Reply With QuoteMore than a few times.. Pretty sure that is the problem..Originally Posted by Robinhood
Has anyone suggested primary extraction.,,,
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
More than a few times.. Pretty sure that is the problem..
well your cases might be getting stuck.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I don't seem to be getting through.
You go outside, spend the whole day in the baking sun, get sun burned.
Was the problem the sun?(primary extraction )
Of should you be looking at putting cloths on, sun screen or stay out of the sun?
In this case I think the question is "Why Is Primary Extraction Not Occurring?"
At the listed .035 (thank you Robbinhood) I don't see it as lack of cam action, stacked tolerances.
I could be wrong of course.
Thank you for the number. But the problem hasn't returned since changing bolt handles. When It does I'll check. No sun here the last few days, been rather crappy, windy and rainy.. Did manage to exterminate several P-dawgs and a Jack wabbit though with no issues.
I think what would help RC20 is if you could explain Primary extraction and how it takes place. If there was an understanding of your perception then there is an opportunity to confirm or deny the concept and build from there.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
In the case of the Savage (vs the Axis) you have the ramp on the bolt handle interacting with the ramp on the baffle.
I call it cam action, Primary extraction is fine as opposed to just pulling the bolt back (assume they call that secondary)
I measured the ramp, its .160 (pretty close, not exact.)
Excess floating space between the babble and the receiver/bolt handle surface when the bolt is closed is .050 (very rough)
That would seem to give us .100 roughly of primary extraction
The point being, if there is adequate extraction distance, then what cause it not to work?
Is the cam distance and force from the ramp not enough?
The bolt rotates all the way, its does not pull the cartridge back that first small distance.
Yes I can see a possible lack of cam distance if its wrong, I don't see it going on for long, but there are other factors than can cause a case to stick that is not overcome with the cam.
Its those other forces that I suspect are the primary cause, not the lack of ramp/cam action.
Putting a feeler gauges between he baffle and the receiver may give you enough more pull force that it overcomes the stuck case, you can also put a cheater bar on a pipe wrench and get more torque out of it.
You also exceed the limits of the wrench. More better to get a bigger wrench (or if possible, find out why your 4 ft pipe wrench can't undo a joint that it should be able to do)
The likely stretch is the case rim.
i.e. when you put it back together use pipe dope and not permatex.
Maybe there is an inherent design flaw in the ramp is not long enough, I tend to other causes.
RC what you are missing is he (Zilla) swapped bolt handles and hasn't had a problem since. That would point directly to primary extraction. Just the little bit of difference between the two ramps on the bolt handles was enough to make the difference. Everything in spec but stacked tolerances were corrected by swapping two parts.
"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:32 (New King James Version)
RC you do realize that the shims purpose it to move the baffle rearward not pry with????Putting a feeler gauges between he baffle and the receiver may give you enough more pull force that it overcomes the stuck case, you can also put a cheater bar on a pipe wrench and get more torque out of it.
Try this experiment; take the firing pin out of the bolt along with all of the cocking pins and sleeves. Put the handle back on the bolt with out the rear baffle. Insert the bolt and close it. Now set up an indicator test or linear travel, to measure the bolt movement. Put the point somewhere that the rotation of the bolt does not effect the reading. Now rotate the bolt to the cocked position without pulling back and write down the reading. It should be .0000. Now go back and put the rear baffle on. Insert and rotate the bolt 90* to the cocked position with out pulling back. wright down that number. post here.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
Earl39:
No I did get it. I am not saying it did not work (though we need to have him do more shooting )
I have had it intermittent and I would try something and it "seemed" corrected it, then came back.
I am not one of those the sun came up in the East and we had an earthquake in CA, ergo the Sun coming up cause the Earthquake .
People took to shucking virgins into Volcanoes on the same basis.
What I am saying is that even if it had a few thousandths more and did indeed corrected it, with a lot of cam movement, why is this occurring in the first place.?
We are not talking small .001 here. Stacking Tolerances is another term that gets bantied about. Yes tolerance can stack, but is it enough for it to be an issue?
So what is the root cause? Bad design, marginal at best or other as suggested?
The more I have shot mine (and also cleaning chambers) the less it has occurred.
Two things are changing as well as the reloads, age of brass.
The first time I thought I had too little powder in a case and getting over pressure. That was wrong but it had the same identical symptoms.
Sticky Case would be a better term I think.
Primary Extraction is a name for a process, its not necessarily the problem.
My latest test was to see how much movement the rim has in the situation. Not a lot, the extractor hold the case head tight to the bolt head.
There is a bit of movement with the wavy washer between the bolt body and the first part of the bolt head. (have to look that up, breakdown does not cover it) . I haven't; measure it yet but in the under .010 I would guess.
deleted
I do realize the shim moves the rear baffle back (takes up slack or correctly) which makes the cam move the extraction further back.
Its more of a surface for the cam to work on.
Second part:
What, more homework?
get those measurements and you will see. without them you will continue to struggle with the topic. the washer is further proof you do not get it.
YesYes tolerance can stack, but is it enough for it to be an issue?
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
Nope. The shim is not part of the surface that gets worked on. The shim causes the ramp to be engaged sooner and for more PEIts more of a surface for the cam to work on.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I do get it, not well put.get those measurements and you will see. without them you will continue to struggle with the topic. the washer is further proof you do not get it.
However, what is not going through is the problem in regards to solution. I have created the same problem by other means. I will continue to explore it.
We can all sit in a group and chant "Primary Extraction" like its the end of and be all of the worlds conundrums (or in this case failure to get a fired case out of the barrel)
That does not mean its the answer, putting a shim or washer in there may work, but its a patch. That may get it to work, its not getting to the root cause. At times we have to accept that, in this case (pun fully intended) I do not.
In Answer to the Nope: I said it badly.
The baffle has the cam surface (shape), the bolt handle engages that surface and that's where both the leverage (torque actually) and rearward cam action come from.)
The shim is nothing more than a clearance take up giving the bolt more rearward movement. With something like .050 you can stuff a pretty good shim in there.
At this point I am going to say we disagree and leave it at that.
We don't disagree in my opinion. What you fail to understand is that the shim is the test. Where the shim helps is a confirmation that PE is bad. The solution has been stated while we were dancing with the clean your chamber solution. Once you confirm that PE is the problem then there is the fix. There are parts changes(and they can work)like changing the baffle and the handle, and then there is the solution where dimensions are corrected as the solution. Savages are assembled from parts in a bin so it stands to reason that every once in a while you meet the extreme ends of the tolerances and PE does no happen. When this happens it requires physically altering the gap between the bolt ramp and the rear baffle. There is the BillPA (set screw)method in the Savage Faqs or there is the mill the end of the bolt where the bolt handle is. You will need to take the same off of the bottom of the slot as you do off the end. If you are in opposition to that then yes, we do disagree. That's bad for you because you would continue to search for an answer and never find it.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I am afraid we do not agree, what you call a fix is a patch and I believe is unnecessary. I do not blame anyone like the OP who wants to move on and shoot.
Indeed that is a way to get it to stop being an issue. What more force does to the extractor and rim of the brass probably only gets revealed if you reload the brass often enough and or have an extractor failure.
What I do strongly believe is this is a chamber related issue, not a lack of motion (movement distance) or force with the Baffle Cam.
The brass is sticking in the chamber for x reasons and that sticking force is more than the cam shape and distance provides as an extractive force.
Put more force on it and it (probably in most cases) breaks free.
As noted I re-created it without a live firing. I have to puzzle on it and try to figure out what is going on, that will be an on and off process as shooting is the prime goal.
You can call it dancing around cleaning the chamber if you choose to, I call it trying to find the root cause. Chamber cleaning may indeed be a help.
If so, that's better than buying unneeded parts of putting various objects on the baffle.
Changing parts may be getting it to work, but I disagree that the root cause is the PE and so called stacking tolerances.
This is not a fine precision devices. A mechanics go its a relatively course one with a lot of movement in it.
Some more data for open minded"
I measured the ramp on my 111 that from serial number is probably 15 years old. That cam ramp on the rear baffle is .164 total movement. the body is .355 and .518 added on the ramp.
Subtracting from that is the .050 (still need better measurement but its awfully close) of the space between the baffle and the handle (it actually can be anywhere between the baffle and handle and the baffle and receiver)
The two new and or newer guns its about .007 more. The 111 and the 12FV both experienced the issue. Last gun session it did not at all.
I will see how it goes down the road (tomorrow hopefully)
The new baffles are actually bit thickener on the body and a bit more ramp distance but overall the lift is only .007 more.
So while this is a very poor sampling for data, its also very illuminating. Rather than less, there is very effectively a significant though pretty small bit more in the newer guns.
Most interesting. Clearly there is not a loss of ramp on the new guns, indeed if the small sample size indicates anything, there is more overall ramp as well as less cleaner fore and or aft of the baffle getting more overall effect
Have you pulled the firing pin assembly and checked it yet. You can do it with a depth gauge from the face of the action to the bolt face so you dont have to set up an indicator..........ah never mind. It is the chamber, You win.
