Action Material
- Thread starter Roger T
- Start date
AL saves weight, allows for a bulkier action and footprint and some will say "deadens" or damps vibration for superior accuracy.
CM is more prone to rusting than SS, is most often blued. Some claim that smoothest setup is CM on SS.
SS is trouble-free, generally doesn't rust easily. SS on SS is prone to galling. I feel that SS on SS is "sticky," doesn't slide like SS on CM.
al
CM is more prone to rusting than SS, is most often blued. Some claim that smoothest setup is CM on SS.
SS is trouble-free, generally doesn't rust easily. SS on SS is prone to galling. I feel that SS on SS is "sticky," doesn't slide like SS on CM.
al
Roger T
Member
So you get the galling with SS, Rust with CM, Bulk with ALUM. There's got to be more too it than that isn't there ? Bulk /Footprint I see it's use, But a CM or SS action can be made to the same footprint (just heavier).What about expansion ? ease of machineability ? fatigue resistance ? ability to machine to tighter tolerance ? Like if brand X made action in the 3 Alloys above, same footprint say 1.6 flat bottom, integral lug etc. (weight is not an issue with this class of gun) but MUST be bedded in a stock. Which would you choose and why ?
Last edited:
S
squeakie
Guest
replys are interesting, but there is a little more in the equation
* a good piece of 4350 or something in that area out of a certified lot of steel will not conduct harmonics as much as most folks think they will (but still will). It's when you get the metal up towards the upper end of it's hardness factors that it will. You could take a piece of certified pretreat 4150, and machine it. Then nitride it for a .015" shell, and come out way ahead. It's also quite a bit stronger than stainless steels we normally think of. You have to get into the exotic stuff (17PH4 rearc melt and 19 series) before you start to see similar strengths
* aluminum is interesting in that some forms do not carry harmonic waves much at all, but some will ring like a bell. But it also gives up ridgidity for the harmonics. Have always wondered why nobody has ever tried Duraluminum or Ticallium in it's place. The latter would be near perfect, and yet be light. Not as cheap to machine (tooling is very close guarded and not cheap), but at least twice as strong as well as being very rigid
* stainless steel is a lie. If it will harden, it will rust! It's the nature of the beast. But what stainless will do, is to take heat. Is not nearly as strong as chrome moly unless you get into the exotic stuff). Most of it has poor harmonics, and tends to change more when heated or cooled verses chrome moly. Stainless steels as a rule do not absorb lubricants as well as chrome moly or even aluminum.
gary
* a good piece of 4350 or something in that area out of a certified lot of steel will not conduct harmonics as much as most folks think they will (but still will). It's when you get the metal up towards the upper end of it's hardness factors that it will. You could take a piece of certified pretreat 4150, and machine it. Then nitride it for a .015" shell, and come out way ahead. It's also quite a bit stronger than stainless steels we normally think of. You have to get into the exotic stuff (17PH4 rearc melt and 19 series) before you start to see similar strengths
* aluminum is interesting in that some forms do not carry harmonic waves much at all, but some will ring like a bell. But it also gives up ridgidity for the harmonics. Have always wondered why nobody has ever tried Duraluminum or Ticallium in it's place. The latter would be near perfect, and yet be light. Not as cheap to machine (tooling is very close guarded and not cheap), but at least twice as strong as well as being very rigid
* stainless steel is a lie. If it will harden, it will rust! It's the nature of the beast. But what stainless will do, is to take heat. Is not nearly as strong as chrome moly unless you get into the exotic stuff). Most of it has poor harmonics, and tends to change more when heated or cooled verses chrome moly. Stainless steels as a rule do not absorb lubricants as well as chrome moly or even aluminum.
gary
4
4Mesh
Guest
Is the question being asked because you are thinking of making one? Every answer I can think of is subjective depending upon which conditions you apply before deciding. In current commercially available custom offerings, most have chosen stainless for it's ease of maintenance. Same goes for aluminum, just think if it as lightweight stainless. Aluminum actions have steel inside anyhow so you're really just talking about a shell. (one that doesn't rust)
Not much more to it than that. Choice of materials usually has to do with what the person wants to work with and what tools they have.
Not sure what you mean by expansion, what's to expand? Machining index, really not an issue. All the above are nearly the same when you consider there is steel in the aluminum action. Fatigue. Failure of todays metals is so rare I can't imagine anyone caring about this. Actions are so far overdesigned now, even the ones that fail are safe. Short of going out of your way to use the wrong materials, there's not much to worry about.
The tightest tolerances are probably achieved most easily in steel. 17-4 is really nice stuff to work with, but it is still stainless and tends to push tools a little. In the areas you machine, tolerances really never come into play. You work to a standard.
I would go with PH Stainless because it's easy to maintain, easy to machine, heat treats to it's hardest at 900F, and is tough enough to do the job. Regardless what action you get in what material, the bolts will usually be made from 4100 family steel, (tho there are customs made from tool steels and exotic stuff). When you get to 1.6", you are so far beyond the size needed for strength and safety, most of your questions no longer apply. As long as the center of the action isn't machined down to a potato chip, any of the above materials will be equally adequate.
Roger T
Member
When you get to 1.6", you are so far beyond the size needed for strength and safety, most of your questions no longer apply. As long as the center of the action isn't machined down to a potato chip, any of the above materials will be equally adequate.[/QUOTE]
4Mesh ,So what you're saying is that it comes down to looks ?
4Mesh ,So what you're saying is that it comes down to looks ?
Last edited:
Do you understand that Duralumin is an archaic commercial term for aluminum alloy dating to at least the early 1900's?
Exactly what is "Ticallium"? I'm guessing this is new slang in the same mode as "billet" being used for Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy amongst the biker and hot rod crowd; not sure, but that's the way to bet. There is no information about "Ticallium" in any reference that is usable for technical work.
The rest of your post shows more of your fuzzy understanding of materials, and I'll leave it at that.
As for answering the original question, the number 1 disadvantage for using aluminum in a rifle action is strength and stiffness. If the overall dimensions are important and minimum size is required, then aluminum is out. Cosmetic problems and durability against nicks and scratches over the long haul are another vote against an all aluminum rifle action, although that might be a minor or even non concern to some people.
Steels are great choice, starting with 4140. 4130 can be heat treated to the same levels as all the other alloys mentioned in this thread, but it probably should not be used in safety critical parts with thicknesses in the part greater than about 0.5 inches. There are many choices and the selection depends on the details of the design.
Last edited:
Boyd Allen
Active member
Stiller's aluminum actions are hard anodized.
S
squeakie
Guest
Duraluminum was an aircraft alloy that is known for it's rigidity (aluminum - magnesium), and was really brought to light with the wings on Japanese Zero fighters in WWII. Ticallium is a titanium/ aluminum alloy that was developed as a weapons grade material. But it later found it's way into race cars (F1). Tooling is a problem with the stuff and all of it comes out of the UK. You see the stuff on TV when you watch an F1 race. It dose not flex all over the place like aluminum, is much stronger, and is supposed to change less than aluminum over the heat scale. Now the use of ticallium is making it's way into the higher end automobiles (suspension pieces), and the aircraft industry. There's also a titanium/magnesium alloy out there that is extremely rigid. Machines well with out growth or shrinkage issues and very little flex. Have not done a lot of work with this one, and maybe a half dozen times at the most. Most apps are military. I might add that the titanium/mag alloy seems to be harmonicly dead as it's almost inpossible to set uo a vibration in it (a little better than high end boring bars)
gary
4
4Mesh
Guest
Well, maybe under some other name, but, if I highlight that word Ticallium and right click, search with google, the first 3 finds are videos from a user on Youtube by the handle of Ticallium, and the next find is this thread. From there on, most of the first page is more Youtube finds from that same user. So, to say this is a common term would be a stretch.
Oh, btw, the very first google result was in a foreign language, so, it's not real common elsewhere either.
Oh, btw, the very first google result was in a foreign language, so, it's not real common elsewhere either.
oops
anyway, far as I know AL is added to Ti in very small quantities, like adding carbon to steel, and acts only to modify the properties of the Ti. The most common form of Ti is alloyed with about 6% aluminum. But it's designated by a number sequence not a name.
Got a cite for this stuff squeakie? A "Ti/AL alloy" seems kinda' weird considering the melting points of the two metals are 2000 degrees apart.
al
anyway, far as I know AL is added to Ti in very small quantities, like adding carbon to steel, and acts only to modify the properties of the Ti. The most common form of Ti is alloyed with about 6% aluminum. But it's designated by a number sequence not a name.
Got a cite for this stuff squeakie? A "Ti/AL alloy" seems kinda' weird considering the melting points of the two metals are 2000 degrees apart.
al
Show us a source for duralumin. I don't think museums count. Anyway, if you were to do a little research, you will find that aluminum alloys all have virtually the same stiffness expressed as Young's Modulus; they're all 10 million lbf per square inch, more or less. I worked with one experimental type in the late 80's that had about 10% iron and that one ran to 11 million psi. You'll find that 2024 alloys are the modern, currently available, analog for duralumin.
