Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35

Thread: rem 700

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    170

    rem 700

    from another gunsmith blue print the bolt and action and then make the countersink in the barrel as tight as possible so the bolt nose fit in the barrel and has no play that
    way the bolt centers in the barrel ???
    not my idea . i think that is just a very bad idea

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fresno
    Posts
    5,580
    Perhaps the dean of 700 gunsmiths, Bob Brackney, sleeves the bolt in the rear bridge to quite close tolerance, trues up the bolt nose and face and uses a very close diametric fit for the bolt nose in the counterbore, with about .007 axial clearance. These actions shoot exceptionally well. Years back a friend brought along a 6BR built on one on a range trip. It is a slow twist varmint rifle, with a top grade barrel, stock, and bedding. Well tuned, with the same custom bullets , it shot right with my custom actioned, tight neck 6PPC. I will agree with you to the extent that having a very close fit in the counterbore without a simiilar fit at the back of the bolt would probably be a bad idea.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Branchville, NJ
    Posts
    540
    I think that this would only work well if you can keep everything clean. I also wonder how temperature sensitive the tight tolerances would be? If it's a hot day with a more rapid rate of fire and everything could bind up.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    702
    I would expect, that Mr. Brackney's work never accommodates contact between barrel breach and bolt.

    The top Hunter Rifle Rem. 700 smiths - Larry Smart, and others, trued/blueprinted the action completely, and bushed the bolt-body for <0.002" clearance @ both front & rear receiver-rings. Done thus, there was/is no need for tight/minimal clearance between the barrel breach and the bolt-face. Larry's rifles were referred to as "SMART" rifles - owners of those were, "the ones to beat".

    Stan Ware took different approach - he sleeved the bolt-body, then turned turned it eccentrically so that at lock-up, there is almost O clearance at the receiver-rings, but, upon opening, there is several thousandths - yet another attribute cloned by some custom action makers. Of course, [the late] Mr. Ware bored and completely "squared" the action prior to fitting the bolt. Again, no need to come anywhere close to having contact between barrel and bolt, which, regarding precision, is always bad medicine.

    This is pretty much what a "custom action" should be . . . the only "problem" with such an action, such as my great Ware smithed 700: great shooting as it is, "it's still a Remington." RG
    Last edited by R.G. Robinett; 05-19-2021 at 09:13 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Augusta, Maine & Palm Coast, Fl
    Posts
    6,443

    So much

    a part of any action is what's in front of the bolt face for real accuracy accuracy.

    Pete

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fresno
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by R.G. Robinett View Post
    I would expect, that Mr. Brackney's work never accommodates contact between barrel breach and bolt.

    The top Hunter Rifle Rem. 700 smiths - Larry Smart, and others, trued/blueprinted the action completely, and bushed the bolt-body for <0.002" clearance @ both front & rear receiver-rings. Done thus, there was/is no need for tight/minimal clearance between the barrel breach and the bolt-face. Larry's rifles were referred to as "SMART" rifles - owners of those were, "the ones to beat".

    Stan Ware took different approach - he sleeved the bolt-body, then turned turned it eccentrically so that at lock-up, there is almost O clearance at the receiver-rings, but, upon opening, there is several thousandths - yet another attribute cloned by some custom action makers. Of course, [the late] Mr. Ware bored and completely "squared" the action prior to fitting the bolt. Again, no need to come anywhere close to having contact between barrel and bolt, which, regarding precision, is always bad medicine.

    This is pretty much what a "custom action" should be . . . the only "problem" with such an action, such as my great Ware smithed 700: great shooting as it is, "it's still a Remington." RG
    A few years back against a field entirely populated by custom actioned rifles, except for his, Bob Brackney won the California State Championship which is a four gun match, shooting nothing but actions that he had blueprinted and sleeved, including unlimited. Randy, perhaps you should consider the facts before contradicting someone. Certainly axial contact is bad but that is not how his touch. The competitors in that match included Hall of Fame members and world record holders.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lower Dakota Territory
    Posts
    2,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Boyd Allen View Post
    Certainly axial contact is bad but that is not how his touch.
    Boyd, if there's no axial contact, are you saying the most forward portion of the bolt nose is in direct contact with the back face of the chamber area in the barrel counter bore.....correct ?

    This assumes a standard 700-style counter bore is being used at the back of the barrel, of course.

    I have some history on Stan Ware's work with this that I was involved with....could be added later, so as not to derail this discussion.

    Looking forward to the discussion.

    Good shootin'. -Al

    P.S. Johan Teughels: generally speaking, outside of some possibly very specialized/controlled setups, it's a very bad idea to have any bolt contact with the barrel.
    Last edited by Al Nyhus; 05-22-2021 at 11:30 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Poetry, Tex.
    Posts
    6,966
    ^^^ Listen to Al and Randy.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fresno
    Posts
    5,580
    To all three of you. Do any of you have any direct experience with Bob's action work? Al, the contact I wrote about was not in the bottom of the counterbore. He uses .007 clearance there. it is between the sides of the nose, which he trues, and the sides of the counterbore. He leaves the stock clearance between the bolt and the front receiver ring, substituting the fit that I mentioned in the counterbore. I have direct experience with this method and I doubt that any of you do. Randy, there is more than one way to skin this particular cat. I am sure that the smiths that you mentioned do wonderful work. I recommend that all of you reread my posts carefully. None of it is opinion. It is all based on experience and my discussion with Bob as to the details. Do you guys really think that I just make stuff up or present opinion as fact?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ca.
    Posts
    934
    Based on personal experience it has allot to do with who is behind the rifle. And their ability to both read and to adjust to the days conditions. Most all rifles are competitive no matter how they are setup by a qualified benchrest gunsmith so no need to get upset.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lower Dakota Territory
    Posts
    2,182
    Boyd, you're referring to the radial fit of the bolt nose O.D. relative to the counter bore I.D., correct? -Al

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fresno
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Al Nyhus View Post
    Boyd, you're referring to the radial fit of the bolt nose O.D. relative to the counter bore I.D., correct? -Al
    Yes.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Louis.J View Post
    Based on personal experience it has allot to do with who is behind the rifle. And their ability to both read and to adjust to the days conditions. Most all rifles are competitive no matter how they are setup by a qualified benchrest gunsmith so no need to get upset.
    Louis I completely and utterly disagree with this

    When you use the term "benchrest"

    Other sports, "yes," but for actual/factual Benchrest I say "no"

    In a sport where we've got top shooters having multiple barrels chambered at a time then going thru and "culling" them for ability.....

    I currently own 8 full-on BR setups and only half of them are currently competitive and two of these have high round counts. The problem(s) is/are mine and the 4 inadequate guns WILL all be competitive when I get the bugs worked out, but right now I wouldn't bring them to a match as no amount of fiddling will produce competitive aggs IMO. Two have balance issues, one a scope base issue, one's just finicky as in I think I've got 'er dialed and then, another day, she ain't. As in I can't get her to repeat. As in, "I go right, she veers left/I go up, she goes down" type a' thing. It may be just me but I suspect a mechanical issue. (I suspect barrel timing but that may well just be my fevered imagination)

    I believe that on any given day in BR only a percentage of the guns are actually capable of winning with the components to hand.

    I furthermore believe that for that area of accuracy UNDER 1/4moa, that area addressed by "tuning", it's all about consistent vibration control which, with parts touching is hard to accomplish.

    I personally see huge reactive differences between the 4-5 different areas of "touching" being discussed and the one with which I'm NOT at all familiar is the one Boyd's talking about..... I will be going down and chambering a 700 this way soon just because....

    I can

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fresno
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    Louis I completely and utterly disagree with this

    When you use the term "benchrest"

    Other sports, "yes," but for actual/factual Benchrest I say "no"

    In a sport where we've got top shooters having multiple barrels chambered at a time then going thru and "culling" them for ability.....

    I currently own 8 full-on BR setups and only half of them are currently competitive and two of these have high round counts. The problem(s) is/are mine and the 4 inadequate guns WILL all be competitive when I get the bugs worked out, but right now I wouldn't bring them to a match as no amount of fiddling will produce competitive aggs IMO. Two have balance issues, one a scope base issue, one's just finicky as in I think I've got 'er dialed and then, another day, she ain't. As in I can't get her to repeat. As in, "I go right, she veers left/I go up, she goes down" type a' thing. It may be just me but I suspect a mechanical issue. (I suspect barrel timing but that may well just be my fevered imagination)

    I believe that on any given day in BR only a percentage of the guns are actually capable of winning with the components to hand.

    I furthermore believe that for that area of accuracy UNDER 1/4moa, that area addressed by "tuning", it's all about consistent vibration control which, with parts touching is hard to accomplish.

    I personally see huge reactive differences between the 4-5 different areas of "touching" being discussed and the one with which I'm NOT at all familiar is the one Boyd's talking about..... I will be going down and chambering a 700 this way soon just because....

    I can
    Al, It is more than just chambering the barrel. It is how he does the action, including the bolt. Just doing the fit in the counterbore will not give you what he does. If you carefully do the whole thing, and hit all of your marks, I believe that you will be quite pleased with the results. He has been doing them this way for a loooong time. Back in the late 90s I did the initial research and because I knew that Bill Shehane was quite active in the long range game, and had had a lot of success, I asked him. It was his recommendation that I went on, learning more from phone conversations with Bob, and seeing the results in my friend's rifle. Back then as today, Bobs method was, to my knowledge, unique. It seems that in our sport that there are significant numbers who are not at all comfortable with things that do not line up with their preconceived notions, enough so that based on those alone, and in the face of actual results they continue to object. Human nature...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by Boyd Allen View Post
    Al, It seems that in our sport that there are significant numbers who are not at all comfortable with things that do not line up with their preconceived notions, enough so that based on those alone, and in the face of actual results they continue to object. Human nature...
    like you CANNOT fire a case 50 times, they just "do not last that long"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •