Bolt lift kit...this time with pictures

[kelbro]

If this works, maybe it will cut my wait times for SSS to T&T my actions :).

[dolomite_supafly]

1. I am not selling the spacers. As far as giving them away as I had planned, I will not do that either for fear of someone installing them incorrectly and injuring themselves with something I provided.

2. This in no way replaces anything related to a T&T. A T&T is a well thought out procedure that requires more than just a few drop in parts to work and this in no way is meant to replace it.


The thickness you need is in the pictures and the OD is .850" to match the OD of the BAS for a finished look. The through hole is .500". Almost any shop should be able to duplicate it for a reasonable amount of money. The other option is to have your BAS reduced the same amount as the spacer. Either way you will need to free up the space taken up by the bearing. I have provided all the information needed to duplicate what I have done, but with that you are on your own.

I will drop any more mention of the previous thread or the goings on in it. Everything has been done to make things right so there is no reason to bring it up anymore.

Dolomite

[Todd33]

I'm new to Savages so just to clarify things for me. I've noticed that my bolt feels really "Tight" when I start to lift it to chamber a round. Just in the first quarter of upward movement. Is this what the lift kit helps eliminate. Not tryin to hijack the thread just tryin to help understand what the issue is.

[LeeH]

I have two of the new actions and I am ordering the bearings as we speak.
The only problem as I see it, is reaming/drilling the center holes to clear the
cocking indicator which is a extension of the firing pin.
No problem doing that on this end.

FINALLY WE HAVE A CHOICE!!!!!!


Way to go Dolomite


The bearing's were shipped today, as soon as I can get them reamed and the spacer made I WILL
post a Range report even though the weather here has been REALLY nasty.
Rain, Shine, or a Stinkin Blizzard, I will make it to the Range.
I am trying to find a trigger pull Gage so I can give accurate bolt lift reading's.

[1Shot]

..Gordon, you thought of my idea..lol..Only I was looking for a needle bearing... ;)...I have a inlaw that is in the bearing business I just haven't had time to pick his brain..lol..

[dolomite_supafly]

WOW, cool I was searching around for bearings with races and happened to find these. Thought I would buy them to see if they would work.

Only time will tell if they are any better than anything previously out there.


And hi-teck:
I never said anything about a fish scale in this thread nor did I make any claims other than it seemed to work on my rifle. If you want data feel free to test away and post your results, I for one would like to see it. I only posted the info for people to make their own decisions. I made no promises that anyone would get all the riches in the world or to be surrounded by beautiful women if they installed these. ;D

As far as the controversial thread you have been following this thread has nothing to do with the previous one and this one has only been going on a little over a day so far. The previous thread has nothing to do with this one and the previous thread is over and done with, locked and all of the 8 testers have been notified of the problems that came to light. Again, that was a seperate idea and not this one. People are having a hard time forgetting and seem to want to compare the two. There is no comaprison between this one and the previous one. Also, unless you are a moderator or one of the 8 testers (you were not) you never even saw the part from the previous thread.

Dolomite

[Dust_Remover]

dolomite, I just Pm'd you however i'm not sure if I did it right. I've never PM's on this site, so what happened after I hit send threw me off. PM me if you didn't get it please.

Branden

[Todd33]

jeeez... :-X

[sharpshooter]

I promised myself I would not interfere anymore in these threds that seemed to have everybody worked up, but now I am going to intervene. It doesn't bother me that you want to tinker and make the world better, however your methods are what got me upset. I apologize for coming off unprofessional, but maybe the following will cast some light where I come from.
Your first idea was very questionable from a safety standpoint, and I am glad that you 86'd it. It raised more questions than answers. Your second idea is more favorable, but it is hardly fresh, as I devised the same thing as soon as the new cocking indicator models came out on the American Classics 2 years ago.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y48/sharp-shooter/thrustbearing.jpg
I never bothered posting a picture, frankly because not many were out yet and there was no immediate need. This version uses 11- 3/32" ball bearings in a custom made race.

