Lengths of Current Crop Of Actions...Short, Medium, Long???

[jackie schmidt]

We just finished putting together a brand new 6PPC for Geramo Villareal, based on one of the ultra short Bat SV Actions.

The stock is a Robertson Composite, the barrel a Bartlien 13.5 4-groove, my chamber, my reamer. For now, it has one of my Frozen Weavers and Jewell External Adjustable mounts. Nice looking Rifle.

What is the general consensus about actions, in particular, the lengths??. I know that the old rule was a longer action would support a heavier barrel, but I doubt this is much of a factor at all in todays 10.5 LV's and Sporters.

All of my Rifles are built on standard 7 1/2 inch long Actions, Farley's and one Diamond Back. This little ultra short Bat is really nice, the thing only weighs 28ounces. Heck, even with the 26 ounce stock, the Rifle is still 6 ounces under with a 22 inch barrel, ready to go to the line

What do you all think the disadvantage, if any, is with using one of these short actions?? In all honesty, I do not see that many of them at Matches, Bob Estes has a short Bat Multiflat that has always been a great shooter.

I can't recall a discussion as of late about the advantages, one way or the other, of long actions vs shorty actions. It's cold outside, let's talk about them........jackie

 

[RJG]

Some would say the advantage of a longer action would be bedding area, which can’t hurt, but I also like a little longer action because of being able to spread out the rings on the scope a little bit more. I do like the short 2 lug Bats, because they are very fast with that short bolt. For these reasons I use a Bat “SB” (RB,LP,RE) which is the length of the “B” action, but uses the short bolt of the “S” action. Best of both worlds to me.

Rick Graham

 

[Charles E]

Jackie, I bet the people who like longer actions will say "bedding area." But since my .30 BR is barrel blocked & HV legal (block no more than 4" in front of the boltface, therefore a a tad less than a 3-inch long block), AND since the block is the only thing "bedded," I don't much worry to much about that anymore.

I have another such rifle, a long-range one (the rules are different), that has a block just about six inches long. This one has a 32-inch barrel hanging off one end, and a 7.5 inch BAT of the other. Again, only the block is bedded, and again, the rifle shoots fine.

Of course, there is some difference between a barrel block (no cuts in the bottom) & and action (has cuts), but I don't think bedding per se is an issue.

 

[stiller]

I think

it depends more on the stock design. The longer actions in my opinion are much more forgiving to bed and spread the load to the stock. Personally, the complete outer shell designs with the action and barrel areas part of the shell should be better for the short actions. If using the filled core type of stock I think the bedding should connect to the shell at the edges.

Bigger barrels, more recoil type of cartridges etc all put more load on the bedding, short actions being higher stressed. Does any of it matter if you have margin, probably not. Now just what is the margin? I have no idea.

 

[HovisKM]

Jackie,
You have seen a couple of my BR rifles. All mine where the BAT SV action. I love the short bolt throw and the weight savings. I do agree with Jerry Stiller... If your not bedding in a molded shell stock like Kelblys, etc.. then you have to pay more attention to the bedding. The last stock I bedded for a guy with the SV, had the foam exposed bedding area...even though it is a glue in, I glued pillars (not actually used with screws) as far back and and as far forward of the action that butted against the bottom shell. I used alluminum for the pillars. I think it added about 1 1/2 ounce, maybe a little less...just don't remember.

Now...I think it's also perfect for the barrel block I have.

Hovis

 

[Jefferson]

was that s new JTR BR stock with the slab sides

just curious,
more to the point, I like a 7 1/2 better as the loading port is a tad longer for less fumbling when running a group (although Bart can do it faster than I weill ever be able to) and perhaps for resale if someone wants to rebarrel to a 6BR or varient.

Having said that now that I shoot a little better the SV is OK, bought one from Bart and have tried 2 others so it works when you have co-ordination.

It would be nice to have the weight at 11 pounds instead of 10 1/2 so we could use the heavier actions, i.e. 1.55 round BAT would be nice to use. Just the feel is nicer, hard to explain. But to make weight with a 1.55 round to be under 10 1/2 with newer scopes and tuner,mmmmm not.

Jefferson

 

[Dick Grosbier]

It would be nice to have the weight at 11 pounds instead of 10 1/2 so we could use the heavier actions, i.e. 1.55 round BAT would be nice to use. Just the feel is nicer, hard to explain. But to make weight with a 1.55 round to be under 10 1/2 with newer scopes and tuner,mmmmm not.

Jefferson

I understand in Australia they have a 9.5 lb class now thats tough.

 

[HovisKM]

just curious,
more to the point, I like a 7 1/2 better as the loading port is a tad longer for less fumbling when running a group (although Bart can do it faster than I weill ever be able to) and perhaps for resale if someone wants to rebarrel to a 6BR or varient.

Having said that now that I shoot a little better the SV is OK, bought one from Bart and have tried 2 others so it works when you have co-ordination.

It would be nice to have the weight at 11 pounds instead of 10 1/2 so we could use the heavier actions, i.e. 1.55 round BAT would be nice to use. Just the feel is nicer, hard to explain. But to make weight with a 1.55 round to be under 10 1/2 with newer scopes and tuner,mmmmm not.

Jefferson

I have a BR bolt for my SV's also. I have no trouble ejecting fired 6.5 x 47 lapua brass out the small ejection port.

Hovis