at all and should not require any slide shows for someone to figure out.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt that removing material from a bolt will in some way weaken it.The question is whether the removal of that material will cause a bolt failure,or cause injury to the shooter that might not have occurred if the bolt was not modified.To this point,no proof has been posted to verify what might,or might not happen.There is not even one reference posted to an actual incident where an injury was caused by a failure of a 700 bolt that had been modified to accept a sako extractor,yet many rifles have undergone this modification.As such,all we have is speculation as to what might or might not happen.The incident that was linked was caused by the shooter violating two safety practices,not ensuring that the barrel was free of obstruction,and not wearing shooting glasses.It did not even involved a 700 action,let alone one that was modified,so we still have nothing but speculation as to what might or might not happen with a modified 700 action.

You have more patience than I Dennis, good for you.
Click to expand...

What does patience have to do with some people choosing not to accept unproven speculation as fact?
 
Years ago, there was an incident written up in Precision Shooting. Chap was loading his rounds at the bench, made a loading error, had a casehead failure. He was firing an altered RH rifle from his left shoulder. Parts were embedded in his head.
It doesn't matter if the shooter was doing something like making dangerous handloads, firing the rifle with a blocked barrel, etc. An unaltered Remington provides a much greater margin of safety than an altered one. No one sets out to fire off a bomb in front of their face. But it happens.
It is not an every day occurrence for a casehead to fail. When it happens, and it does, some designs are superior to others. Some very popular rifles are inferior, in the event of a failure. The pre-64 Winchester is an example. Look at the photos in Ackley's book.
The Remington system is among the best in a currently produced factory rifle. In the event of a catastrophic failure, the design can protect the shooter. Intentionally defeating the design can have consequences. If a person chooses to do so, that is their business. If a blown casehead never occurs, then it doesn't matter.
 
stubblejumper said:
There is no doubt that removing material from a bolt will in some way weaken it.The question is whether the removal of that material will cause a bolt failure,or cause injury to the shooter that might not have occurred if the bolt was not modified.To this point,no proof has been posted to verify what might,or might not happen.There is not even one reference posted to an actual incident where an injury was caused by a failure of a 700 bolt that had been modified to accept a sako extractor,yet many rifles have undergone this modification.As such,all we have is speculation as to what might or might not happen.The incident that was linked was caused by the shooter violating two safety practices,not ensuring that the barrel was free of obstruction,and not wearing shooting glasses.It did not even involved a 700 action,let alone one that was modified,so we still have nothing but speculation as to what might or might not happen with a modified 700 action.
Click to expand...

You might not have anything but speculation but I think that is because of your mind set.

If you had gone to the link in a much earlier post you would have read of one instance.. but there have been several injuries when cases let loose in a 700 action with the Sako conversion... if the conversion had not been done, the case failure would not have occurred. It is that simple. This is not speculation, it is an accepted fact by others more intelligent than you or I. There is no extractor system stronger or safer on a two lug rifle than an original 700. This information has been posted before. I have copied and pasted below some text posted by a long time shooter in Texas on Benchrest Central.


Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,219
Here is The Deal

When you add a Sako Extractor to a Remington 700 style bolt, you TOTALLY negate the safety engineering placed into the design by Remington.

I have told this story on this Forum before, but we have new visitors, so here it is again.

About 6 or so years ago at the old Lake Houston Gun Club, a shooter, (left handed), was practising with a custom Rem 700 in 243 Ackley. It was a right hand action with a Sako Extractor added.

He had been shooting 68 gr. match bullets with a BIG dose of 4350, just seeing what kind of velocity he could get. It was a very hot day. He decided to switch to some 90+ gr. bullets, (I do not know which brand). The thing he FORGOT to do was drop the charge. The resulting catastrophe welded what was left of the case head inside the bolt recess, and the Sako extractor ended up in his head. This is like getting shot with a small 22 short.

To get the bolt open, they had to remove the barrel.

stubblejumper - if that bolt had not been altered, there would have been no catastrophic case failure and no extractor in the head... in this instance the conversion allowed the case to blow right down the side of the bolt...

You stated in an earlier post, "I am all for making informed decisions,but some posts on this thread are making it sound like installing a Sako extractor in a 700 bolt is an sure invitation to injury,and that only clueless people would do such a thing.I would like to see someone tell that to the people that built my rifles."

I do think installing a Sako extractor in a 700 bolt is a sure invitation to injury... and that ends with a period. It certainly isn't an invitation to more safety or strength.

