Titanium Recoil Lugs

[Dave Hoback]

I’m contemplating making precision 6AL4V Titanium Recoil Lugs. For the Accufit stocks as well. These are sold for Remington, Tikka, etc., but I’ve not seen any for Savage. I would certainly buy one if they were made. But, I’m a bit of a Titanium junkie. LOVE the stuff. Just a brilliant element to alloy, as the case with 6AL4V! But really, no one else has done it? There quite a few more than capable machinists here! Guys with TWO ARMS even! LOL! No..seriously, some guys here that while I am proficient, make my machining look beginner-novice AT BEST! I machine & use Ti a good deal, & yes it’s a pain in the butt much of the time. But it surprises me if none have done this.

[PhilC]

When I see Ti dollar signs appear, so, other than weight, what would be the advantage over current premium SS lugs (honest question)?

[Dave Hoback]

Well, that’s it. The strength to weight ratio. 6AL4V Ti is much stronger than the stainless used for for components like Recoil lugs. But of course someone can say you don’t NEED that strength, that it’s OVERKILL. But honestly, who doesn’t like stronger? It’s the reason I already use 7075-t6 Aluminum for things like rails & rings. It’s AS strong as Stainless and much lighter. I would have a Titanium rail, but at $220, it’s just out of price range I’m willing to get. Not when a Talley scope rail is $50!

[Nor Cal Mikie]

Some folks will buy ANYTHING.:rolleyes:

[Dave Hoback]

Well, when it comes to performance, yes.. of course to a dollar amount.

Mike, I didn't BUY anything. I'm talking about MAKING these. And if you've seen any of my history, you know I don't try to make money from firearms related items. I'd probably give them away, At worst, sell them for no more than a standard aftermarket recoil lug, just to break even on material. In fact, I wouldn't buy the Murphy Titanium rail BECAUSE at $220, I felt it was too much, given it's nature. Same reason I won't spend $3K, $4K, $5k+++ on Glass! But you are correc, some WILL by anything. I agree 100%

[Robinhood]

Im curious as to how much difference there is between a Remington factory recoil lugshape and dimensions and a accustock recoil lugs shape and dimensions.

[Dave Hoback]

Well, I think the shape & length is really close. But isn’t the Remington lug smaller diameter? Thought the Savage Lugs are around 1.340” & Remington Lugs are like 1.300-1.305?

[AZ_GUN_NUT]

Dave have you decided if you're going to make these? I'd be interested in buying some if you do. Thanks!

[Dave Hoback]

At some point. No real plans. I’m not looking to make & sell anything. It’s not really in my forecast at the moment. I’m working on several projects right now. Making new blades & Carbon Fiber handle scales for a couple folders. Which is super time consuming! I’m waiting for cooler weather/less humidity to start doing Cerakoting again. Still need to spray my Chassis. And I’m looking to make another Bipod like the one I recently made for my bench gun. Although this next one I want to be a slimmer, folding model like an Atlas for my AR. So my plate is quite full. On top, it’s more & more difficult for me to go down to my work room & commit to any project for more than an hour or two at a time. I have more weeks now where pain keeps me from doing anything for several to many days at a time. But I’m thinking when I do next rebarrel I’ll likely try this out as well. I’ll keep your name for when I do.

[efm77]

Titanium is cool, but most times pricey. I like the idea of Murphy Precision's too, but like you, don't want to spend that much. But where do you get 7075 aluminum being stronger than steel? Wouldn't it depend on the grade of steel? Maybe a soft steel, but 4140 chrome moly, and 416 stainless are pretty strong I thought. I only ask because you're the only person I've ever heard claim that. I've asked several rail manufacturers and have always been told it's almost as strong as steel, but not quite. I'm not a metallurgist by any means, just basing it on what they've told me, which is why I'm asking.

