Flat-back vs round receiver- any accuracy difference?

[mattri]

Know this has been covered but I can't find it.

Is there any accuracy difference between a flat back vs a round receiver?

If one were to use the same barrel, stock, optics etc does either have an advantage?

Is either known for being more or less out of square etc?

[Blitzfike]

I own and shoot both. The flat back really has no bearing (pun intended) on how tightly the bolt lugs lock up in the receiver. If you examine the target single shot actions, they are much stiffer than a conventional receiver and that is supposed to make them more accurate. I can see where if you had a very heavy scope, there might be a little more flex on the flat back receiver than on the round, but I have not experienced any difference in accuracy with mine. If there is any difference in accuracy between the flat and round back receivers, it is less than that introduced by my old shaky body. That is just my opinion.. Blitzfike

[skoger]

The older savage flat backs were more true, less warpage than the Stainless especially during heat treat. I have several built on them, shoot as good as any action. I faced mine off true, and I know some full time custom smiths who prefer them for builds. I would not hesitate to use them. I have a factory .270, that I have had a .243, 6.5x284, 30/06 all on and they all fit and fed and shot fine on this receiver.

[stomp442]

I have a flat back with a cbi 6.5-284 barrel on it that may be my most accurate build.

[dcloco]

I search for the 110 flat back actions. Especially the single shot actions in this variety.

As another stated, less warpage and somebody has already broken in the action for you. :)

Another advantage, not often mentioned, if you need 10, 20, 30, 40, or xx MOA, it is easy with these actions - just a flat shim...and away you go.

[thomae]

The older savage flat backs were more true, less warpage...
Is this a documented fact or a personal opinion?


I can see where if you had a very heavy scope, there might be a little more flex on the flat back receiver than on the round, I am not sure I understand the cause and effect relationship implied in the above statement. I'd be interested in further elaboration.

My understanding is that the flat rear was machined from round receivers. There are stories (some captured in threads on this forum) about the flat portion not being true, and the resulting difficulties in mounting rails and scopes. Without a good scope mount it is hard to be accurate. Please remember, however, that there are plenty of flatbacks shooting very well with no scope mounting issues at all. :^)


I, for one, don't know the answer to the OPs question, however, my limited experience has shown that in my case, with my shooting abilities/skill ( I am no 1000 yard benchrest shooter by any stretch of the imagination), there is no discernible difference.

[GaCop]

Over the years, I've found no difference in accuracy between the two.

[sharpshooter]

Is this a documented fact or a personal opinion?

I am not sure I understand the cause and effect relationship implied in the above statement. I'd be interested in further elaboration.

My understanding is that the flat rear was machined from round receivers. There are stories (some captured in threads on this forum) about the flat portion not being true, and the resulting difficulties in mounting rails and scopes. Without a good scope mount it is hard to be accurate. Please remember, however, that there are plenty of flatbacks shooting very well with no scope mounting issues at all. :^)


I, for one, don't know the answer to the OPs question, however, my limited experience has shown that in my case, with my shooting abilities/skill ( I am no 1000 yard benchrest shooter by any stretch of the imagination), there is no discernible difference.

The flat back receivers were the WORST for warping during heat treat, especially the single shot versions. When the round receivers came out, they changed the method of heat treat to reduce distortion.
The flat back receivers were known for not being quite "flat" because they were finished on a belt sander after machining the flat.
Aside from that, I have found no difference in accuracy from long or short or single shot vs. repeater.
I once ran a test involving 4 different actions; long action single shot, long action repeater, short action single shot and short action repeater, and one barrel and the same 10 cases. I shot 5-5shot groups from each action (25 shots total) and compared the aggs.
From the best to the worst, the difference was .058", which gives a standard deviation of .0023. Which essentially is nothing.

[mattri]

Great replies thanks. I ask because I recently purchased a 110 action sight unseen and didn't realize that it was a flat back until it arrived. The action will be timed and trued so any issues should be found and rectified.

[mnbogboy2]

Is this a documented fact or a personal opinion?

I am not sure I understand the cause and effect relationship implied in the above statement. I'd be interested in further elaboration.

My understanding is that the flat rear was machined from round receivers. There are stories (some captured in threads on this forum) about the flat portion not being true, and the resulting difficulties in mounting rails and scopes. Without a good scope mount it is hard to be accurate. Please remember, however, that there are plenty of flatbacks shooting very well with no scope mounting issues at all. :^)


I, for one, don't know the answer to the OPs question, however, my limited experience has shown that in my case, with my shooting abilities/skill ( I am no 1000 yard benchrest shooter by any stretch of the imagination), there is no discernible difference.
When mounting a rail on a flatback, install the from screws torqued tight first, if the reciever is untrue you might see the rear part of the rail lift off the "flatback"!
I measure this slight gap with a feeler gauge and make thin metal shims according to that thickness. Some actuallybedtheirrails with an epoxy basedbedding material.
The shimmer ones haveworkedwell for me and stay tight over thousands of shots.

[PhilC]

You're replying to a comment made over 8 years ago by a member who hasn't logged in since August 2016. :rolleyes:

[Chris_in_Idaho]

When mounting a rail on a flatback, install the from screws torqued tight first, if the reciever is untrue you might see the rear part of the rail lift off the "flatback"!
I measure this slight gap with a feeler gauge and make thin metal shims according to that thickness. Some actuallybedtheirrails with an epoxy basedbedding material.
The shimmer ones haveworkedwell for me and stay tight over thousands of shots.

Very helpful technique, thank you for sharing. A few days ago I mounted a 1 piece DNZ Game Reaper on my 110 flat back. I torqued the front screws and was pleased to find no gap at all on the rear.