You completed that statement with " only clueless people would do such a thing". I disagree with that. It is more likely uninformed people may have the conversion done, and those who don't care about it. Clueless is your word, not mine.
 
Last edited:
Well you have provided one incident,and I of course I do have to admit that without a sako extractor in the bolt,it is obvious that there would have been no injury due to a sako extractor striking the shooter in the head.

However,there is no way of guaranteeing that there would not have been a case failure had the sako extractor not been installed.You are again making an assumption that can't be proven.I do personally know of an incident where a stock 700 suffered a case failure due to a severe overload.The bolt face actually fractured,and the case most certainly did rupture.There were no bolt modifications on this rifle.The shooter is actually a member on this forum,and if I remember correctly,the cartridge was a 280 remington.If he reads this post,he may choose to post on this thread about his experience,but out of respect for his privacy,I will not divulge his username.

Now back to the incident you posted the link to.The action was a right handed action,and the shooter was left handed which placed his face in the line of fire for shrapnel should a failure occur.

I personally believe that it is not a safe practice for a left handed person to shoot any action where the gas ports or ejection port are on the right side of the action because the shooters face is directly in the line of fire of any resulting gases or shrapnel should a catastrophic failure should occur.

Do you agree or disagree with that opinion?

As such,I do concede that in the case of a left handed shooter,and a right handed action,or vice versa it is not a wise idea to install the sako extractor.However,as I previously stated,I believe that a left handed shooter, shooting a right handed action was not the safest idea either.

Which brings us to a right handed shooter,shooting a right handed action,or a left handed shooter shooting a left handed action.The shooters face is no longer directly in the line of fire for shrapnel or gases should a case failure occur,so in my opinion the risk is greatly reduced.As such,I don't feel that I am exposing myself to significantly increased risk in the unlikely event that a case failure should occur.Obviously Mr.Stiller agrees,or he would not continue to sell actions with the sako extractor installed.
 
Last edited:
...and Mr Stiller's latest post on Benchrest Central stated, "The best is probably the factory Remington style."

and as far as your claim, "However,there is no way of guaranteeing that there would not have been a case failure had the sako extractor not been installed.You are again making an assumption that can't be proven"

If you want to use one of your converted 700 rifles and I use one of my 700's... it will be easy to prove...

This is my last response to you on this thread. As far as I am concerned you are trolling. I have you on my ignore list.
 
Last edited:
If you want to use one of your converted 700 rifles and I use one of my 700's... it will be easy to prove...
Click to expand...

I have been using my converted 700 rifles for all of my hunting for nearly 20 years without incident.However,I am not going to purposely expose one of my rifles to an intentional overload.I work too hard getting them built,developing loads, and paying for it all to purposely expose one to an overpressure.And sako extractor or not,I would never trust any rifle after it has experienced an overload.

You are the one making the statements about the supposed safety issue,so you are the one with something to prove.As such,why don't you acquire one stock rifle,and one with a sako extractor and expose both to equivalent overloads with a test dummy in the shooting position to compare any sustained damage.

Better yet,see iF Myth Busters are interested.

This is my last reponse on this thread. As far as I am concerned you are trolling.
Click to expand...

I am just asking for proof to back up your claim,since to this point,it hasn't been proven.

And I did take notice that you avoided answering my question about the safety issue presented by a left handed shooter using a right handed rifle,which placed his face directly in the line of fire of shrapnel and gases,should a case rupture occur.I am thinking that not answering was intentional,and not merely an oversight.
 
Last edited:
What does patience have to do with some people choosing not to accept unproven speculation as fact?
Click to expand...
pa·tience [pey-shuhns]
–noun 1. the quality of being patient, as the bearing of provocation, annoyance, misfortune, or pain, without complaint, loss of temper, irritation, or the like.
2. an ability or willingness to suppress restlessness or annoyance when confronted with delay: to have patience with a slow learner.

"unproven speculation" Where? Its proven but you choose to ignore it. If there was no sako extractor, then there would not have been a death caused by a sako extractor sent through a person's brain. That is a fact.
 
The safety issue does exist. It is more of a problem in factory remingtons which have been converted. It is a lesser problem in rifles which have been rebarreled and in which tolerances are closer. These are facts. Here are some more:
ANY action which uses an extractor which is not totally contained within the receiver ring can lose the extractor in the event of a catastrophic case failure or severe overload. This includes such actions as the Mauser, Springfield, Model 70, Ruger 77, Howa, BSA, Tikka, etc. etc.
It is entirely possible to make the conversion of the 700 safer but to do so requires further modification and adds to the expense.