I know you don't understand what Ti-6al-4V meant when I posted that, so I'll give you a little information about that, too. Ti-6Al-4V is a common heat treatable titanium alloy with 6% aluminum and 4% vanadium by weight, plus some trace elements. This alloy has been around for a few decades, too, and is indeed seeing more use in race cars where cost is virtually no issue at all. This material is roughly 60% more stiff than aluminum and its alloys, and its density is also ~60% greater. When heat treated to 160 ksi condition this alloy provides opportunity for weight savings, especially at elevated temperatures where aluminum has lost too much strength and stiffness to use effectively and the density of steel causes the parts to go over weight.
In case you're interested, or not, I've designed and sized a metric boat load of parts for high performance airplanes, and other stuff, from every useful alloy of aluminum, titanium, steel, and nickel.
The claim about vibration in aluminum or titanium alloys is simply silly, particularly in the experience you cite. Most likely what you perceive as dampening comes about from hystersis in the joints, or designed in stiffness by the tool designer, but it's certainly not because these metallic alloys are "dead". 'tain't so.
I'm going to check with one of my race mechanic friends to find out whether he's hearing "ticallium", "ticaluminum" or "ticalumin" around the tracks and shops. Hopefully he'll start a campaign to get it stopped. My experience searching the internetz turned up the same results as above. If I get some time tomorrow and remember, I'll search a technical resource or two that will turn it up, if there is anything to find.
I found a description for "ticalium". This is a metal matrix composite of carbide fibers in aluminum. I have some experience with these materials, too, although I worked on a titanium matrix composite for the MDC NASP vehicle. There's hardly a worse choice for a rifle action, or just any other part in a firearm. In fact, the reason you won't see it in common use in any product is not only due to its cost, but also its anisotropic material properties as we've used in the past. However, from what I'm reading about the Adal product, I have to wonder if it is a short fiber product as it appears they are casting the stock. Glas filled Nylon 6-6 would be an analog amongst common plastics we use. I would be interested to learn more about this material, but I don't plan to tell a designer to use any just yet; we'll just say I'm skeptical about Adal's claims, and that's okay, they're in good company, preceded by a long line of makers of marginal stock materials with over sold claims. The aluminum alloy with iron I mentioned above is one such material. The $15k per pound titanium matrix/carbide fiber metal matrix composite I mentioned above is another, except it's defects were egregious (outside its obscene cost).
Adal Group is (was) headquartered in New York and appears to have gone out of business in 2006. The world did not beat down their doors to buy their mouse trap.
Last edited:
T
TRA
Guest
Wouldn't the best action be no action.
While you are talking about unobtanium, have any of you worked with or seen any "Baked Aluminum"
While you are talking about unobtanium, have any of you worked with or seen any "Baked Aluminum"
4
4Mesh
Guest
Baked aluminum?
Sure,
When I make baby back ribs, I use an aluminum pan to bake them in for 2:50 before grilling them. Very common stuff. I don't like it for cakes though cause it conducts too well and tends to put a crust on the cake.
Sure,
When I make baby back ribs, I use an aluminum pan to bake them in for 2:50 before grilling them. Very common stuff. I don't like it for cakes though cause it conducts too well and tends to put a crust on the cake.
S
squeakie
Guest
4
4Mesh
Guest
Names for a product can get butchered pretty well out in the working world. My bet is that Squeakie heard a slang name for an alloy and remembered it, or something like that. It's amazing what happens when some marketing jackass get's ahold of an idea that they think will sell something. Let's call it "xyz123" and the public will think they're in hog heaven.
What comes to my mind is maybe, some product was made with alum that they wanted to differentiate one part from another to sell it's super duper properties, and they dreamt up some word for their super part. Wouldn't surprise me a bit. Sorta like, the rest of us call it 7075 and these folks just weren't satisfied with that.
Microsoft is the best example of this I can think of. They have an entire division with teams of people who's purpose in life is to dream up new words for the same ole sh!!!t. Back in the day, a file was a file. A directory was a directory. This was standard across PC's, IBM's, Spark's, Sun, it just mattered not, they were all happy to call a directory a directory. But no, now with windows, they are folders. Interesting that if you go to the command prompt, you still type in DIR (Directory!) to see what's there. But it's not a directory any more, it's a "Folder!" ewwww, ahhh. Yes, I'm impressed. Win3.1's Internet mail and news became "Outlook Express" in win 95, and it changed to something else in Vista, now in win 7 it's called MSN Live someth'n or other. In case anyone hadn't noticed, it's the same program. They just give it a new fancy name so you'll pay for it again. They also had to loose the "Outlook" moniker cause when you bought "Office Pro" they didn't want you to think you were paying extra for an overblown version of the free mail client (even tho that's exactly what you are doing). names, names, names.