You have created quite a stir amongst those who want to learn more about this and others who question what your role is. Your "testers" have no established protocol or scope of parameters to lend any credibility to what's going on. It's like the blind leading the blind. Like anything scientific, there are proper and accepted ways to experiment and collect data. I can see where you are lacking in this department and I have decided before this thing gets ugly, I will help you out.
In grade school we had science fairs that were based on experiments of the student's choice, but the format was always the same.This is how is was laid out:

1. OBJECTIVE: decribe what you are attempting to acheive.
2. HYPOTHESIS: decribe what you think will happen with limited observation.
3. METHODS: describe your methods for testing and the equipment you used.
4. RESULTS: report what actually happened supported with data.
5. SUMMARY: summarize the situation explaining why, or why not, the results were different than what was hypothesised.

Over the years I have gathered more than enough data for this, so I will lead by example.

1. OBJECTIVE: to establish a way to reduce the cocking effort required to cycle/cock a Savage rifle by reducing friction.

HYPOTHESIS: by reducing the friction on the bolt assembly screw where it contacts the cocking sleeve on the periphery can reduce the amount of efforts needed to cock and close the bolt.

METHODS: I will use ball bearings as a means of friction reduction and will collect data using torque values gathered with a Sturtevant Richmont inch/lb beam style torque wrench, model M 50-1. To eliminate as much human error as possible, I will chuck the action in a lathe chuck and support the torque wrench with a solid support to get consistant reading.All tests will use a bolt assembly screw shortened the same amount of what the bearing will take up.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y48/sharp-shooter/torktest.jpg
RESULTS: The data collected here was derived from 36 different actions representing a cross section obtained from specimens manufactured from approximately 1997 to 2008. These numbers represent the average of operations.

[color=red]COCKING EFFORT: 22.30 in/lbs.
CLOSING EFFORT: 13.5 in/lbs.
OPENING EFFORT(already cocked): 17.9 in/lbs.
notes: The hardest to cycle measured in @30 in/lbs, the esiest @ 18 in/lbs. I consider these to be the extreme, with most being in the 20 in/lbs range.
The following data was collected from 1 speciman using the 2 types of bearings to reduce friction.

Efforts involved in cycling operation
Observations made on a Savage model 116 serial# G893xxx
1.operation. 2.before mod(stock). 3.w/single centered ball bearing. 4.w/ thrust bearing. 5.Trued&timed w/no mod. 6.Trued&timed w/thrust bearing. 7.Trued &timed w/single centered ball bearing.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
cocking effort 20 in/lbs. 18 19 14 13 12
closing effort 16 14 15 10 8 8
re-open effort 16 14 15 12 10 9

SUMMARY: These tests conclude that a single centered ball bearing reduces more friction that multiple ball thrust bearing. Other factors besides friction affect the efforts of cycling due to the variant geometry of the various components of the fire control system. This test does not address the several other points of friction that also contribute to cycling efforts. The trued & timed action was included in this test to demonstrate the the consistancy of what a single centered ball would reduce in friction only. It appears through this test and many others that I have checked to reduce all the cycling efforts only by 2 in/lbs.
This data was collected long before I publicly shared the idea of the ".38 case and ball bearing tip". Before that, I made the first ones turning a steel "case" and drilled it for a ball bearing. Although it was more precise, it did not work any better than an old .357 case cut down and a ball bearing expoxied in the primer pocket. It was alot less work, not to mention cheap. As far as shortening the bolt assembly screw, it is less work than fabricating a spacer of specific size, although the spacer will work.
These are my findings; like it or not, you don't have to take my word for it, so feel free to do what ever you want. It took quite some time for me to dig out all my notes and compile this, so I hope you appreciate it.

[possum1]

I really appreciate the post sharpshooter. You have answered a question I have been pondering since I joined this forum. Some of us dumb old country boys have to have the meat laid out in front of us " got something to do with being from Missouri ". One thing for sure you have sold me on your T&T service. I really do appreciate you posting the number's, that is like putting the icing on the cake ;)

[xhogboss]

Thanks for posting the results of your research, sharpshooter. My uneducated guess would have been that the thrust bearing was the way to go. Your methods seem sound and I'm very willing to accept them over my guess. I'll be calling to schedule my action for a T&T job. You've convinced me. Thanks again.