I have converted Remington 700 bolts using extractors from Sako (and copies threrof), BSA, Weatherby, and Ruger (a lot of work). On my own bolts I am currently using Sako-style extractors. I shoot these right-handed rifles off the left shoulder. I don't flinch too badly yet but might start as a result of Dennis' fear mongering!
In case anyone is unaware, the last was said in jest. Dennis is pointing out a potential safety issue which he considers to be important. Since he stops short of calling me an idiot for using this conversion on my own rifles, I have no problem with this. There are numerous ways to utilize a Sako-style extractor on an action and contain the extractor in the event of a case failure. Even I have been able to devise a few so it isn't that difficult!
Dennis poses the question, "Why would anyone want to compromise the safety of the Remington design?" Well, there are a couple of reasons. The first concerns the old 722 and 721 actions. The factory extractor on these IS a relatively weak design and replacements are not available. While it is possible to alter these to use a 700 extractor, it is a very difficult task so the Sako type is a viable solution. The other reason is that the Sako type is replacable with only the point of a knife as a tool. Not the case with the 700 design. This might make it desirable on a tactical rifle.
Ultimately, whether or not you have a Sako extractor on a Remington, it pays to follow some simple rules:
1. Load within reasonable pressure limits. A 30/06 will never be a 300 Magnum. A 300 WSM will never be a 300 Ultra. A 338/06 will not match a 338 mag.
2. Don't fire your rifle with the bore obstructed. If you have to push the case out with a cleaning rod, the extractor is no good anyway. Quit using the rifle until the problem is corrected.
3. Be aware of potential safety issues and let this awareness guide your actions.

As of now, too many people have stated that any gunsmith performing such conversions is deliberately putting his customers at risk. This means it is only a matter of time before some clown loads Red Dot in his 308 then sues the gunsmith because the Sako extractor failed. This should effectively kill the Sako extractor conversion business. Ralph Nader would be proud. Regards, Bill.
 
I have a Stiller TAC30 and have no concerns for my safety as I'm quite meticulous in my reloading, though that doesn't mean mistakes can't happen.

Interesting, Stiller is considerind a design change to M16 style extractors from the current Sako style he's using now. More info can be found at the following: http://www.viperactions.com/whats_new.htm
 
As usual Bill puts things as they are. Keep in mind firearms are a tool. Reliability as well as safety are concerns. In our experience remington extractors fail far too often. Whether we have dirty chambers on hunting rifles left in the elements, too hot loads,whatever the reason, the rem. system fails far too often. When it does it means a trip tp the shop. I have replaced several rem. extractors in the last 30 yr. These are on my own or friends rifles. Some have been changed to the sako, some just replaced with rem. Maybe the rem. is 'safer' maybe not, but for sure it is less reliable. Perhaps the sako is a trade off. Like Bill I shoot most rifles from the left side and have several r/h rem. converted. Since I flinch anyway the sako debate prob. won't affect my poor shooting. Mark
 
Anyone who reloads ammo creates the opportunty for an overload accident. #### happens.

I have a collection of blown up rifles. I use them in safety lectures. All have the same cause. Winchester ball pistol powder was laoded accidently instead of Winchester rifle powder. A Reminfton 270 was accidently blown up in the Sierra test range for the same reason. Blew the receiver into 27 pieces. Shooter was not hurt.

I have a Win M70 in 308 blown up with 45 gr of WW296. Sheared off a bolt lug. Broke the stock and blew the mag and trigger guard out the bottom. receiver and barrel can be re-used. I am really impressed with this rifle.

I don't have to risk sounding like an old fart. I am an old fart.

First, if you load both pistol and rifle, don't by both flavours of Winchester powder. Murphy will eventually visit.

Second, examine the case head and primer of the first shot of a new box of ammo. If you don't like what you see, STOP!! I have seen severl catastphic failures where the first two or three rounds were blown primers, hard extraction, etc. That usually means pressures are way above proof round range.
 
"unproven speculation" Where? Its proven but you choose to ignore it. If there was no sako extractor, then there would not have been a death caused by a sako extractor sent through a person's brain. That is a fact.
Click to expand...

I certainly hope that you aren't referring to the link posted by guntech about the left handed shooter being struck by the extractor,since he was not killed and the extractor never went through his brain.That is a fact proven in the link itself.

It is a lesser problem in rifles which have been rebarreled and in which tolerances are closer.
Click to expand...

Which would include all of my own rifles,whose actions were trued and lapped,and which all wear custom stainless barrels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom