Printable View
I picked up an old 1980 era stainless 116 for a donor rifle today. My question is that the front edge of the locking lug on the extractor side of the bolt head is beveled. Is this normal on an old savage? All my newer 1990s and 2000s rifles have sharp locking lugs
Come on guys nobody has an old 110 ?
Send 82boy a note as he is one of our resident experts.
My 80's model has a slight bevel. My 2014 is at the gunsmith until Monday
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w...ps9t1xwsue.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w...ps4ilwez7a.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w...psjpsvjpqy.jpg
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w...psquq48xde.jpg
I don't have amy way to do pics. but I have a 116 that has pronounced bevels on the leading edge of the engagement side of the bolt lugs. It was bought used as a basis for a 7mm/300Win. wildcat. I guess it came from the factory that way . Paul
Is mine not beveled like yours?
If you look at the chamber end of the bolt,you have a very small bevel on the leading front edge.Mine looks to be 3-4 times as long.It's hard to tell from the side views. Mine appears to have been done at the factory,but who knows w/a used weapon.It is so smooth it doesn't appear to be worn. Paul
I have a action from the 70's, a couple from the 80's and all the rest from the 90's to present. None of them have a bevel on the front or rear faces of the bolt heads. Figured I would throw that out there FWIW.
A lot of the older models from the 80's have this bevel. This was an ill attempt to correct the timing that actually made it worse.
thanks for the infomation guys. mine looks very similar to futureriders. my newer savages are much sharper and have almost no bevel. should i look into getting a new bolt head for mine before i start fireforming 280ai brass? I like to keep my rifles at 1/2 moa or less will this casue a problem?
One thing notice is both of the bolts are for 116 models. Mine should be the orig.bolt ,s/n matchs my action.Mine is F24xxxx ,F s/n's ran from 89 to the mid 90's if I remember the s/n listing correctly. Luke what letter prefix is yours? Can you post a pic. face on as it enters the reciever?
serial # is F438XXX, and sorry i had a typo, the bevel is on the opposite side of the extractor as well as the extractor side (slightly more pronounced than futureriders) so basically the fron of the lugs are not squared, they the edges of the front of the lugs are beveled. and cant post pics. anybody think there is a negative to this?Quote:
Originally Posted by scpaul
Someone can be more exact than me, but I think yours was made mid 90's,if I remember the s/n chart. Also I think you are still describing the lugs on mine too.
can you elaborate on this?Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpshooter
and paul i think we both have the same thing, im just wondering if i should get a new bolt head. all mt bolt actions, savage, remington, ect all have very square lugs unlike this onem just seems strange to me
Back in the 80's, they changed the machining operation that cut the lug ramps in the front of the receiver. This change was a cost saving measure that left the geometry of these ramps less than optimum configuration. When the bolt was slid forward, the leading edges of the bolt lugs were below the starting angle of the ramps. This lead to a difficulty closing the bolt, requiring the bolt to be shoved ahead before the bolt handle could be turned down. Their band-aid fix was to hand file bevels on the bolt lugs to engage the ramps. What this does is retard the advancement of the bolt, because of a ramp engaging a ramp, essentially slowing the advancement for a short portion, then speeding up after the short bevel clears the edge of the lug abutments. It only alleviated the first problem, it was still hard to turn the bolt down after it was engaged. Had they only known at the time this situation was compounded by incorrect sear geometry, which was addressed later in the 90's.
There is nothing unsafe about your bolt head, but if you decide to ever have the action trued and timed a new bolt head would be in order.
I don't see how it can be a problem.The actual engagement/load bearing surface should be on the back of the lug when cammed into the lug recesses,and recoil is going to apply pressure toward the rear pushing the rear face of the lug into the lug recess-right? Paul