Blueprinted actions

[DrMike]

Kurt,

The Defiance actions are excellent and serve as the basis for some great accuracy.

 

[BK]

Thanks, Mike.

I'm pretty well decided on action manufacturer, but the guy putting it together is where I'm finding stumbling blocks. If I can find a 'smith, then we can discuss what he likes to see as far as which tang option he prefers and several other choices. I've never done it before, so I have no clue.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I always have wondered about the context of "Blueprinting" an action, which is an old hot rodder term. Being an engineer, I always think in terms of dimensional control and true position tolerancing. For me, before you have any tangible dimensional control tolerance of a rifle's critical tolerances for SAAMI specs, concentricity, parallelness, interface contact specs and/or perpendicularity. This means that you have to establish some true position tolerance for action and barrel components which is based on SAAMI specifications and some practical tolerance, such as [0.003 TP (TIR)] on all critical dimensions. Otherwise, I am not sure what "blueprinting" means exactly when there are no precision limits defined.

An example would be thread engagement. Is it 25% thread engagement or 75%? This is an order of magnitude difference. Controlling major and minor thread diameter within .003 TIR for flatness and concentricity means something. "Make them fit tight", does not mean much of anything. To me "blueprinting" means starting with the drawing of the component and tightening tolerances to eliminate variability and tolerance variability within some defined specification. Without this product specification or statement of work about what it is that you are getting, it is hard to justify just giving someone a blank check to "blueprint" the rifle. Just thinking out loud.

 

[Guy Miner]

In addition to "blueprinted" the terms "squared" or "trued" are often used. From what I know, it's all the same job - just improving the production action. I've only had one rifle trued up - my short-action Rem 700. It's a honey.

Interesting about some benchrest rifles - they're set up so that the shooter can actually swap barrels By Hand, at the range! Some guys will have barrels chambered for various cartridges, and will swap them during the match, using what's best described as a "wrist snap" to snug the barrel down.

Now, I'm not saying I'd want a hunting rifle set up that way, or my hard-use .308 either, but it sure was interesting to me when I learned that little tidbit from some of my BR shooting buddies.

Guy

 

[Ridge_Runner]

yep blueprinting use to be a catchphrase, now its true and accurize, from what I gather accurizing a 700 consists of
1) single point cutting the receiver threads
2) cutting the bolt face square
3) cutting the receiver face square
4) squaring the receiver and bolt lugs
5) lapping the lugs
and most of the time
6) surface grinding the recoil lug
I have a detailed 6 page explanion of the hows and whys of trueing a rem 700 sent to me by APS, that is quite detailed.
RR

 

[Antelope_Sniper]

A traditional blueprinting consists of three things.
Squaring the front of the receiver.
Squaring and lapping the lugs.
Squaring the bolt face.

There is alot more that can be done as part of an "accuracy package".

 

[Oldtrader3]

I understand what is entailed in truing an action. However without a target dimensional envelope and an understanding of True Position tolerancing goals and being able to define not only what is reasonably achievable, possible within reasonable costs and also what is required to reach a certain total tolerancing control standard with the existing parts involved, you could spend more money for "goodness" and not necessarily achieve any significant and tangible improvement in performance on an existing barreled action.

For these reasons, it is my opinion that it is cheaper, more easily attainable and has a higher predictable outcome to build a blueprinted action from scratch, with defined tolerancing relationships, rather than trying to correct one that is already built to sloppy high volume production tolerances, fit-up, threading and with true position issues. In other words, you could spend more money on straightening out what you have than building it correctly from scratch in the first place.

 

[Guy Miner]

I tend to agree Oldtrader - and if I was starting over with a precision rifle build, I'd likely start with one of the custom actions.

 

[Ridge_Runner]

couple quotes from APS in the article sent me by kirby allen the owner on reciever accurizing

The rem 700 is a very desirable action because it is extremely strong, designed extremely well for extreme accurizingand it offers the fastest lock time of any factory action.

A properly accurized Remington 700 will stand with any match grade action offered today as long as it is used within its design limits

The final product, a perfectly accurized Remington 700 magnum action ready to be the building platform for a big game rifle capable of placing three rounds inside 1" at 500 yards. Truly a piece of Art

RR

 

[Ridge_Runner]

ok, stiller predator is 0ver a grand?
you buy a new 700 for 500.00, 250.00 to accurize it, ya have the same action as the stiller, except you also have a functional trigger and bottom metal for 750.00, I use 700's cause its what I have on hand, when I run out of them I might buy a custom.
RR

 

[usmc 89]

couple quotes from APS in the article sent me by kirby allen the owner on reciever accurizing

The rem 700 is a very desirable action because it is extremely strong, designed extremely well for extreme accurizingand it offers the fastest lock time of any factory action.

A properly accurized Remington 700 will stand with any match grade action offered today as long as it is used within its design limits

The final product, a perfectly accurized Remington 700 magnum action ready to be the building platform for a big game rifle capable of placing three rounds inside 1" at 500 yards. Truly a piece of Art

RR

i will agree with most of his quotes, the middle one however is a little ambiguous.

 

[wildgene]

couple quotes from APS in the article sent me by kirby allen the owner on reciever accurizing

The rem 700 is a very desirable action because it is extremely strong, designed extremely well for extreme accurizingand it offers the fastest lock time of any factory action.

