Printable View
I'm planning a build based on a custom 'fat' cartridge and need a large ring action; Which actions are large ring? are all the WSM chambered rifles based on the large ring?
As far as off the shelf actions is it correct that the only long action is the sporter which is small ring?
Thanks guys
Target actions are large. most WSMs are large, some early ones are small.
So there are no large ring long actions then
any RUM round would be on a long large.
The "ring" is the same size outside diameter for all of them. There are small shank and large shank barrels and receivers but the outside dimensions are the same for the receiver. All they did was ream out the receiver ring a little more to accomodate the large shank barrels. If you're building a really fat cartridge it may be best to use a large shank receiver/barrel.
When the term 'ring' is used generally it is referring to the thread size and therefore through association the barrel 'shank' size. The Mauser has been referred to as either 'Large ring' or 'small ring' for years without any confusion.....the intention IS to use a large 'ring'/large 'shank' for the build and I do realise the external dimension of the ring is the same for the savage...
When did savage start/stop producing the RUM chambered models? As it appears I'll need to track down a used rifle
Thanks
defoxer
How fat are you talking? What is the rim diameter?
I'm asking because it be easier to guide you to the correct action or offer more specific advice.
Just so you know, I've built a few RUM and WSM's on small shanks with no ill effects. I'm curious if you're planning on going fatter than that.
I'd also be quite comfortable putting a RUM or WSM or even a weatherby(which I'm currently doing) in a small ring; I'm working on a Gibbs based 'cat which is a step up again in size at 16.26mm rim & case size.
Ok Defoxer. It was my understanding that the large and small ring mausers were different size receivers all together which is why I was trying to clarify. Good luck with your project. A regular Weatherby round would be fine in the small shank but I wouldn't try one based on the 378 case as it would leave the chamber walls too thin for my liking.
Large ring and small ring Mausers ARE different diameters on the outside as well as thread. That's why they are called that.
For simplicity; mauser large ring/small ring term has historically associated with either the small ring size barrel thread diameter of 0.98" or the large ring thread diameter of 1.1"; granted ring sizes are different BUT it is not the rule but the exception as there are large ring + small shank 98s and as such it can get confusing. As I said, at least when I use the term large ring mauser I'm referring to large barrel shank.
With the weatherby 378 case - as a result of the finer/shallower savage threads there is more 'meat' left on the barrel after chambering a small 'shank' savage compared to all other commercial actions whether Rem, Mauser large and even Weatherby itself. 378 case on either small or large Savage is ok in my book...
True about the other shank sizes and thread depth. Not trying to argue here, just thinking out loud ;). A couple things to think about with the Weatherby action though in reference to theh 378 case. The receiver is larger than the Savage which probably provides more strength around the chamber. Outside the receiver you have a shouldered barrel which in turn gives you a thicker chamber wall outside the receiver. You could make the same argument about the shouldered barrel on a 700 or say that you can have a shouldered barrel made for the Savage. But another thing to think about with those shouldered barrels is this; Part of the shank between the shoulder and receiver on the Rem's and Savages is exposed under the recoil lug. The recoil lug is not thick enough, nor a tight enough fit around the barrel to add any strenght against chamber pressure. I've never heard of it happening but I would think this could be a place it could let go, a weakest link if you will, if you had too large a cartridge with too much pressure. Another thing is bolt thrust. A Mark V bolt is larger than a Savage bolt and it has more locking lugs and may make it able to handle the thrust of those larger cases better. They are smaller lugs and the bearing surface may be the same, I'm not sure but it's something to think about. It's your project but for me I would make my limit on a Savage action at the RUM cases since they have a smaller rebated head which helps reduce the amount of thrust compared to a 378 case. If I were building a 378 size case on a Savage action I would want a large shank to have thicker chamber walls and probably even the bolt head they are using on the 338 Lapuas since it has thicker lugs. I would feel better if it had larger lug recesses and wider lugs for more bearing surface to help contain that much thrust. The standard Savage may be able to handle it, but I think it's pushing the limit too much for my liking. To each their own though. Check with 358 Hammer on here. He's built some hand guns on the large shank target actions using the 378 cases and hasn't had any trouble. I've also heard him say though that he handloads and loads them to a lower pressure. He can tell you more about it than I can, I was just expressing some concerns I would have and thinking outloud.
I understand the weatherby action is 34.2mm while the SAV is 34.4mm, The barrel nut takes the place of the shoulder, could probably expend a few neurons arguing whether or not it contributes to the strength, I’d say so though.
With the lug not adding to strength; has anyone interference fit it for this purpose??