Wait till Pennsylvania Steel gets bought up by someone else. What will we call Flexor then? I'm already at a loss as to how I can use the Carpenters matched steel charts, now that Carperter's isn't in business any more.
What comes to my mind is maybe, some product was made with alum that they wanted to differentiate one part from another to sell it's super duper properties, and they dreamt up some word for their super part. Wouldn't surprise me a bit. Sorta like, the rest of us call it 7075 and these folks just weren't satisfied with that.
Microsoft is the best example of this I can think of. They have an entire division with teams of people who's purpose in life is to dream up new words for the same ole sh!!!t. Back in the day, a file was a file. A directory was a directory. This was standard across PC's, IBM's, Spark's, Sun, it just mattered not, they were all happy to call a directory a directory. But no, now with windows, they are folders. Interesting that if you go to the command prompt, you still type in DIR (Directory!) to see what's there. But it's not a directory any more, it's a "Folder!" ewwww, ahhh. Yes, I'm impressed. Win3.1's Internet mail and news became "Outlook Express" in win 95, and it changed to something else in Vista, now in win 7 it's called MSN Live someth'n or other. In case anyone hadn't noticed, it's the same program. They just give it a new fancy name so you'll pay for it again. They also had to loose the "Outlook" moniker cause when you bought "Office Pro" they didn't want you to think you were paying extra for an overblown version of the free mail client (even tho that's exactly what you are doing). names, names, names.
Wait till Pennsylvania Steel gets bought up by someone else. What will we call Flexor then? I'm already at a loss as to how I can use the Carpenters matched steel charts, now that Carperter's isn't in business any more.
You've completely lost me now. I started posting in this thread due to one person's complete and total ignorance about the topic at hand, starting with posting about using a material that hasn't been in commercial production since before WWII, and another material that he couldn't accurately identify that isn't available because the company holding the patents has been out of business since 2006. And then the he wants to argue about a topic of which he knows not even the most fundamental facts.
I'm not trying to reinvent anything, improve anything, find a problem, or an invent an issue. So far all you've done is your best to bash engineers, who we all know couldn't design themselves out of a paper bag, or solve a problem in the shop, and create more problems than they solve. I don't know if the motivation is jealousy, ignorance, or simply wadded panties and sand in your mangina. It doesn't matter, either, your lack of contribution makes your opinion not relevent to the discussion.
The original poster started this thread looking for some information about why one material would be chosen over another. There are good reasons for those choices, some were even pointed out on the first page. They don't offer equal advantages or disadvantages, they're different and should be chosen to exploit their strengths. The fact that a job can be done with a particular material doesn't mean it's a good choice; I'm sure I could size up an aluminum or steel action from annealed stock that would function okay, but the whole damn gun would have weird dimensions in order to accomdate the poor choice of material. On the other hand, a person that knows what he's doing can strike off on a side path to investigate an interesting possibility without being forced to follow the crowd stuck on a path already broken for them, probably by an engineer in conjunction with a shop.
Not one single person posting in this thread made a comment about deficiencies of current materials commonly used in actions. Not one. As for the Ticalium, I am the only person posting here that tracked it down. The person that brought it up couldn't spell it correctly so the rest of us could get more information, but he was damned well going to insist it has to be good for guns if it is good for race cars. Well, a feller had better be able to argue and defend his position if he's going to make claims like that, and he couldn't beyond "whatever".
So, I'm still waiting too see if you will offer anything useful to the discussion.
Last edited:
T
TRA
Guest
aero
Just what are you going to offer this discussion, just here to trash talk those of us that are not carrying a card.
BTW, aero, is the "e" for engineer, or for esq? Pray tell us it's not both. That's all the rage today.
SSSSOOOOOOOOO, whats the latest bling-bling material to build a BR action .....Besure to supply supporting documents.
Be careful ...your mouth is starting to overload your ass, your starting with your insulting and personal attacks. My capabilities and resources may startle you. You have no idea what I can produce, now with you, we have a fairly sufficient overview.
Just what are you going to offer this discussion, just here to trash talk those of us that are not carrying a card.
BTW, aero, is the "e" for engineer, or for esq? Pray tell us it's not both. That's all the rage today.
SSSSOOOOOOOOO, whats the latest bling-bling material to build a BR action .....Besure to supply supporting documents.