Al's Perfect LR BR action???

[Louis.J]

All though a 100lbs + of Torque seems to be allot. Lug nuts on a typical car is only around 90lbs. So possibly not as much as one might think like I too used to also believe. This is what they use at your typical tire stores while using their air impact wrenches.

[alinwa]

All though a 100lbs + of Torque seems to be allot. Lug nuts on a typical car is only around 90lbs. So possibly not as much as one might think like I too used to also believe. This is what they use at your typical tire stores while using their air impact wrenches.

lugs on a typical car are 7/16 mild steel and should only be tightened to a lubricated 25-30ftlb. Pickemup trucks maybe 1/2" and 50-ish....... they'll friggin TWIST OFF at 150ftlb....BTST the lugs on my little 3500HD pickup trucks are often tightened to around 200ft lb and on my mid-sized 24ft box vans with their "huge" 7/8 lugs I'll often see 600ftlb from the tire stores although we only set them to a lubricated 200.

Of course none of this is relevant in any way to the problem of countering the unseating force generated by 80,000psi on a 1" threaded joint. Let me just say that engineers, Engineers and even physicists have told me to use 150ftlb, a truly paltry force on a properly shouldered 1" bolt. That while it's far from actually seating the abutting shoulders as would be done in a machine assembly, the 150lb on a properly lubricated joint will resist the minor disruption caused by a firing cycle.

I lissen to folks whose specialized education allows them to analyze problems in their fields well. I didn't say "folks smarter than you and I" because they're not, just that they specialize. I get my information on gardening from my sister the hippy, I get my information on blowing sh!t up from my son the chemical/mechanical engineer and pyro.... and I get my information on threaded gunbarrel joints from a group of people who have a capital 'E' Engineer in their title.

And right now I think that 150ftlb is on the marginal side for some of my chamberings generating 6,000-8,000fpe...... 4 tons of heffalump banging on a threaded joint supporting 8lb of displaced weight on either side??? that joint takes a beating.

[Al Nyhus]

Engineers and even physicists have told me to use 150ftlb, a truly paltry force on a properly shouldered 1" bolt. That while it's far from actually seating the abutting shoulders as would be done in a machine assembly, the 150lb on a properly lubricated joint will resist the minor disruption caused by a firing cycle.

I'm interested in learning how it's been proven that the action face/barrel shoulder interface moves during firing.

Good shootin'. -Al

[glp]

[QUOTE=Butch Lambert;847102]

davidson from brownells
3/4" drive flat steel bar

om a side note....don't get snippy..i think you need to get better at the thread and shoulder. while i chamber ok, my local be 'smith is much better at the whole package.
his thread/shoulder lock up is amazing
just sayin' something to look at.

good point! I had a barrel done maybe 15 years ago, that shot great then went to ell. I setup to pull it and the action just fell off the barrel, no wrench torque needed. Come to find out the smith pulled the threading tool out just a bit too soon and left an unthreaded portion between the end of the thread and the barrel shoulder. That was just long and wide enough to prevent positive lockup of the barrel to action face, despite it seeming it was. That unthreaded part was cut out and the Lilja went on to be one of the two best barrels I ever had. The devil is in the details isn't it?



And you are??

[alinwa]

I'm interested in learning how it's been proven that the action face/barrel shoulder interface moves during firing.

Good shootin'. -Al

I don't know that it jhas been

[jackie schmidt]

Heck, we torque Big Block Chevy Main Bolts to 110 pounds feet, and they are just 1/2 inch.

I have one of the original Kelbly rear entry wrenches for a Panda/Remington and I see no reason at all why you could not put 150 pounds feet on it.

Am I missing something here?

[alinwa]

Heck, we torque Big Block Chevy Main Bolts to 110 pounds feet, and they are just 1/2 inch.

yup, and the hotrodder's phrase for that is "TTY" which DOES NOT mean "Throw iT awaY"..... it means "Torque To Yield"

Which means you use it once, stretch it to almost break



and then throw it away




LOL

I have one of the original Kelbly rear entry wrenches for a Panda/Remington and I see no reason at all why you could not put 150 pounds feet on it.

Am I missing something here?

I tried to get one, from James hissownself and he said the guy who made them has passed on.

And again, for PPC's it ain't a thing!!! I use rear wrenches too, got a whole bunch of them. But I have pretty much quit putting bigger cases into my glue-ins


On that note I've got a glue-in done yrs ago by one of the finest 'smiths on the planet.... done before I started doing my own work, and I once made the mistake of putting one of those silly flat wrenches in....... To remove a barrel that HE, THE GUNSMITH HAD INSTALLED because the local gunsmith couldn't remove the barrel with his equipment. I started wounding 'er up (scope off) until she went 'pip-pip-krkkk' and I STOPPED. I called the gunsmith who had built it. He sent me an action wrench (my 3rd? 5th??)..... We got 'er off... And I believe that wrench to be made by the feller who died a few years back........of course I still have it.......

and to this day I wonder just WHEN that stock's gonna' come right off in my hand.

I carry the gun different.

And I quit with the glue-ins.

And my remaining 4 steel glue-ins will become screw-ins once they discombobulate





is all's I'm sayin'


And Panda's don't count. A glued-in Panda driving a BR/PPC case is as close as one can hope to get on this earth to having a completely foolproof and absolutely accurate rifle.

[alinwa]

I finally manned up and tooled up and stepped up and am now set up to drill/ream my own fitted pins. Not WELL, but well enough for individual lockups per action.

