Choosing a custom action

Bandits

Bandits

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Location
GTA, Ontario
I am looking for some up to date advice (preferably first hand) on 700 footprint custom actions that would suit a 300 RUM build. I am a good way down the road to collecting the parts for it. I already have 450 pcs of virgin Norma brass, a 30" (1:10 I think) Broughton barrel, 30 cal Heathen brake and a pre-2014 AICS AX chassis. I have done some googling, making the rounds on CGN, the hide, accurate shooter, etc. looking for information.

A big thing for me is an action that is going to work rain or shine! I have Kelbly Atlas Tactical in 6BRA that shoots like a dream and have been leaning that way for this one. I really like the feel of the Kelbly and the mechanical ejection that doesn't beat the crap out of my brass. Two Canadian suppliers I contacted said they don't like/sell the Atlas, but didn't give any reason as to why. My googling didn't reveal much trouble with them. Most everyone seems happy with the Atlas, though the threads are all a couple years old. Looking at other action options (Impact, Defiance, Bighorn, ARC) they all seem to be pushing $2000+. Are they 30% better than the Kelbly?

I am trying to keep below $2000 on an action. It should be accurate within the scope of reliability needed for rain or shine shooting, and not beat the crap out of my brass. A big plus would be the ability to install pre-fits. Lets be honest the barrel is likely to die before I exhaust my brass supply!
 
Have you considered a Cadex action? They are made in Canada, available in both short or long action, and they are really well built! Plus it's well below your 2000$ budget. But they aren't prefit barrels though...
 
If you're happy with your kelbly, then get another one. They seem like an incredible value. I run the arc nucleus actions in long and short and really like them. That said, my next action will most likely be an atlas tactical or a TL3. There definitely is value in an action that is able to have prefits spun up without sending out the action.
 
Borden rifle actions maybe worth a look, no first hand experience with them just seen them on the real gunsmith he speaks highly of them.
 
No experience with the Kelbly Atlas but have only heard good things. They really seem like a fantastic value. If you have one in short action and like it, I'd say get a long action for your RUM. The only long action custom I have experience with is a Stiller Tac 338 (my .300 Norma Mag) and I've had zero issues with it. Also have short action Defiance Elite and ARC Nucleus and again, zero issues. There are so many good actions out there these days that I think a lot of it comes down to personal preference. If you like the Atlas, I'd just get another one.
 
Yeah I can't find a reason not to go with another one. I will take a closer look at the Nucleus and Origin actions. I do like that the origin has a longer tenon to support those longer heavy barrels.
 
If you are interested in accuracy, you need to read into features and understand how they may affect your objectives.

A screw on pic rail for example indicates the action will be less stiff than one with an integral pic rail.

A big consideration is how exactly the round is ejected. Here's why that matters... A typical Rem 700 has a spring plunger that kicks the brass out. The potential problem with that is that it can kick the brass so hard into the barrel and action on the way out that it puts a dent in the neck. That dent is the problem if you plan to reload as it will affect your concentricity. It also initiates a crease in the neck that initiates the split point.

Now, you can shorten the ejector spring until it is weak enough that it does not dent the necks. This is common among target shooters.

Another option is to go with a controlled round feed system that does not have a spring to eject. Instead these actions will have a blade near the back of the bolt travel that will throw the brass after it is clear of the barrel and action and has a clear line out the ejection port.

If you don't reload, little of the above will matter, but if you reload and want top level accuracy, then give it thought.

I have a Defiance Deviant Tactical and I did weaken the ejector spring, but it still dents case necks and I will need to weaken the spring a little more. I neck turn and run tight necks and want everything just perfect and can see that controlled feed would have been a better option for me as long as the pic rail is integral.
 
Last edited:
Maple57 said:
If you are interested in accuracy, you need to read into features and understand how they may affect your objectives.

A screw on pic rail for example indicates the action will be less stiff than one with an integral pic rail.

A big consideration is how exactly the round is ejected. Here's why that matters... A typical Rem 700 has a spring plunger that kicks the brass out. The potential problem with that is that it can kick the brass so hard into the barrel and action on the way out that it puts a dent in the neck. That dent is the problem if you plan to reload as it will affect your concentricity. It also initiates a crease in the neck that initiates the split point.

Now, you can shorten the ejector spring until it is weak enough that it does not dent the necks. This is common among target shooters.

Another option is to go with a controlled round feed system that does not have a spring to eject. Instead these actions will have a blade near the back of the bolt travel that will throw the brass after it is clear of the barrel and action and has a clear line out the ejection port.

If you don't reload, little of the above will matter, but if you reload and want top level accuracy, then give it thought.

I have a Defiance Deviant Tactical and I did weaken the ejector spring, but it still dents case necks and I will need to weaken the spring a little more. I neck turn and run tight necks and want everything just perfect and can see that controlled feed would have been a better option for me as long as the pic rail is integral.
Click to expand...

I have been doing my homework, but their is loads to read and the internet is full on 'experts'.

I take your point on the action stiffness. As I understand it the rigidity is a function of the ejection port size and not the integral rail. For instance a Barnard will have the same rigidity as a defiance with an integral rail. Reason being that the ejection port is small as compared to a standard 700 action.

I have been and hope to continue loading my own stuff. This has been one of my major gripes is actions that ding the crap out of the brass because they use plunger style ejectors. They work great if you are running the action hard and pull the bolt back sufficiently fast to have the case clear the front of the action. I typically go slow to feed and eject, thus the brass takes more abuse from plunger style actions. Hence my love of the mechanical ejector on my Atlas. That being said, the more I look the more I am seeing actions with mechanical ejectors.

