Printable View
I just received my EGW 20 moa HD base for my 10-fcp-K and the base but nowhere does the card that came with the base indicate the proper torque specs for the 6-48 bolts.
I am assuming that 20 inch pounds would be the correct torque specs for these bolts.
Is my assumption correct ?
The instructions that came with my FAT wrench specify 30 in-lbs, but 20-30 is good in my opinion. Definitely not more than 30.
I called EGW and they said 20 inch pounds so i guess 20 inch pounds it will be.
BTW do you guys use brake or carb cleaner to clean the bolts and threaded bolt holes before installation ?
Thanks
DO NOT use carb cleaner! Brake cleaner or Gun Scrubber only for degreasing.
Yes, and chase the threads with a tap - carefully- if you feel like they need it.
Be careful with the brake cleaner- keep it off your stock, and test it on an inconspicuous area of the action.
Sliderspal, I edited the above post- I didn't see the carb cleaner part at first! DON'T use carb cleaner!
There are different types of carb cleaners, and some will remove various finishes- bluing, stock finish, etc.
Thanks for the replies.
No CARB cleaner.
Whew! ;) :)
Thread ressurect!
I just attempted to torque my OEM EGW 20MOA rail on my 110 to 20 inch pounds. I did them all to 15, then tried 18 and two screws stripped so they're all still at 15.
Very nice rail. It sits flat against the receiver and neither rear nor front look to need a bedding. No flex, anyway.
But the screws are allens so they suck. Torx would have been smarter.
Sorry to hear that. I agree, Torx heads would be better. Did they strip in the head or the threads?
This brings up an issue that's bothered me for a while now. I know it would take a while to standardize, but why don't the gun manufacturers make the move on up to #8-40 mounting screw holes in their receivers? What with all the rifles out there sporting very large and expensive optics, why not make the move to the larger, stronger mounting system? It shouldn't cost them much at all, and in my mind if I were trying to decide between two rifles on which I was going to put a 2#+ set of rings, rails, and glass that cost way more than the rifle, having a more secure means to mount that investment would be a huge factor in my decision on which rifle i'd buy. I know, it's possible to drill/retap the receiver yourself and end up with the same thing, but we shouldn't have to do that. The gun manufacturers need to catch up with the times. Savage seems to be quick to institute changes in their model lineup in order to meet changing market demands... Hey Savage, are ya listening? This is an improvement that's way overdue. The days of the average rifle sporting a little fixed 4x/32 scope are long gone. Big variables, often mounted on large/heavy rails, are more the norm around here. Time to catch up. The aftermarket accessory manufacturers would follow suit quickly.
Sorry for the rant, but I'm tired of gingerly tightening base mounting screws, the whole time sweating it out, knowing that I could easily end up with the situation that Twinsen has now. That's just not necessary.
Did you clean/chase the threads before mounting? Lotsa times there's all manner of grit and burrs in there, that cause the tiny screws to bind, and then strip. Always a good idea to clean and chase before mounting your base.
The allen heads stripped, not the threads or receiver. I barely cleaned the threads and did not chase them with a tap.
They weren't even in hand tight out of thr box but were well lubed. That is how I would prefer it. Let me do it right, but don't let anything rust.
Some people are not aware that there are different torque specs for lubed screws vs non lubed.