It was a convo with Ian Kelbly got me to it when I asked him if they'd add pins to an existing setup he said "I'd rather not after the action's been nitrided"

So of course I hadda' go see just how hard it is....and it is..... I'll never do it for a customer.

But at least I can salvage some of my experimental whorehorses

And consider an un-pinned action for future.

[rsmithsr]

just got to break the surface..but it is tuff.

I finally manned up and tooled up and stepped up and am now set up to drill/ream my own fitted pins. Not WELL, but well enough for individual lockups per action.

It was a convo with Ian Kelbly got me to it when I asked him if they'd add pins to an existing setup he said "I'd rather not after the action's been nitrided"

So of course I hadda' go see just how hard it is....and it is..... I'll never do it for a customer.

But at least I can salvage some of my experimental whorehorses

And consider an un-pinned action for future.

[Al Nyhus]

Torqueing an 1.25 while it's not visible, also resets sometimes...... and always will show advancement over several barrel changes which simply stated proves deformation empirically.

I'm not a precision machinist but to see advancement on repeated barrel changes with 1.250 shoulder barrels at 150 lbs/ft of torque, something else must be going on....thread fit, action face to barrel fit, lubrication type or a combination of these.

Checking the breakaway lbs./ft. numbers after shooting a barrelled action for a while and comparing it to the assembled lbs./ft. number can also be revealing.

Good shootin'. -Al

[alinwa]

I'm not a precision machinist but to see advancement on repeated barrel changes with 1.250 shoulder barrels at 150 lbs/ft of torque, something else must be going on....thread fit, action face to barrel fit, lubrication type or a combination of these.

Checking the breakaway lbs./ft. numbers after shooting a barrelled action for a while and comparing it to the assembled lbs./ft. number can also be revealing.

Good shootin'. -Al

I mark all my setups using a horizontal scribe so I can easily spot even infinitesimal advancement.

[Al Nyhus]

I mark all my setups using a horizontal scribe so I can easily spot even infinitesimal advancement.

Same here. The question is...does it make a difference?

Good shootin'. -Al

[alinwa]

Same here. The question is...does it make a difference?

Good shootin'. -Al

It does for me.

IME for typical 100/200yd BR setups it's moot. A 6PPC or 30BR with only a .2 shouldering surface (.100 per side) torqued to 75ftlb seems to be locked up. and if it does advance over time it'll be only very little and doesn't seem to affect accuracy. I have tried torque these 1.2 barrel shank setups to over 100lb and found them to deform, always.

A larger round, say .308 sized even running large pressures (small primer Lapua Palma cases) is adequately fixed by similar poundage.....with an 1.250 shank

But when doing the larger 300WSM on a Heavy 600/1000yd gun and especially with a longer 28"-30" bbl with a tuning knob out on the end I'm uncomfortable even with an 1.250 shank diameter and for the big hunting rifles and really long-range stuff like my 65lb unlimited Heavy, and for big hunting rifles with 404 Jeffery and larger chamber dimensions. I've also worked with larger cases on my 65lb gun..... and it's currently "broken" in that I can't get it to really shoot well. I've been special ordering 1.350 shanked blanks for about 5 yrs for hunting rifles in these big chamberings and have found it to be a key to accuracy. When I can make a .250moa hunting rifle and yet my big steel-mounted Heavy gun fights to make quarter inch groups it's embarrassing! The big gun will drop little bullets into one little hole but get up to the long-range VLD's and I've got hunting rifles that'll beat it......

AND, I time or index my barrels on the big stuff as I believe it dramatically affects the gun's recoil characteristics, and it's tuning characteristics. Any change or advancement changes the tune. ( IN MY OPINION )

This is exactly what got me going on the "3D Tuner" stuff

This is why I've prefaced this thread, asked the question regarding BIG rounds. I've spent the last 6-8yrs making BIG field stuff to BR specs..... not MACHINING standards, IMO quality machining is a must..... but making stuff that acts and shoots like BR stuff while making 3 times the energy. Folks always talk about tuning hunting guns but actually getting a large elk rifle to roundhole is very rare.

I've used this analogy before and I'll use it again.... when we started catching BIG fish, we had to learn all new knots and techniques. IMO these big rounds require higher torque values and larger abutting surfaces,

IMO PPC/BR stuff is pretty well established science, and even up to and including the 6X47 or CM/308 sized stuff is easy. And a lighter 16-17lb 300WSM Light 600yd gun is pretty easy to make solid and tight. Where I'm running into problems is in the heavy steel-mounted 300WSM Heavy gun, and in making a 1000yd 338 to shoot the 300 OTM's. A Light 300WSM with 230's-240's will hammer the peewaddy out of you and a Heavy gun has trouble getting out of the way..... a 300 grain OTM trying to displace 65lb of gun humps the system up like a monkey buckin' a football....which tends to shake stuff aroung, like the barrel joint.

[Pete Wass]

who is a Mechanical engineer gave formulas for torque on here and should be available with a search. And there is always Machinery's Handbook or now the Engineers Black book. At this point in the evolution of guns in general, every nuance of torque no doubt has been solved by sound engineering principals, not feelings.

Pete

[Al Nyhus]

..... a 300 grain OTM trying to displace 65lb of gun humps the system up like a monkey buckin' a football....which tends to shake stuff around, like the barrel joint.

I certainly can see that scenario. As a gun moves in recoil, it's dissipating energy. When the gun weight is so high that it barely moves, the entire gun...every component...is absorbing the energy. It's no surprise that stuff gets broken and/or moves.

Good shootin'. -Al