Maybe a little more reading will help sort things out. Then again, I should get this rolling sooner rather than later so that I can get it up and running :)
 
I have ocean front property in Arizona to sell to anyone here that thinks they can shoot the difference between "action stiffness" from a bolt on rail to integral rail action.
 
kthomas said:
I have ocean front property in Arizona to sell to anyone here that thinks they can shoot the difference between "action stiffness" from a bolt on rail to integral rail action.
Click to expand...

The discussion may be a theoretical one as stiff enough is stiff enough. The question in debate is what is stiff enough. Even that is relative to factors such as barrel length and weight.

Fiberglass stocks are often bedded for the first few inches of the barrel in order to compensate for action deflection.

As for the good old Rem 700, what you may or may not see on target does reveal itself in other ways such as loose scope rail screws that are clearly the result of action deflection. There really is not much steel in the mag/ejection port areas of a Rem 700 and there is little doubt that is a benefit to target grade accuracy. Having said that, the most accurate center fire rifle I ever had was a Rem 700, but it was tuned to the 9s by Dan Dowling himself, so there's that. At least while the scope rail screws were tight.

Bandit is correct that actions with a small ejection port and full steel across the top of the action will certainly be stiffer than a Rem 700.
 
Last edited:
Maple57 said:
The discussion may be a theoretical one as stiff enough is stiff enough. The question in debate is what is stiff enough. Even that is relative to factors such as barrel length and weight.

Fiberglass stocks are often bedded for the first few inches of the barrel in order to compensate for action deflection.

As for the good old Rem 700, what you may or may not see on target does reveal itself in other ways such as loose scope rail screws that are clearly the result of action deflection. There really is not much steel in the mag/ejection port areas of a Rem 700 and there is little doubt that is a benefit to target grade accuracy. Having said that, the most accurate center fire rifle I ever had was a Rem 700, but it was tuned to the 9s by Dan Dowling himself, so there's that. At least while the scope rail screws were tight.

Bandit is correct that actions with a small ejection port and full steel across the top of the action will certainly be stiffer than a Rem 700.
Click to expand...

I doubt anyone here can shoot the difference between action stiffness levels.

I agree that there's a chance of rails coming loose, which is a much bigger problem then lack of stiffness. I had that happen at a match years ago with my old Defiance Rebel action, not fun.

However, a rail doesn't have to be integral to not come loose. ARC for example keys their scope rails, and the fit is so tight that even without any screws that rail is not coming loose. I have no fear of my Mausingfield scope rail coming loose, even though it's not integral.

I think how a rail is attached to the action is a worthy consideration, but not so much for the stiffness aspect. The chase for stiffness brings about its own problems - just look at the Ultimatum actions and the problems they induce by trying to make a stiff action.

To the OP, the Kelbly is an excellent action by pretty much all accounts. Not sure what quack gunsmiths you are talking to that say differently. If you like the Kelbly, get another.
 
I would totally recommend the impact precision action or a TL3. Leaning toward the impact tho. Best action I’ve had so far. Tried the others including defiance. Impact for sure
 
Thats good to know about impact precision. I have heard some rave reviews and they have started making a long action. Not many customs that dont get the nod. See who has something in stock and get it all moving
 
kthomas said:
I doubt anyone here can shoot the difference between action stiffness levels.

I agree that there's a chance of rails coming loose, which is a much bigger problem then lack of stiffness. I had that happen at a match years ago with my old Defiance Rebel action, not fun.
.
Click to expand...

I think the two points are related. The scope rails come loose because of a deficiency in design related to action stiffness.

As long as the scope rail is tight, your point is valid, but only until things start to come loose, then you will wish you had an action that was not vulnerable to the problem.

Pinning a rail is something of a solution, but there are always clearances and the potential for movement.

An integral rail is in my opinion the most foolproof.

I have considered laser welding a pic rail to a Rem 700, that would certainly solve the problem. To do that would be best to anneal the action, then weld on the pic rail, then harden it again, but it could probably be done successfully without annealing. If I had my heart set on using a Rem 700 that is what I would do as the cost of laser welding is negligible. At that point, why stop there? Might just as well laser weld the recoil lug as well. Afterwards, the action would need to be trued.
 
If you want to support a Canadian company and get a top-shelf product for a fair price, take a look at both the PGW Timberwolf Action and Cadex CDX-33. Not cheap no, but made right here in the great white North and some of the strongest actions I've ever seen with outstanding customer support.
 
If I were you I would seriously look at the NZ made Barnard action. It's three lug just like my 1980ish Wichita 1375 action.
However the CNC and very nice smooth finish on the Barnard is self evident.
A good friend of mine has the Barnard single shot in 338 Lapua with a Sightron III on top McMillan style stock.
I have a Palma type Wichita rifle in mere 308 Winchester.
 
Myself I would not choose a controlled feed action (mauserish) for a precision rifle build.
There is a possibility the round will not be concentric to the bore before the trigger is pulled.

Note that not one major army with deep pockets issues a K98 Mauser type sniper rifle.
It's generally believed the long heavy extractor can affect the line up the live round in the chamber.

In the 1990s when Winchester reintroduced it's controlled feed action once again in the Model 70, HB varmint rifles and target rifles were offered in push feed action only.
Same as Remington 700.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom