Re: The "new and improved" blueprint process is we
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lw8</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Chad,
What all do you feel is needed to properly blueprint a 700?
Guessing from the pics that you don't square the bolt face? What about the lugs and lug abuttments? </div></div>
Edit-(in response to the ? below)
Here's what's done:
Face the receiver
Helical bore the new thread ID
Cleanup pass across lug abutments
Time to the existing thread and thread mill the new thread pitch to 1.085"/16
Gauge threads while on the fixture to ensure tolerance and remachine if required. (usually only the first one or two require a 2nd pass. After the machine "thaws out" a bit it runs to the numbers.
truncate/counterbore the lead thread to make it easier for the G/S fitting the barrel
drill a pair of holes for the recoil lug (that I include as part of the job)
As far as bolt work goes:
I've done this work on more than a few M700's over the last two years. In every instance when lapping in the lugs on the bolt, the surfaces achieved full contact in about 5 minutes. The bluing rubs off and all four surfaces have a nice dull gray finish.
This tells me the lugs are pretty darn straight to begin with.
If we look at the manufacturing process of how a bolt is made, its supportive of what the lapping op tells us. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts Remington machines the bolt prior to soldering the handle. Just makes sense from a manufacturing standpoint. A lathe would have to be grossly worn out/totally incompetent operator in order to screw this up.
Lets look at a crown on a barrel for instance. Many, many smiths machine crowns 90* to the bore. It's convenient and simple with no elaborate setups required. If it'll work there, then it should stand to reason it'll work on bolt lugs. As stated, the proof is in the lapping operation.
One must remember that whenever you remove material from a lug surface, the primary extraction of the action is affected. It becomes a cascading effect. Fire control timing, sear engagement (in relation to the lugs), and shroud location is all affected. One can't rob Peter and pay Paul with this.
My attempt here is to offer the most features with the smallest impact on the residual function. .005" is removed from the lug abutments. That's as far as it goes. The receiver face to lug abutment distance of 1.15" is preserved so the tennon dimensioning is maintained. (aside from the threads of course)
Bolt faces:
The bolt face and the lugs are surely machined in the same operation at Remington. Again I have to question the argument that they screw this up. I'd have to really question how a G/S goes about proving that its in fact out of square to the bore. Short of a surface plate, gauge blocks, and a height stand I don't see the inspection process being valid. (all of which I have) Bear in mind that with the tolerances between the bolt body/receiver bore being what it is in most 700's, you can true this stuff all you want (lugs/bolt face) and it won't amount to a hill of beans the moment you rotate the bolt into battery. The ejection side lug is doing all the work until the trigger breaks.
It's certainly within my powers to correct all this, however I'd have to sell blueprinted actions for $1,200 in order to do it. The setups involved are virtually identical to what a custom action manufacturer would use.
I think we'd all agree if I tried that all you'd hear around here is crickets chirping. Nobody would buy one.