[Dave Hoback]

Well, 4140 & 416 are in different classes. But actually I never claimed 7075 was STRONGER than either of those. 4140 is quite strong, but 416, while yes-it’s stringer, it probably isn’t as strong as most think. It’s stronger than 7075, which in the T6 hardness is around 80,000psi Tensile.(I’ve heard of aged 7075 test at 90K). 416, depending on heat treatment & Temper, is between 85,000 to over 100,000. So yes, 416 IS stronger than 7075, but comparable. I say that because 4140 has a Tensile of 140,000psi. 6AL4V Titanium is even HIGHER! So why isn't Ti just used for everything? And can’t 7075 be used for a gun barrel? Because Tensile strength, Yield & Shear Modulus are just working properties at different heat treatment and hardness values. Each can be stronger at a higher hardness, but at the cost of being brittle. Tensile strength goes up as Hardness increases, but only to the point of fatigue. Titanium on the other hand, has some strange characteristics. It acts like it’s incredibly hard, yet it’s softer than most steels can achieve. It has a “springyness” to it, and is incredibly tough! (Which is why it’s such a pain to machine) Different materials work better for different purposes by their strength, characteristics of hardness, toughness, & obviously weight.

To put it into real terms: take the Rail & scope Rings for instance. While yes, the 416 is stronger and Murphy actually 17-4ph SS (which is actually a BETTER 400-series Stainless), for a much lighter alternative, the options are either 6061 or 7075 Aluminum & Titanium. Now the 6061 struggles to hit 60,000psi Tensile and while Titanium surpasses the strength category, it’s price is off-putting to say the least. But the 7075 has a minimum strength of 75,000psi, weight & price to match 6061. So that’s the in’s & out’s basically. Sorry, I should have been more clear in the beginning. 7075 is as strong or stronger than basic SS or mild steel(structural).. like 300-series or 1029/A36 mild.

[efm77]

Thanks for clarifying. I knew you didn't specifically state 4140 or 416. I merely mentioned those because they seem to be the most commonly used in firearms. I've read that 416 is usually used in stainless guns because it isn't as hard as some of the higher grades stainless steels so it's easier to machine, but still strong enough for its use in a firearm. I thought you were probably meaning milder steels, but was just curious, because you were kind of general when you said it was as strong as stainless. I prefer steel myself but have used, and still do some, 7075 aluminum for rails and rings and have not had any problems with it. I have always been leery though of the 6061 especially on anything with some hefty recoil to it.

[Dave Hoback]

Exactly… What’s crazy is 17-4 is stronger & has greater wear than 416. It’s actually a better choice for barrels. I believe Bartlien’s “400MODBB” is actually 17-4PH. But yes, 416 is easier on tooling, and “416R” just sounds nice when advertising.

[Fuj']

[QUOTE=Dave Hoback;503944But yes, 416 is easier on tooling, and “416R” just sounds nice when advertising.[/QUOTE]

It's not just advertising, 416R is formulated with a touch of "molybdenum" in the melt making
it even tougher then typical 416. It's the preferred barrel steel for it's ease to machine. I have
always found it easy to chamber and thread !!.....As for the Titanium, Yeah in most cases it is
overkill, but if your a competitive shooter needing the heaviest barrel you can find, making
weight is troublesome. Ounces need shaved here and there. One of the guy's I shoot with poured
money into a complete Titanium action from Pierce.

[Dave Hoback]

Yes, that’s correct Fuj’. Sorry, that’s what I meant by it being easier on tooling, but should have been more clear. Although that is compared to standard 416 SS. 17-4 actually has the same or slightly more Moly. In addition it also uses Copper & Nickel as alloying elements to enhance solid state strength & to aid in its uses. The more % Alloying elements lessens lowers total Iron content, beneficial for some applications.(not so much barrels though.) My point was “416R” sounds better than 17-4. Of course that was simply anecdotal. I will say, easier machining is not a good selling point for consumers of the finished product. When people hear that they automatically think “weaker”, which isn’t necessarily true, but can be. In the case of 416R & 17-4, it absolutely is true. 416R is much kinder to machine. But 17-4 will make a stronger barrel which will last longer, not to mention have even better corrosion resistance.