338LM Bolt face

guntech said:
I agree... a catastrophic case failure is required to make it dangerous.

I like to compare the safety of the 700 conversion to removing your seat belts and airbags in your vehicle. You can still drive and use your vehicle for a lifetime and you may never have a need for them... but if you are in a catastrophic situation you would wish you had the added safety of the original design.
Click to expand...



It would be interesting to see what the frequency and magnitude of failures would be given the design of the casing. I understand the 338 Lapua specifically is a significantly enhanced case design. It would be interesting to see the results of a failure.
 
What can you tell me about the enhanced case design? Looks the same as any other to me. I agree with Dennis, it's a heck of a sales job.
Dan,
While it's true you see P17's built in large cartridges, I think this is often done because they are perceived as being big. In reality, they are no larger than a 700 except in the case of the barrel thread diameter. Bolt diameter etc. is just the same and the left lug is split. Regards, Bill
 
Bill, can't tell you much about it since I only read the info a while back. I don't recall the actual details. Steve at PGW would probably be closer to that info then myself. I''ll see what I can find out.

I don't know how many cases you have sectioned and analyzed. I know I haven't touched the case, but I doubt the information is that far off but hopefully we can locate some information to dismiss give us more details. Have you ever compared cross sections of the case head bill?

I know I'd like to think there is more behind the cartridge then just sales as some people would have us believe. Lapua being a qaulity producer wouldn't be viewed very positively if it were mostly BS, but I guess you never really know.

I'm sure someone will post some interesting information at some point in time.
 
Lapua .338LM brass was modified to handle the high pressure required to meet the velocity spec. required as part of the performance criteria for the first specifically- designed 1000 metre sniper round. The parent .416 Rigby design could not handle the presssure and was modified(strenghtened) in the head area. The original.338LM CIP spec. has since been lowered, as the presssure requirments for long range performance can be met at lower than original pressure, however the case maintains the same higher pressure construct. Only 2 manufacturers in the world make .338LM to military specs, RUAG and Lapua.

The "sales job" was not by Lapua but to Lapua by interests such as the Boots Obermeyer and the U.S. Navy long range sniper rifle program.

The .338LM remains the only .338 calibre cartridge in use by military snipers throughout the world. For target shooters, fill your boots!

With best regards,

Peter Dobson
Hirsch Precision Inc.
Lapua in Canada
 
As per my earlier post...this is where I found the information on the Lapua casing.

http://www.lapua.com/index.php?id=889

I suspect Remington also took this information (perhaps additional and perhaps even their own destructive testing) into account. That information or those results no doubt will play a large role in their decision. Now couple the legal department and ouch.........
 
PGW Steve said:
You can't blow up a Timberwolf and our "sako" extractor doesn't become a projectile.
Click to expand...

I think any action can be blown up given a stupid enough load i.e. a caseful of olin 231. From what I understand the Timberwolf is the only action that was enginered for this case size.

I have a 602 Brno that I am going to build either a 338 Laupua or a 338-378. I haven't decided which. If I wasn't at the bottom end of the economic food chain, I wood use a timber wolf action, if I could get one.
 
I think we are losing the understanding of "Engineered." It is possible that the Timberwolf has design criteria and field tests it must pass, but I doubt it is for ever scenario. Perhaps Steve could comment on what the parameters were in the build of their action.

In general, the actions are designed with a reasonable factory of safety as per industry standards. I would be interested in seeing the requirements to handle a complete failure due to reloader error or gross negligence.

I suppose if size, weight and functionality were not issues we could make a rather robust action.
 
Ultramag said:
Save yourself the hastle and potential danger and get (doesn't support this site) or (doesn't support this site 2) to order you Predator action from SPF, you'll be money ahead!
UM:)
PS> Good Thread!
Click to expand...

What hassle? LOL
 
Then how is remmington doing it on the new 700p MLR in .338 lapua?
Is it a different action?
I heard it's suppost to be a variant of the m24a3, how is that rifle built?
If it's even rumoured to be unsafe I don't think remmington would do it?
 
700p338.jpg
 
Someone has likely mentioned it already, but here I go.....looks like great free advertising. What an excellent way to feel the market....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom