Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24

Thread: Barrel torque

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,403
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    my 300 wsm is 125, my 300 wm was 150
    ya got's that one backwards baas..... recoil impulse, bolt thrust and radial or hoop stress WSM>WM

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    674
    well i actually just backed up from my early numbers.
    the 300 wm was early and i THINK 150 was more than enough...so only did 125 on the wsm. still think it is ok.

    yes ??

    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    ya got's that one backwards baas..... recoil impulse, bolt thrust and radial or hoop stress WSM>WM

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,403
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    as AL points out different torque for different bbl dia and cartridge.
    we put a 6ppc on at 75 and almost could not get it off 3 months latter.
    case of well cut threads and a square face.
    my 300 wsm is 125, my 300 wm was 150, 150 on my 338 edge
    but 50 only works on small lite stuff
    THIS part....


    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    ......we put a 6ppc on at 75 and almost could not get it off 3 months latter....
    HOKAyyyyy, let's examine this statement for a bit..... taking it at face value. If you "almost could not get it off" then it must have tightened since you easily installed it at 75ftlb.


    right??


    I submit that this is TRUE, and that the barrel tightened up. I've put many a barrel on hand-tight and later it's taken wrenching effort to remove. I've slipped and scarred barrels this way before cuz too lazy to do it up right in the vise w/wrench....so I think this PPC bbl tightened up.

    For it to tighten up it must MOVE...


    right??


    Now, I could go on and on here but I've been accused me, of late, of horseflogging, pedagoguing and pernicious, persistent pettifogging


    so


    I


    won't

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,403
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    well i actually just backed up from my early numbers.
    the 300 wm was early and i THINK 150 was more than enough...so only did 125 on the wsm. still think it is ok.

    yes ??
    I stick with 150 cuz "smarter people than me" and all that jazz.....

    That said, I build lightweight 338's with huge phallic knobs present at the end of limber buggy-whip barrels and these bad boys flop like a trout on the tar'droad, and for almost as long....hence my predilection for, nay obsession with 1.350 shankage.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    29
    I'm neither very experienced at barrel changing nor an expert in metallurgy, but I talked to Kelby regarding torquing the barrel for a Panda action, and told 100ft LBS.
    However, I can read, and Kelby has instructions for torquing his barrels. The instructions say 100 Ft LBS, and use bearing grease. It also says not to use anti-seize.

    The fact it says not use anti-seize is the reason I called. I work with stainless a lot and it sounded odd to not use it.
    I'll take his word.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,403
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsplce View Post
    I'm neither very experienced at barrel changing nor an expert in metallurgy, but I talked to Kelby regarding torquing the barrel for a Panda action, and told 100ft LBS.
    However, I can read, and Kelby has instructions for torquing his barrels. The instructions say 100 Ft LBS, and use bearing grease. It also says not to use anti-seize.

    The fact it says not use anti-seize is the reason I called. I work with stainless a lot and it sounded odd to not use it.
    I'll take his word.
    typically anti-seize has big hunks of ground up metal in it. Plays hell with the abutting surfaces

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    11,403
    perhaps it also needs to be said that Pandas are a class unto themselves.... I would never run over 100ftlb on a Panda and never even consider an outside wrench. I once built a big magnum on a LH Kodiak and I went to absurd lengths in my quest to ensure lockup of the barrel joint. This is not to knock Ralph's design but I will never again do a Kodiak and all Pandas I build will be glue-ins. I have a screwed Panda on a 17lb setup and I've milled crosshatched grooves all over the bottom and rebated the screw holes.... and my next step is to install studs

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Oriental, NC
    Posts
    1,015
    I'm pretty sure the threaded inserts in Kelbly actions are CM. Kind of negates the need for anti seize. Once I started making my threads a little on the loose side I never had another problem with SS on SS. I use about 80 ft/lbs for 1.0625 threads

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Augusta, Maine & Palm Coast, Fl
    Posts
    6,475

    I used 100 for years

    on all the 30 Cal barrels I used and never had an issue with stuck barrels. I once bought a rifle that had a copper type antiseize, it looked like, on the threads and I liked that, I must say. I have had issues with the regular antizeize drying out in the past or that is t say, it made me uneasy but it prolly was Ok. I used a specific torque simply because I never believe "snapping" them no was adequate and wanted a Benchmark and or standard to rely on so that I knew-----.

    Stiller posted on here a specific torque he had researched and said he had been able to use that value to take flyers out of some rifles. To me, that would seem a very good reason to always torque.

    Pete

Posting Permissions

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