Bolt thrust; I’m chambering an improved case with minimal slope and bolt thrust is directly proportional to this geometry. Parker famously tested his chambering WITHOUT a bolt and the case stayed put while the un-improved ‘slopey’ cases shot out at almost projectile velocity. Even without the improved cases; as long as you make sure there is NO OIL in the chamber area; bolt thrust should not be an issue. Make sure you wipe out the chamber before use!!
Area of lugs; I tried to work it out some time ago; I came to the conclusion that there was not an appreciable increase in shear area on the wby multi-lug .
Appreciate the input mate.
I had the same thought about the shear area of the recoil lugs on the Mark V but wasn't sure. I'm not sure the barrel nut is a tight enough fit to add any strength for chamber pressure but could be wrong. Seems I've heard that it's not but maybe someone else could chime in here. I heard where SSS tested 338 Lapuas on the small shank though and said it wasn't safe enough. The chamber walls were too thin and were swelling when fired. Something to think about. I'd say if you go with the large shank you'll probably be ok. If you take the diameter of the large shank 1.125" and consider the shallow threads it's probably the thickest chamber walls of most any rifle. Most shouldered barrels are 1.25" at the shoulder which is only 1/8" thicker at the shoulder than the large shank. Anyway good luck with your project.
Swelling chamber??? what was he using, proof loads?
The lug would need to be machined to just undersize so it would fit with friction or heat = interference fit; so it would provide strength to the chamber area, just thinking aloud here but a very fat lug would be a benefit in this case.
btw, the large shamk at 1.125 spec end up at 1.11" according to the savage sheet, but still plenty thick...
At 1.1" you must be referring to the bottom of the threads right? I don't think he was referring to proof loads. Think about the diameter of a 338 Lapua at the case head vs the diameter of the small shank barrel. If you chamber a WSM or RUM in a small shank you only have chamber walls 1/4" thick and that's to the top of the threads. The small shank is 1.055" and the diameter above the extraction groof of a WSM/RUM case is .555. 1.055-.555=.5. .5/2=.25". The Lapua case is even larger. The chamber walls are mighty thin, too thin for my liking. I'll try to find the thread for you. You may be right about the recoil lug but I don't know of anyone who's done that. The recoil lugs slip over the barrel shank easily and in that case I doubt they provide much additional strength.
Let's see if this works. This thread is a good read.
http://savageshooters.com/SavageForu...c,36123.0.html
Sorry, meant to type another 1 there, (fixed it) 1.11" dimension at the top of the threads - Detailed as 1.11 to 1.115 and "1.115 Max under locknut" on the 1&1/8 barrel shank.
Looking at the remaining wall thickness, interesting to note that a standard Savage, chambered in a weatherby or Lapua size case will still have more barrel material around the chamber than a win 70 chambered in a standard magnum sized case.
I'll read that thread, thanks
Where did you get those figures from? Everything I've ever seen said the large shank was 1.125". Not that it's a big difference though.
the sheet that comes with the target action, details 1&1/8 nominal thread but finished dimension after thread as I mentioned; I'll try to attach the image of the document
This is the image of the spec sheet (care of a vendor’s site) shows the 1&1/8th” as the nominal dimension but also the limit of the finished dimension
[img]http://[/img]
With a finished diameter of 1.11" it still leaves the equivalent sidewall thickness as a Mauser large ring barrel chambered for a standard 8x57 size round when chambered for a magnum sized round. No complaints here.
ftfy ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by defoxer
thanks mate
Interesting. Thanks for the info. When I had my large shank barrel made, I measured the outside diameter of the threads with my caliper and it was showing 1.12" and it fit in the receiver without any trouble. I still say that the chamber walls may be thick enough but with a cartridge the size of the 338 Lapua or any of the 378 Weatherby cases you're getting too much rearward thrust for those size locking lugs. Dry chamber or not I think it's too risky. I haven't found the exact dimensions yet but everything I've read says the Mark V has more lug bearing surface and the overall size of the receiver is larger than a Savage. Regardless of barrel shank size this would give the chamber more support for cartridges that size. It also has an integral recoil lug so the shoulder buts right up to the receiver and therefore would have plenty of chamber thickness outside the receiver as well. I think the lug setback has been documented enough that I wouldn't do it. Pursue at your own risk.
I stand corrected. I finally found some specs for the Mark V action and if they are correct the outside diameter is about the same as the Savage. However, I still thick the shear area/surface area of the multiple lugs on the Weatherby bolt may be more than the Savage's.
My understanding is that the ring sizes are the following;
34.24mm WBY
34.40mm Sav
34.65mm Rem
35.59mm Mauser98
I measured the Sav and Mauser. Between the Rem,Wby and Sav the difference is inconsequential, however barrel shank wise both the savage small and large stand apart due to their finer thread and pitch i.e. most 'meat' around chamber.