PS your measurements never take into consideration the distance from the action lug abutment to the rear face of the receiver RC20. I'm done. Chase that rabbit my friend.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
No you simply do not get it nor seem to want to. No I did not pull the bolt apart, I will at some point.
I am not saying its only the chamber, I am saying the Chamber seems to be a factor and it may be the key factor, there may be other causes as well.
And I do understand the extraction distance I am measuring is not the actual. It is indicative of the whole. In mechanical terms its a hell of a lot even if to the non machine person its seems tiny.
I read that the ramp is not enough, its been ground down too much on new guns.
What I am seeing if the small data set is accurate is that the baffle is both thicker with more lift now that it was before and I had the same problem with an older gun.
I can also add dimension's. I am accepting the .035 is correct, .006 stacked clearance is not going to be enough to cause an issue, an engineer does not design that close to a tolerance for something that course.
Engineers for the most part are not stupid, mistakes yes, mfg issues at times yes, but an on going never ending FPE? (Failure Primary e
Extraction would be the right term as it describes the issue without saying its the cause.
What I can say is that the Barrels were all Savage I had the issue with. XC and Shilen have not done that.
I try not to get emotional attachments to technical issues and my theory.
It should be data, cause and affect, an operating theory and see if it pans out.
If not, re-consider.
I will see if I can repeat my created fault and see what has affect on it.
RC, I do get it. FPE is is only never ending if it is not a function of the bolt opening. If you have a stuck case and you have PE then you often will never notice. I don't believe the chamber is the issue. I believe the brass case is effected by heat and pressure. It is where the dimensions of the case do not return to a smaller set than the cooling chamber.
Over pressure is often the culprit. Powder choice, powder volume or weight, bullet weight and case manufacturer can all be contributors to brass getting expanded beyond the norm causing the brass to stick. This is why every commercial bolt action and most if not all customs have a PE ramp. If we accept that brass gets distorted from firing and needs the PE to help remove it we have only one choice if your bolt gets stuck. Test for PE function and timing.
The only other time that I know of a bolt being difficult to open is when you jam a bullet in the lands and then try to remove the cartridge. Often you find a lot of powder in your rifle right after you get the bolt open....unless you stand your rifle up to open the bolt.
You will get it brother, it is a learning process. Seasoned Savagesmiths have learned to deal with PE issues. When you get around to pulling the pin and measure actual PE, you will at the least have the opportunity to correct it if you desire.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
Would this kit help at all? Trying to figure all this out and to be honest I would prob just but a new bolt or send to a gunsmith if it wasn't an easy fix. The gun should work as intended or Savage should fix it. http://pacifictoolandgauge.com/misc-...tainless_steel
IT my help for heavy bolt lift, but it will not help for PE problems
.You will get it brother, it is a learning process. Seasoned Savagesmiths have learned to deal with PE issues. When you get around to pulling the pin and measure actual PE, you will at the least have the opportunity to correct it if you desire
Robinhood: Please note that I am neither your friend nor your brother. I find it condescending and would appreciate it if you would stop.
I have no issue with disagreement but leave that out of it.
When you start with over .100 extraction distance, even if with all the take up factors you wind up with .035, that is still a major amount.
And note that since the barrels were changed it no longer is an issue at least with my guns.
You continue to ignore the data that things have changed and to the more extractive force with recent guns (again at least with my two)
More ramp cam and thicker base on the rear baffle.
At one time everyone knew that you put a tourniquet on a limb when serious bleeding.
They then eventually realized that you killed the limb and it had to be cut off (often gangrene)
I believe the evidence points elsewhere and support it, you don't and I find the information on that side less than convincing.
Others can draw their own conclusions. Cleaning a chamber is awfully quick and easy to do.
I will continue to explore this as time permits.
My rifles are working perfectly fine without one of those add on devices. They worked better for a time when they had the Savage barrels on after cleaning the chamber.
From the one comment I gather its normal to get flamed on this subject. That's a shame, science, engineering and technical areas should open to discussion and exploration and learning new things.
I am testing a theory and my mind is open to other facts that will change it and I will leave it at that.
Not my friend or brother, This was Zilla's post. You took over his post. Zilla's issue is PE. You problem is much different.
.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I had to put a shim on my bolt baffle for better PE. Did the job nicely. I do not consider it a band aid, or 'tourniquet'
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks