Savage 12 bolt hard to open at times..

[RC20]

deleted

[RC20]

RC you do realize that the shims purpose it to move the baffle rearward not pry with????

Try this experiment; take the firing pin out of the bolt along with all of the cocking pins and sleeves. Put the handle back on the bolt with out the rear baffle. Insert the bolt and close it. Now set up an indicator test or linear travel, to measure the bolt movement. Put the point somewhere that the rotation of the bolt does not effect the reading. Now rotate the bolt to the cocked position without pulling back and write down the reading. It should be .0000. Now go back and put the rear baffle on. Insert and rotate the bolt 90* to the cocked position with out pulling back. wright down that number. post here.

I do realize the shim moves the rear baffle back (takes up slack or correctly) which makes the cam move the extraction further back.
Its more of a surface for the cam to work on.

Second part:

What, more homework?:disturbed:

[Robinhood]

get those measurements and you will see. without them you will continue to struggle with the topic. the washer is further proof you do not get it.

Yes tolerance can stack, but is it enough for it to be an issue?


Yes

[Robinhood]

Its more of a surface for the cam to work on.

Nope. The shim is not part of the surface that gets worked on. The shim causes the ramp to be engaged sooner and for more PE

[RC20]

get those measurements and you will see. without them you will continue to struggle with the topic. the washer is further proof you do not get it.

I do get it, not well put.

However, what is not going through is the problem in regards to solution. I have created the same problem by other means. I will continue to explore it.

We can all sit in a group and chant "Primary Extraction" like its the end of and be all of the worlds conundrums (or in this case failure to get a fired case out of the barrel)

That does not mean its the answer, putting a shim or washer in there may work, but its a patch. That may get it to work, its not getting to the root cause. At times we have to accept that, in this case (pun fully intended) I do not.

In Answer to the Nope: I said it badly.

The baffle has the cam surface (shape), the bolt handle engages that surface and that's where both the leverage (torque actually) and rearward cam action come from.)

The shim is nothing more than a clearance take up giving the bolt more rearward movement. With something like .050 you can stuff a pretty good shim in there.

At this point I am going to say we disagree and leave it at that.

[Robinhood]

We don't disagree in my opinion. What you fail to understand is that the shim is the test. Where the shim helps is a confirmation that PE is bad. The solution has been stated while we were dancing with the clean your chamber solution. Once you confirm that PE is the problem then there is the fix. There are parts changes(and they can work)like changing the baffle and the handle, and then there is the solution where dimensions are corrected as the solution. Savages are assembled from parts in a bin so it stands to reason that every once in a while you meet the extreme ends of the tolerances and PE does no happen. When this happens it requires physically altering the gap between the bolt ramp and the rear baffle. There is the BillPA (set screw)method in the Savage Faqs or there is the mill the end of the bolt where the bolt handle is. You will need to take the same off of the bottom of the slot as you do off the end. If you are in opposition to that then yes, we do disagree. That's bad for you because you would continue to search for an answer and never find it.

[RC20]

I am afraid we do not agree, what you call a fix is a patch and I believe is unnecessary. I do not blame anyone like the OP who wants to move on and shoot.

Indeed that is a way to get it to stop being an issue. What more force does to the extractor and rim of the brass probably only gets revealed if you reload the brass often enough and or have an extractor failure.

What I do strongly believe is this is a chamber related issue, not a lack of motion (movement distance) or force with the Baffle Cam.
The brass is sticking in the chamber for x reasons and that sticking force is more than the cam shape and distance provides as an extractive force.
Put more force on it and it (probably in most cases) breaks free.

As noted I re-created it without a live firing. I have to puzzle on it and try to figure out what is going on, that will be an on and off process as shooting is the prime goal.

You can call it dancing around cleaning the chamber if you choose to, I call it trying to find the root cause. Chamber cleaning may indeed be a help.
If so, that's better than buying unneeded parts of putting various objects on the baffle.

Changing parts may be getting it to work, but I disagree that the root cause is the PE and so called stacking tolerances.

This is not a fine precision devices. A mechanics go its a relatively course one with a lot of movement in it.

Some more data for open minded"

I measured the ramp on my 111 that from serial number is probably 15 years old. That cam ramp on the rear baffle is .164 total movement. the body is .355 and .518 added on the ramp.

Subtracting from that is the .050 (still need better measurement but its awfully close) of the space between the baffle and the handle (it actually can be anywhere between the baffle and handle and the baffle and receiver)

The two new and or newer guns its about .007 more. The 111 and the 12FV both experienced the issue. Last gun session it did not at all.
I will see how it goes down the road (tomorrow hopefully)

The new baffles are actually bit thickener on the body and a bit more ramp distance but overall the lift is only .007 more.

So while this is a very poor sampling for data, its also very illuminating. Rather than less, there is very effectively a significant though pretty small bit more in the newer guns.

Most interesting. Clearly there is not a loss of ramp on the new guns, indeed if the small sample size indicates anything, there is more overall ramp as well as less cleaner fore and or aft of the baffle getting more overall effect

[Robinhood]

Have you pulled the firing pin assembly and checked it yet. You can do it with a depth gauge from the face of the action to the bolt face so you dont have to set up an indicator..........ah never mind. It is the chamber, You win.



PS your measurements never take into consideration the distance from the action lug abutment to the rear face of the receiver RC20. I'm done. Chase that rabbit my friend.

[RC20]

No you simply do not get it nor seem to want to. No I did not pull the bolt apart, I will at some point.

I am not saying its only the chamber, I am saying the Chamber seems to be a factor and it may be the key factor, there may be other causes as well.

And I do understand the extraction distance I am measuring is not the actual. It is indicative of the whole. In mechanical terms its a hell of a lot even if to the non machine person its seems tiny.

I read that the ramp is not enough, its been ground down too much on new guns.

What I am seeing if the small data set is accurate is that the baffle is both thicker with more lift now that it was before and I had the same problem with an older gun.

I can also add dimension's. I am accepting the .035 is correct, .006 stacked clearance is not going to be enough to cause an issue, an engineer does not design that close to a tolerance for something that course.

Engineers for the most part are not stupid, mistakes yes, mfg issues at times yes, but an on going never ending FPE? (Failure Primary e
Extraction would be the right term as it describes the issue without saying its the cause.

What I can say is that the Barrels were all Savage I had the issue with. XC and Shilen have not done that.

I try not to get emotional attachments to technical issues and my theory.

It should be data, cause and affect, an operating theory and see if it pans out.

If not, re-consider.

I will see if I can repeat my created fault and see what has affect on it.

[Robinhood]

RC, I do get it. FPE is is only never ending if it is not a function of the bolt opening. If you have a stuck case and you have PE then you often will never notice. I don't believe the chamber is the issue. I believe the brass case is effected by heat and pressure. It is where the dimensions of the case do not return to a smaller set than the cooling chamber.

Over pressure is often the culprit. Powder choice, powder volume or weight, bullet weight and case manufacturer can all be contributors to brass getting expanded beyond the norm causing the brass to stick. This is why every commercial bolt action and most if not all customs have a PE ramp. If we accept that brass gets distorted from firing and needs the PE to help remove it we have only one choice if your bolt gets stuck. Test for PE function and timing.

The only other time that I know of a bolt being difficult to open is when you jam a bullet in the lands and then try to remove the cartridge. Often you find a lot of powder in your rifle right after you get the bolt open....unless you stand your rifle up to open the bolt.

You will get it brother, it is a learning process. Seasoned Savagesmiths have learned to deal with PE issues. When you get around to pulling the pin and measure actual PE, you will at the least have the opportunity to correct it if you desire.

[sigfla]

Would this kit help at all? Trying to figure all this out and to be honest I would prob just but a new bolt or send to a gunsmith if it wasn't an easy fix. The gun should work as intended or Savage should fix it. http://pacifictoolandgauge.com/misc-savage-parts/1998-nat-lambeth-inspired-savage-bolt-accessory-kit-w-o-handle.html#/550-choose_material-416_stainless_steel

[drybean]

IT my help for heavy bolt lift, but it will not help for PE problems

[RC20]

You will get it brother, it is a learning process. Seasoned Savagesmiths have learned to deal with PE issues. When you get around to pulling the pin and measure actual PE, you will at the least have the opportunity to correct it if you desire.

Robinhood: Please note that I am neither your friend nor your brother. I find it condescending and would appreciate it if you would stop.

I have no issue with disagreement but leave that out of it.

When you start with over .100 extraction distance, even if with all the take up factors you wind up with .035, that is still a major amount.

And note that since the barrels were changed it no longer is an issue at least with my guns.

You continue to ignore the data that things have changed and to the more extractive force with recent guns (again at least with my two)

More ramp cam and thicker base on the rear baffle.

At one time everyone knew that you put a tourniquet on a limb when serious bleeding.

They then eventually realized that you killed the limb and it had to be cut off (often gangrene)

I believe the evidence points elsewhere and support it, you don't and I find the information on that side less than convincing.

Others can draw their own conclusions. Cleaning a chamber is awfully quick and easy to do.

I will continue to explore this as time permits.


My rifles are working perfectly fine without one of those add on devices. They worked better for a time when they had the Savage barrels on after cleaning the chamber.

From the one comment I gather its normal to get flamed on this subject. That's a shame, science, engineering and technical areas should open to discussion and exploration and learning new things.

I am testing a theory and my mind is open to other facts that will change it and I will leave it at that.

[Robinhood]

Not my friend or brother, This was Zilla's post. You took over his post. Zilla's issue is PE. You problem is much different.
.

[bodywerks]

I had to put a shim on my bolt baffle for better PE. Did the job nicely. I do not consider it a band aid, or 'tourniquet'

[RC20]

Not my friend or brother, This was Zilla's post. You took over his post. Zilla's issue is PE. You problem is much different.
.

My apologies to Zilla if he feels that way. He can also comment.

I believe we were discussing FPE.

I offered what is an extremely simple thing to test. I also PMd him explain some of my reasoning.

However I will re-open my original post on the subject and continue it there.

[RC20]

I had to put a shim on my bolt baffle for better PE. Did the job nicely. I do not consider it a band aid, or 'tourniquet'

In my world it is, but that does not mean its not effective and does what you want.

[chetc]

i had the same PE issue on one of my savages, i did not care for the shim method, i removed the rear baffle, drilled a 1/8" dia hole x 1/4" deep in the middle on the bottom side where the cam is, machined a small delrin pin with a .128 dia shank 1/4" lg, with a 1/4" dia head about .050 thick, tap it in the hole and use a file to file off some of the head till you get what you want, i think mine ended up being about .020 thick, to do the test with a shim as someone shown in a video where you put the shim on the cam, try putting the shim under the baffle on the cam side, if you get the proper PE by adding approx .020 to .025 then the pin method will work mine works slick.

Chet

[Robinhood]

Some smiths will re mill the detail in the rear of the bolt body removing enough to reclaim PE

[zilla]

I am Thinking [probably PE at the moment. BUT, since I changed bolt handles the problem hasn't returned. Just waiting for it to rear it's ugly head again.. I am going tpo have to put this waaay back on the back burner as I have had a knee replacement surgery..

I am in a holding pattern now waiting for the problem to re-cur..