A properly accurized Remington 700 will stand with any match grade action offered today as long as it is used within its design limits

The final product, a perfectly accurized Remington 700 magnum action ready to be the building platform for a big game rifle capable of placing three rounds inside 1" at 500 yards. Truly a piece of Art

RR

i will agree with most of his quotes, the middle one however is a little ambiguous.

...& I find the last one to be just a hair optimistic...

 

[Ridge_Runner]

i will agree with most of his quotes, the middle one however is a little ambiguous.

...& I find the last one to be just a hair optimistic...[/quote]
shots 4,5,and 6 from a lilja barreled 700 with the action trued by kirby allen

2 shots testing scope repeatability from that rifle at 660 yards

and
a 3 shot group at a lazered 752 yards from a ray romain built rem 700

I've messed with alot of rifles, the one built by kirby is absolutely the least temperamental, best shooting rifle I ever had in my hands, thought it was luck of the draw but, I've talked to the owners of at least 30 different APS rifles, they're results are the same as mine.


so how much truer is a bat or borden than a 700 tricked out by a smith who knows what he's doing?
RR

 

[usmc 89]

i will try to answer that with a question, how many times do you see a remington action in the money at a major top level benchrest match? remington actions are excellent but a product is only as good as the sum of its parts. if your comparing a reworked mass produced action to a piece of gear that is engineered for accuracy from the ground up who has the advantage? yes remington actions can be made to shoot incredible but if you had money on the line for a twenty five shot aggregate not a three shot group what would you pick?

 

[Desert Fox]

Bat benchrest action is in a class by itself. You can't compare it with a re-worked Remington Action. I think what Kirby Allen of APS was comparing to here was with any custom Remington clone action like the Stiller TAC 30, Lawton 7000, Surgeon 591, Pierce etc. etc.

Look, the only advantage custom action listed above had over the Remington action is refine machining and tight tolerance, although there are few custom out there that are not made well at all. (My smith told me which custom action to avoid). Smith like Greg Tannel and Nathan Dagley will fully accurized a Remington action and it will be just as good if not better than any of the clone listed above. It will set you back $450 but you'll have an excellent platform.

 

[highcotton]

i will agree with most of his quotes, the middle one however is a little ambiguous.

...& I find the last one to be just a hair optimistic...

shots 4,5,and 6 from a lilja barreled 700 with the action trued by kirby allen

2 shots testing scope repeatability from that rifle at 660 yards

and
a 3 shot group at a lazered 752 yards from a ray romain built rem 700

I've messed with alot of rifles, the one built by kirby is absolutely the least temperamental, best shooting rifle I ever had in my hands, thought it was luck of the draw but, I've talked to the owners of at least 30 different APS rifles, they're results are the same as mine.


so how much truer is a bat or borden than a 700 tricked out by a smith who knows what he's doing?
RR[/quote]

RR- Is that a 7mm AM? I have a .270 Kirby built on a Borden action- I will have to agree, his rifle will without a doubt outshoot the shooter..........

 

[Ridge_Runner]

i will agree with most of his quotes, the middle one however is a little ambiguous.

...& I find the last one to be just a hair optimistic...

shots 4,5,and 6 from a lilja barreled 700 with the action trued by kirby allen

2 shots testing scope repeatability from that rifle at 660 yards

and
a 3 shot group at a lazered 752 yards from a ray romain built rem 700

I've messed with alot of rifles, the one built by kirby is absolutely the least temperamental, best shooting rifle I ever had in my hands, thought it was luck of the draw but, I've talked to the owners of at least 30 different APS rifles, they're results are the same as mine.


so how much truer is a bat or borden than a 700 tricked out by a smith who knows what he's doing?
RR

RR- Is that a 7mm AM? I have a .270 Kirby built on a Borden action- I will have to agree, his rifle will without a doubt outshoot the shooter..........[/quote]
Yes it is.
RR

 

[usmc 89]

Bat benchrest action is in a class by itself. You can't compare it with a re-worked Remington Action. I think what Kirby Allen of APS was comparing to here was with any custom Remington clone action like the Stiller TAC 30, Lawton 7000, Surgeon 591, Pierce etc. etc.

Look, the only advantage custom action listed above had over the Remington action is refine machining and tight tolerance, although there are few custom out there that are not made well at all. (My smith told me which custom action to avoid). Smith like Greg Tannel and Nathan Dagley will fully accurized a Remington action and it will be just as good if not better than any of the clone listed above. It will set you back $450 but you'll have an excellent platform.

which one did he advise to saty clear of?

 

[Desert Fox]

which one did he advise to saty clear of?

Jim Gruning told me that Surgeon is overated. Worst machining he'd ever seen. Lawton is junk as far as his concern. He swore by Barnard, Bat, Nesika and for great value, the Stiller. I valued Jims opinion. He is not just an ordinary smith. He carry his journeyman aerospace machinest certification by heart. He is the only smith I know that own an air gauge to check barrel bore uniformity. An action that arrived at his shop, whether custom or not will be checked thoroughly and run through a gamut of measuring and cross checking before he start working on them.

 

[Oldtrader3]

Sounds like someone who knows his business to me!