Gotta wonder at modern manufacturing approaches

Bang · 06-22-2015, 11:19 AM

Having read a lot of reports on the Savage Mark II FV SR being quite accurate, I purchased one. I am very happy with its accuracy. I knew going in that the stock has been a downside by all reports. Still, I cannot understand why they couldn't have designed a mold producing a stock with more conventional dimensions. Filling a more voluminous mold with a handful more pellets would cost them, what, five bucks? But, since the rifle is accurate as is, the skimpy stock is just barely adequate. Is that the criteria by which a manufacturer must be competitive?

I had a fail to extract. 5 failures out of 50 is a 10% fail rate. Hopefully, that will be worked out eventually.

Actioning the next round created an impact jamming several times that not only sprained a magazine lip, it also undid one of the side retaining mortises. That resulted in the magazine no longer keeping hold of rounds. Once returned home, I fixed the sprained, un-hooked side plate by re-peening the mortise (I guess that's what to call it) and tweaked the lip and all is well again, but it aroused my curiosity...

The Savage magazine steel seemed a tad thin and weak. I measured the thickness of my circa 1950 Marlin 80DL magazine. It is constructed in the same fashion as the Savage mag and is of .034" thick steel. The Savage mag is .025" thick. That's 36 percent thinner than the Marlin of 65 years ago (which also has a very nice walnut stock of ample proportion). As far as I can tell, .22LR ammo has not changed component dimensions, still needs a minimum of spring pressure beneath the follower, and reducing the strength of a device designed to accommodate the mechanics (which includes occasional malfunctions) is counter-productive.

**J.Baker** · 06-22-2015, 08:09 PM

It's fairly common knowledge that Savage rimfires have three major deficiencies...

1. the magazines kinda suck
2. the synthetic stocks kinda suck
3. extractor reliability is marginal at best

The magazines we're stuck with. The stock can easily be replaced with a laminate one from Boyd's for a little over $100. The extraction can be improved by makint sure the claw is sharp and/or adding a second spring clip over the first to provide a little more down force on the extractor so it doesn't slip over the rim so easily when trying to extract.

Trust me, we've all been complaining about these issues for 8-10 years or more, but when Savage is selling more rimfire rifles than anyone else year after year there's really no incentive for them to address the issues. If/when people stop buying them and their sales numbers drop enough then they may just do something about it.

Bang · 06-22-2015, 11:42 PM

The fail to extract is now corrected. There was a radial burr in the chamber. I spun 400 sandpaper and removed it. Fired over 50 rounds composed of three different brands this afternoon without a hiccup.

I've searched for two nights for a "little over $100" Boyd's laminate but cannot locate one other than a 99 dollar one that is 96% bedding finished and in need of the bottom metal, all listed as out of stock. By the time I buy the bottom metal and finish the stock, seems a $142 completed varmint/tacticool (that is available at DIP) is a may as well.

Thanks for the come-back.

Bang · 06-25-2015, 01:49 AM

Online purchased a Boyd black painted laminate for $92, trigger guard and mag plate another $26 ends up $146.34 with shipping but then for some very strange reason Boyd's doesn't offer the bolts to assemble their wares and refers consumer to DIP for the needed longer 12-32 bolts, adding $12.94 to the project. Can't wait to get it all together and get it on the range. This ain't as easy as leaving the house with three fishing rods and coming home with four. I think the wife is gonna notice this acquisition.

**justinp61** · 06-25-2015, 09:07 AM

Have you checked the metal thickness of a 1957 automobile compared to a 2015 model? I'm satisfied the new cars sheet metal is quiet a bit thinner.

The bottom metal is something that has to be replaced on any Savage MK II. Even the most expensive models come bottom metal not much better than tin foil.

I have a BTVLSS and couldn't be happier. It shoots great, no magazine or extraction issues and has a nice laminated wood thumbhole stock.

IMO most of these rifles shoot well past their price point. I don't expect Winchester model 52 quality out of a $200-$450 rifle.

bigcheese920 · 06-27-2015, 12:52 AM

It's the same reason you will never find cars from nowadays in the desert of Arizona with zero damage and just a little surface rust. They're not made like they used to be. Everything is about making money and production time. The faster the process the more they make and the more money they get in the end. And like what has already been said, until sales dip they're not going to change a single thing about it.

Bang · 07-02-2015, 04:44 PM

Well, the Boyd $98 stock arrived today. I see no effort was made to give the lugs ability to touch down on anything. Looks like it "beds" along the receiver contacting the wood. May work fine...time will tell. I had to open up the right side of the barrel channel as the channel is left of the receiver centerline (long axis) and the thicknesses of the walls vary and are tapered. Opened up the channel so there is no longer any barrel/channel contact.

The bottom plate is secured with one lug bolt and a wood screw. The wood the screw is meant to secure to was pre-drilled larger than the outside diameter of the screw threads, making use of the screw impossible. I replaced it with a machine screw and nut. Must be a lot of good street drugs in South Dakota.

**J.Baker** · 07-03-2015, 10:15 PM

Originally Posted by Bang

Well, the Boyd $98 stock arrived today. I see no effort was made to give the lugs ability to touch down on anything. Looks like it "beds" along the receiver contacting the wood. May work fine...time will tell. I had to open up the right side of the barrel channel as the channel is left of the receiver centerline (long axis) and the thicknesses of the walls vary and are tapered. Opened up the channel so there is no longer any barrel/channel contact.

The bottom plate is secured with one lug bolt and a wood screw. The wood the screw is meant to secure to was pre-drilled larger than the outside diameter of the screw threads, making use of the screw impossible. I replaced it with a machine screw and nut. Must be a lot of good street drugs in South Dakota.

It's a $100 stock - that's what you're going to get when you go cheap. You want a precise, top grade stock it's going to cost you more from a custom maker, not a mass production house who relies on high volume sales rather than quality and attention to detail to make their profits.

Everybody scoff's at SSS's $250 price for a laminate wood stock for the Savage rimfires, but as someone who has owned both I can say without doubt that you get what you pay for. That $250 also gets you a new metal trigger guard and metal magazine surround. Most here however are willing to pay the $100 for "so-so" stock and do a few things themselves to bring it up to snuff to save the money, which is fine, but to expect a $100 stock to be just as nice as a $250 one when you pull it out of the box is little more than wishful thinking.

Bang · 07-03-2015, 10:38 PM

to expect a $100 stock to be just as nice as a $250 one when you pull it out of the box is little more than wishful thinking.

Agreed, and that would be why I would not expect it and never said I did. I would also not expect it to take a custom stock-maker to machine a barrel channel in a blank correctly, and to not drill a hole where it doesn't belong, especially since they have been cranking these things out for years...which is a definite production advantage over custom work.

**foxx** · 07-04-2015, 12:36 AM

Originally Posted by Bang

Agreed, and that would be why I would not expect it and never said I did. I would also not expect it to take a custom stock-maker to machine a barrel channel in a blank correctly, and to not drill a hole where it doesn't belong, especially since they have been cranking these things out for years...which is a definite production advantage over custom work.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Boyd's offers a product that serves me well as a good start to a pretty decent rifle. I have bought and passed along dozens and I have never been disappointed in any of them. For basic, no frills hunting purposes, most of them come out of the box just fine. Some need tweaking here and there. I fully expect to have to pillar and bed them for any kind of reliable target shooting and am glad to do it myself. I hope they continue to make their products as inexpensively as they do now and not worry about an occasional product coming off the line a bit "off". I am sure they know HOW to build them better, they choose not to pay what it costs to make sure they are all (or any, for that matter) of a higher quality and precision that I expect for a finished product. The fact is , I don't consider them finished, and I am glad of it.

My guess is many a skilled gunsmith/stock maker resents them and wishes they'd go out of business.

Bang · 07-07-2015, 02:22 PM

I'll be ****ed! I cannot believe this!

Boyd says the Savage factory 3/4" bolts need replacing with 1" bolts, which I obtained.

I have been torqueing the bolts 1" bolts with a FAT wrench (at 15 in-lbs). Today I was working on the rifle and noticed a considerable gap between the shoulder of the front bolt head and the plate. WTF???? How come I didn't discover this at the git-go? Well, as it happens, the plate had an initial configuration where the plate was in contact with the bolt head. Over a little bit of time, it took a set deeper into the inletted area and the mistake was exposed. At first I thought the lug might have turned out, but such is not the case.

The stock tapers rapidly in the distance of the front and rear lugs, so of course the front lug calls for a bolt shorter than the rear lug.
The 3/4" Savage bolt is back in the front lug.

And the beat goes on...

LOL...gotta laff...look what gets censored and WTF is allowed....

**foxx** · 07-07-2015, 02:36 PM

I don't know, but that tells me the action screws should be pillared and maybe the action bedded.

Bang · 07-07-2015, 08:35 PM

My problem from the git-go has been inconsistency. Shooting at 50 yards, I'd get five near touching then opened up to inch and half, another time five close again... finally it settled down or I got used to controlling the rifle as needed, and I started getting better results...all with a front bolt not securing the receiver to the stock, yet I could not make that receiver wiggle in any direction...that's how well the rear bolt was drawing it down. Oh, yeah, ideally pillared and bedded. But if I can maintain an average consistent 5 touching at 50 yards or very nearly so as is, I'll be happy. It's all part of the challenge of the sport. Thanx.

**Robinhood** · 07-07-2015, 09:00 PM

It will all come together brother. One way to check for proper action screw length is to push the screws in without the barreled action. check to see if they are proud enough to engage the action but not so long as to hold it off the stock.

Bang · 07-07-2015, 09:59 PM

Gonna get some soft modeling clay and see what's what in that regard. The wood at the front bolt hole is missing the rear third of the bored hole. If that makes sense. Normally, a hole has wood all around it. This hole has a section missing wood. Call the muzzle direction of the hole 12 o"clock. Wood is missing from 4:30 to 7:30 o"clock. The plate is not strong enough to span the missing wood without bending at 15 inch-pounds. So to properly support the bolt head and plate, the missing wood needs to be filled in. By the way, the thickness of what wood is present is only 5/32" thick. But, I'm told to be happy with such things bestowed by Boyd, so I shall persevere and eventually work it out.

bigcheese920 · 07-08-2015, 01:40 AM

If you're not happy with the product send it back. It's a cheap stock. Either deal with the short comings of a cheap stock or try to get your money back and get a more expensive one that doesn't have so many short comings or any at all. I've bought a Boyd's tacticool for my FV-SR and it wasn't the greatest stock out there but I want expecting it to be. I'm looking for for a chassis for my long range gun and for the money I plan on dropping on the chassis I expect it to not have any issues. For spending less than $100 on any stock you shouldn't expect much.

Bang · 07-08-2015, 01:52 AM

The fun continues. I made a half-moon washer out of 1/8" thick aluminum that now duplicates the front end of the plate, ending just at the magazine well. The plate is installed in its normal fashion, and the aluminum half-moon installs on top of the plate. Together, the thicknesses of the plate and half-moon piece make a very stout metal that spans across the poorly bored wood hole and the bolt head now has a good solid bearing surface. It looks kind of neat, if do say so myself. It's just ahead of the magazine which extends twice as far from the stock anyway, so the half-moon and bolt head are not intrusive. If I paint it black, it will be barely noticeable.