Fred

[dolomite_supafly]

I would to thank you Sharpshooter, first for all for posting all the data you have presented in this thread and second for being civil while doing it. In the previous thread it wasn't the fact you felt the idea was a problem that bothered me because it didn't, Greg even voiced the same concerns before you did. Had you raised the concerns, as Greg did, in a manner that didn't involve name calling I don't think I would have had one single issue. It was that fact it went from being civil among all those posting to a name calling diatribe after you opened the door for everyone to follow suit. It was just a bit disheartening to see someone, that people do admire, resort to tactics that most people despise. Before the name calling began there were concerns brought up that I acknowledged and that people were discussing. Perhaps a new idea, you could be benefitting from now, could have been brought to light had it not spiraled out of control the way it did. I hope you realize the outcome would have been the same, regardless of whether the name calling was introduced there or not. I do accept your apology.

I am sure you spoke to Greg the second he got "that part", I know you seen it after it was posted in the moderators section. So hopefully he also let you know to that safety was my concern above all else. This is why I didn't post pictures for the less experienced shooters to duplicate if there was a concern. Every email I sent out prior mentioned safety and the second I realized there was a problem I contacted everybody, by email, PM, by phone and then by registered mail, letting them know to stop using "the part" for safety reasons. And despite what was implied in the other thread there only 8 people got them, your staff included, and not everyone as some seem to believe. In retrospect, yes reducing spring pressure was the wrong way to achieve a light bolt lift. And during the whole exchange I was honest and open by posting everything I did but above all else I felt I was civil.

Despite what you may think I do not have anything against you, your staff, or this site. Too many gun people are tired of dealing with all the hassles and just stepping away from anything firearms related. I see it all the time, both locally and across the nation. You provide a service people want as well as a place to discuss and I appreciate both. I am not trying to replace anything you sell or do and I even let people know that there is nothing that can replace a quality T&T. For all those who have the new actions, with the cocking indicator bolts, the thrust bearing is reducing the bolt lift from stock. Albeit by a small amount, 5%, it is still a reduction. Considering that they are unable to use the single ball bearing method the thrust bearing seems to be a viable alternative for those who can't afford a T&T. Perhaps by finding a way to use less ball bearings in your design you can reduce that amount further for the cocking indicator guys.

Again, I appreciate all the information you have provided. It is the data that proves the ball bearing method you championed is better than my idea. I am not sore or upset because my intent was never to show anyone up or try to sell something. It was just to provide people with an idea and perhaps that could get their creative juices flowing to come up with the next great idea that will make things better for everyone.

I am glad this has gotten you more business as well. You mentioned before that every time there is some sort of turmoil involving you or something on your site your sales go up. I am glad to see this has done the same as well because I will be the first to wish you and your family all the best, both personally and professionally.

Dolomite

[joeb33050]

Being the nicest, best looking and youngest testing volunteer, I have been checking the mail and hoping for the kit.
While reading these posts I had a thought.
Boston Gear made sintered "Boston Bronze" bearing material that held oil and made very good bearings.
Wouldn't a ~1/16" thick round piece of this material do the trick??
Thanks,
joe (extremely nice!!)b. (Have to check the mail.)

[joeb33050]

I just looked at the Boston Gear sit. They make Bost-Bronz sintered bronze in bar stock and as thrust bearings. What is the OD required?? If you tell me, I'll look it up to se if they make such a thrust bearing.
Thanks;
joe b.

[dolomite_supafly]

Being the nicest, best looking and youngest testing volunteer, I have been checking the mail and hoping for the kit.
While reading these posts I had a thought.
Boston Gear made sintered "Boston Bronze" bearing material that held oil and made very good bearings.
Wouldn't a ~1/16" thick round piece of this material do the trick??
Thanks,
joe (extremely nice!!)b. (Have to check the mail.)


Just to put your mind at ease, you can stop waiting at the mailbox for something from me. I won't be giving anything out related to this or the previous kit. Seeing how you are "so handsome that young girls cluster around me at the beach" at age 72 you probably have more to be look forward to than anything I might send you. ;D

Dolomite

[wbm]

Still say wish I had your "get up and go" Dolomite, because I'm not near "Disabled" as you. I think you know what I mean. Stay well, Dale ;)


+1 ;D

[82boy]

I would to thank you Sharpshooter, ... turmoil involving you or something on your site your sales go up.
Dolomite


I would like to add, That this site is NOT owned by Sharp Shooters Supply or Fred Moreo (AKA Sharp Shooter), that this site is owned and maintained by Jim Baker (AKA MR. Furious) of Baker media. I wish to add that They are not related, and did not know each other until after the site was born. Sharp Shooter was picked, just like all the other staff, to be a moderator because of his incite and knowledge.The staff members are picked, and are located from all over United States, and Canada. The staff members are not employees of SSS, or SSS's staff. To the best of my knowledge SSS gives no preferential treatment to paid members over Non-paid members, or even knows the names of who is and who is not. I do know that Sharp Shooter pays advertising fees just like the rest of the advertisers.

My wish would be, that all of the conspiracy theory nuts would put to rest that SSS and Savage shooters are one in the same. FACT IS, THEY ARE NOT! I can say this with the utmost confidence. I will get off my soap box now that I have addressed this issue that just fires me up to no end.

[LeeH]

I would to thank you Sharpshooter, ... turmoil involving you or something on your site your sales go up.
Dolomite


I would like to add, That this site is NOT owned by Sharp Shooters Supply or Fred Moreo (AKA Sharp Shooter), that this site is owned and maintained by Jim Baker (AKA MR. Furious) of Baker media. I wish to add that They are not related, and did not know each other until after the site was born. Sharp Shooter was picked, just like all the other staff, to be a moderator because of his incite and knowledge.The staff members are picked, and are located from all over United States, and Canada. The staff members are not employees of SSS, or SSS's staff. To the best of my knowledge SSS gives no preferential treatment to paid members over Non-paid members, or even knows the names of who is and who is not. I do know that Sharp Shooter pays advertising fees just like the rest of the advertisers.

My wish would be, that all of the conspiracy theory nuts would put to rest that SSS and Savage shooters are one in the same. FACT IS, THEY ARE NOT! I can say this with the utmost confidence. I will get off my soap box now that I have addressed this issue that just fires me up to no end.


Thanks for the info...
I think there was a lot of confusion about who,when, what, or where.
Honestly, I had NO idea who owned the site as I don't think it was ever mentioned.

LeeH

[sliderule]

A big thank you to Fred for taking the time to share with us actual test data. Information that could have been done from the get go before this all got blown out. But progress was made and knowledge shared for all to take in. It definetely proves that there is more to an easy bolt lift than just a "kit".

I only wish Smokepole would have put his two cents in.

[jrmy_1]

The data makes sense, Fred using the "scientific method" helps to conceptualize the process a bit so it can be repeated by others and should obtain essentially the same results with some variation due to induced error.

The basic friction formula is as follows:

Fr = ?N

Where, Fr = force attributed to friction, ? = coefficient of friction and N = the force normal to applied force of objects.

This equation is a very simple version, but will make the point I'm trying to make.

The idea is to reduce Fr. There are only two ways to do this. Either reduce the coefficient of friction, which is basically achieved through trying different methods such as that which has been done in this thread or reduce the applied force between the components, which would be done by reducing spring tension, mass if gravity is the driving force, etc.

Coefficient of friction is a dynamic value that has many inputs such as shape, material of construction, adhesion properties, speed of movement, etc. if you would like to model the value. The faster something moves typically reduces coefficient of friction. One of the items that could've been included in Sharp Shooter's write up would be the speed/rpm with which the torque wrench was rotated as this would have a direct impact on the obtained values.

Basically, the idea is to find a solution that reduces the coefficient of friction lower than the ball bearing technique. I bet there is already a modeling software developed by some student or engineer out there that you could input the materials and properties and it would spit out the best combination to use for friction reduction.