Front and rear of receiver are different height? update: Back from Savage

I went to install a new one piece rail mount scope on my rifle today and noticed that the front of the receiver is milled lower than the rear. The rifle is a 10 FCP HS that I purchased new about a month ago. If I put a straight edge on top of the rear of the receiver there is about .027"-.028" clearance at the front . The front and rear of the receiver are milled parallel but on a different plane. I can not understand why this would be designed this way, it makes no sense. The mount was made as if to fit a receiver that is milled on the same plane and I have not seen any descriptions by any manufacturers that indicate anything different other than "Round Rear" or "Flat Rear". Has anyone else noticed this on their rifle? I discovered this too late to call Savage today, but I will be calling them tomorrow and see what they say.

Update: 3/29/11
I got the rifle back yesterday and am pleased with the result. They replaced the receiver and this one is level and true. They also included a test target with a .7 moa 5 shot group.
Kudos to Savage for making it right!

http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/...iver1-Copy.jpg

http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/...iver2-Copy.jpg

http://i1124.photobucket.com/albums/...iver3-Copy.jpg

I would definitely talk to the folks at Savage before doing anything else. I have read several threads recommending a thin layer of bedding material under the scope base to help level it out....from manufacturing discrepancies. I usually set my base on top of the action and look to see if things are square....and so far...I've been lucky.

Wayne

Yeah, that aint right. Let us know what Savage says when you call them.

Show us a pic.

Had the same thing, happen to me, a couple a years back. The man at "On Target" in Kzoo. MI. agreed that it, "shouldn't have left the factory" in that condition. They refunded my $.
Torg

Over the last 45 years or so I have had to shim many bases. Brownells used to sell pre-cut and drilled shims. Maybe they still do. This applies all brands, not just Savage. That is why we use an alignment bar on two piece bases. Not a big deal at all.

If I had bought this rifle used, then I might consider shimming as a solution, but not on a new one with warranty coverage. I talked to Savage this morning and they want it back and said they would likley replace the receiver. They are sending UPS here to pick it up and said I would not have to pay the shipping cost to them which is different than what is stated in their warranty policy. I'll post an update when it returns and I know what the resolution is. I would reccomend to anyone buying a Savage rifle to have a straight edge with them and make sure you pick out a good one. I went back to the gun store where i purchased this one to comepare other Savage rifles and all, including one Stevens 200, were parallel.

I had this happen to me, went to 2 piece mnts, and Burris Signature rings and had approx. 30 MOA extra in my scope. Gave me almost full up 90 moa adjustments. Just one way to handle the problem. Good luck. Joe

Idaho Joe, with that much differrence front to back you probably put a strain on the scope tube that may come back to bite you in the future. Watch for it. Hope not, but if were me I would shim the lower of the rings to make it level .

El Lobo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ellobo

Idaho Joe, with that much differrence front to back you probably put a strain on the scope tube that may come back to bite you in the future. Watch for it. Hope not, but if were me I would shim the lower of the rings to make it level .

El Lobo

---

Burris Signature rings, no strain because the inserts swivel.

I just saw the same thing while helping a friend mount a scope on his new Savage. I'll let him know to give Savage a call. The gun has already been back to Savage twice for problems - the most serious was not firing in the cold. Sometimes the firing pin would not even touch the primer!

Two piece bases, Burris Signature rings. No more problems.

My just acquired,new,10 FCP-K has the same issue. I'll let Savage know, but don't consider it too much of a problem. Ordered a 0, MOA EGW HD mount. I'll just measure the discrepancy from front to rear and add the appropriate shim. To the poster who had a problem with malfunctions in the cold? Grease in the FP channel would be my guess. A clean-out and lighter lube may solve that issue. Just a thought.

I would like to know if it is a machining problem or a bent action. Either way it is shoddy QC.

Thinking I had a problem with out of spec milling diff.,I went ahead and actually used a precision strait edge in my 10 FCP-K just to make sure there really was a For & Aft difference. It's strait. Mounting holes are perfectly aligned and no milling difference between front and rear. Whew!

I sent a Weather Warrior back for the same thing, They told me it was fine ! LOL I was using a Leupold one pc base they said I should use a 2 pc base ? And lap the rings. LOL It was .045 difference in height ! They recomended Weaver bases to me, I shimmed my Leupold 1 pc. I told them a 600.00 dollar rifle with an 800.00 Zeiss scope is not getting 5.00 bases ! I hope you have better luck with their customer service then I did, I had a real winner. Forgot to mention, The guy at Savage told me " Thats the first he's heard of it"

Update added to origional post.

I found this thread to satisfy my curiosity. Glad (sort of) to know I'm not alone.

I bought the Savage Model 10FCP / Choate Tactical from Cabella's middle of 2009. Hadn't done much with it really until August of this year when I started shooting competition. I mounted a scope that had 50MOA of elevation travel on top of Weaver #46 bases. Zeroed at 100 yards, practiced at 300 yards -- everything great. When I took it to the match and tried to dial up to 600 yards I ran out of elevation. Didn't make a lot of sense, but I figured a 20 MOA one piece base would fix it.

When I mounted the new base this week, I found about .030" to .035" gap under the rear of the base. I put a straight edge on the base -- straight. On the action, it was definitely off. I just bedded the rear. All good now.

Seems needing to bed one piece bases is pretty popular on lots of rifles. I don't know if .030" is wildly out or normal. Regardless, it's a great rifle -- I love my Savage.

Mine was the same way, from heat treating I quess. I bedded the back and used Burris Signature rings with the inserts that pivot and have 90 MOA of up now. I can spin in 1000 yds easy. I have to look at a bed under the rear of the mount but not a bad trade off. Good shooting. Idahojoe