Reply With QuoteWatch this vid and see if this helps.
I jumped on the bandwagon and bought one of the Cabela's special. It is the first Savage I have owned since the middle 70's. The barrel will probably come off sometime next year for a SS one. Just like the looks. Anyway, All my other rifles are Win's. and Remington's. With my Remington's I will remove the firing pin and the extractor when searching for the fit of my brass and finding the lands for any particular bullet. How can I accomplish this with my Savage bolt? Couldn't find anything on You Tube but, then again, my computer skills aren't that great.
Watch this vid and see if this helps.
Well, I certainly dont profess to know everything, but I dont understand why you would remove those parts to "find the lands" and regardless of that I dont understand how you would find the lands with the bolt any way. Plus, with every different bullet you use, this measurement will change.
I do it using the Hornady Lock and Load O.A.L. gauge, Lock and load modified case, (for the the particular caliber you are using) Hornady Bullet Comparator & Basic insert set, along with a good digital caliper.
You put your gun in what ever apparatus you use to hold gun when you work on it, and remove the bolt. Using the O.A.L. device you screw the modified case (which suits your caliber) on the end. Then you place the bullet you are going to use in the end of this modified case. (you can make your own case if you are mechanically inclined and have the equipment) Loosen the set screw on the O.A.L. device which allows a rod to slide out through the end of the modified case, which allows you to push the bullet out or retract it back in the case. Sliding this (with bolt removed) into the chamber you can press the rod in, which will push the bullet forward into the lands. re tighten the set screw and pull out the device. The bullet will many times remain in the gun, push it out with your cleaning rod.
Put the bullet back in the modified case. The OAL device has a cut out that allows your caliper to get on the back of the case. Attach the Bullet Comparator onto your caliper and measure, recording the result. Now you know what a bullet length for the bullet you are using is, that can be used to set how far off the lands your bullet is, or by measuring again after how ever many rounds you have fired, and comparing to this original length, what throat erosion has occurred. (using the same bullet, of course)
Here is a well made you tube showing this process:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJt7AxQr5ik
Russellc
Robinhoods, video posted while I was posting...
Russellc
Video (Robinhoods video) is correct about getting false readings if you dont apply the same pressure using the Hornady device. A little practice is required, and repeating the results for consistency.
Another point, the video using the bolt method is a really nice action, most basic Savage actions are no where near that sensitive right from the factory! I have never had one trued, like are available from Northern shooters....
Another one I liked...( dont care to poke cleaning rod down barrel )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtLAmANcywI
Russellc
Originally Posted by russellc
Using the Hornady tool, it's easy to get consistent readings if you follow some simple steps. First of all, clean the chamber and throat area well. Any crud in either will give you fits.
Next, grab a handfull of bullets from the batch you will be loading. Take a measurement with each of the bullets, record each reading, then use an average for your working number. To make sure you have the bullet fully seated in the lands but not jammed to the point the lands start to engrave, just give the push rod a tap with something light. I use a soup spoon and just tap until I feel everything is seated. JUst be careful to keep pressure on the body of the tool that holds the case in the chamber against the shoulder.
If you don't want to mess around with averaging out readings then take the time to sort the bullets by base to ogive measurements. Doing that though will require a different seating depth for each group you segregated by base to ogive measurement and that's usually not enough to matter (unless using some really cheap bullets).
FWIW, the only part that really needs to be removed from the bolt if you are using the bolt to judge whether or not the bullet is in the lands is the ejector. Once the firing pin is pulled back and cocked you can raise or lower the handle with little or no issue. You really only need that last little bit of bolt handle movement to judge the drag.
That said, the Hornady tool or even case with a split neck will get the job done regardless of rifle brand and not having to disassemble the bolt.
Another small thing is when using the Comparator to measure, the bullet angle going into the insert needs to be straight in. This sometimes necessitates loosening and adjusting the position of the comparator on the caliper. This allows both the case head to sit square as well as allowing the bullet to enter the comparator insert squarely.
Russellc
This is why I prefer the Sinclair comparator inserts. They are designed so the bullet only fits in straight. They fit the Hornady adapter but the readings won't be the same as the hornady insert. Since you only want to read "relative" measurements it's no big deal but the Sinclair's are far more consistant.
I have never had an issue using the Hornady OAL gauge. Take 5-10 measurements (Whatever you deem comfortable for your determination) and use the average. When you get good your measurements can be within .002-.003 or less consistently. The most important thing is saving the bullet that you originally measure with in order to keep track of the lands if you need to re-measure to reset seating depth during the barrels life span (primarily due to switching bullets or lots etc. I know everyone likes "exact" measurements, but being "close enough" on this measurement will yield solid results every time if using quality components and a good load development process.
You have to consider that every component used in the process has some degree of variation that plays into the mix. The key item in this equation (if all other processes are done correctly) being the selected bullet. Some bullets are obviously more jump sensitive than others or show much larger inconsistencies in base to OGIVE measurements. High quality bullets will usually see .005 or less variation within a specified lot. lot to lot variation I've seen .005-.010 with high quality bullets. Others I've seen greater than .010 difference from lot to lot. Now if you are trying to shoot VLD style bullets this may lead to having to conduct load development every time you get a new lot of bullets at least to determine proper seating depth. Basically is you are within .005 of the lands you can find your starting point for load dev and work from that point in .005 increments if deemed necessary.
For me in my load dev process seating depth is the very last thing for fine tuning a load. I always start .020 off the lands and work charge/powder selection first. Once I have a good consistent load that prints good groups I'll review the chrono data for velocity consistency. If I feel it could be better I'll test seating depth at +/-.005 from my starting point. Typically I see an improvement on this adjustment. If group size changes drastically due to seating depth adjustment that should automatically tell you that you have a jump sensitive bullet and you will have to monitor the erosion of the lands to keep that bullet shooting tight.
Other observations on seating depth:
I recently tested the 140 Berger Hybrid in my 6.5x47 from .020 jump to .100 jump. I did not see any changes in groups at 100yds. What I did see is that from .100-.040 my Velocity was 2760fps with an SD of 8 and ES of 14-16. Inside of .040 jump my velocity increased by 20fps up to 2780fps. I also saw my chrono numbers tighten up to an SD of 2 and ES of 8 over a 10 round string. I was pretty surprised by this so I loaded up a re-test and saw the same results. This is the load I've been running from around 1000-2000rds on the barrel when I got a new lot of bergers. I have not had to mess my charge at all, but the new lot of bullets were about .010 shorter to the OGIVE then the previous lot.
Take it for what it's worth, but I learned a lot with my current barrel due to it's extreme consistency for a test like this. Other barrels and observation may differ, but this it what I saw when I removed all other factors as possibilities in my loading processes.
I will try the Sinclairs, inexpensive enough and I am a tool junkie. That said, its easy to see if the bullet isnt going straight in, and even if it is, if the case head end isnt square, inconsistency happens at that end. I see Hornady offers an "Anvil" that attaches to the other jaw of the caliper and provides a small flat area to square the case head on better than just the edge of the calipers jaw.
Russellc
Using SMK bullets, I have noticed a difference. Things like this drive me nuts. Now I measure and sort the bullets. This is for bolt guns, so far I am not nearly so OCD about AR15 loading, but tweakier than some...
Russellc
Using SMK bullets, I have noticed a measurable difference between projectiles. Things like this drive me nuts. Now I measure and sort the bullets. This is for bolt guns, so far I am not nearly so OCD about AR15 loading, but tweakier than some...
Russellc
A couple years ago, just to see if what everyone said was true, I sorted a complete box of 500 175 gr SMK's by Base to ogive measurement. Sorted into groups that were +/- .001" which gave a .002" variation in the group. Ended up with 6 separate groups with a full .012' Variation from shortest bullet (BTO) to longest (BTO).
It appears that Sierra (at least at that time) just dumped the production of all their machines into a common bin and filled boxes from that. Nosler, on the other hand, claims to box bullets each machine separately. The Nosler 175 C/C's I've purchased seem to bear that out with extremely uniform BTO measurements.
Variations come from both the tolerances allowed when the forming die is "cut" and polished as well as wear as bullets are formed. An over or undersized brand new die may create bullets that are longer or shorter than others from dies that have been in service longer. About the only dimension I find to be dead on from most manufacturers is bullet OD. From there I find all kinds of variations.
The introduction of tipped bullets has alleviated, to a point, OAL variations but not necessarily base to ogive measurements. All complaining aside, we are shooting some of the best ever bullets due to continuing development.
I find that the factory Hornady modified cases are a different dimension than my cases from base to shoulder. Meaning I have to add the difference. This is a variable that most people overlook. The ones I made myself were not a problem. At best the Hornady gauge is a rough estimate. The method in the video is definitive in my opinion with firing pin removed. Even better if the ejector is removed. Once the lands are found, you get the case base to ogive and done. I keep the test cartridge in with my dies marked with pertinent information. to each his own.
The Hornady OAL tool with the modified case is my preferred way of measuring.
I can take the measurement 10 times and it will not differ more than 1 thousands between measurements.
I've compared the measurements of the Hornady OAL tool to those using the Wheeler method from the video. The results with both methods were within 2 thousands of each other. More than good enough for me.
One thing about the method from the video is that I needed to use clear tape on the sides of the bolt head retaining pin. Otherwise it wanted to slide out with out the firing being there to secure it.
Sorry for not posting any replies. My computer keeps freezing every time I log on here. Except for this.
Yes, I already use the A. Wheeler method on all my REM's. Works many times better then the Hornady tool.
Finally, my grandson came over and "fixed" it for me. LOL.
I have reverted to using my Hornady tool, (with lots of patience) and my readings are getting more consistent. Got spoiled using Alex's method.
Once you get use to it, accurate measurements are quite consistent.
Russellc
One trick I found with the Hornady tool to keep from having the bullet jammed in the lands is to take a wooden dowel and insert from the muzzle and as you push the tool forward and feel the bulet contact the lands push the dowel rod forward. You can actually push back and forth with each and you can tell when it's kissing the lands. The point about using the Hornady case versus a fireformed case is valid. You should measure each and take that into account or drill and tap a fire formed case. Hornady will do it for you for a small fee. The thread pitch on the tool is an oddball.
"The point about using the Hornady case versus a fireformed case is valid. You should measure each and take that into account or drill and tap a fire formed case. Hornady will do it for you for a small fee. The thread pitch on the tool is an oddball." (Cornbread)
Exactly. I measure my fire formed cases against the modified case to determine the amount to add. My chamber has .020 more distance to the lands than the barrels I chambered with my Manson .199 reamer. I have read where Savage had problems in the past with short chambers, but it could have been because of a reamer being sharpened too many times.
Earlier today I got around to trying the method of finding the lands shown in the video. I previously used the Hornady tools, and once developing a touch for it felt it was good to go. I began an intensive measuring methodology, and noted some oddities with the Hornady method, if not performed carefully. Going to the Hornady sight, I read their notes and instructions, particularly the suggestion of very carefully poking a wooden dowel in the muzzle and sandwiching the bullet between the Hornady setup and the wooden dowel. This helps get a good feeling for when the bullet is just touching the lands, slightly into the lands, and fairly jammed into the lands.
Where the oddities began was repeating the measurements having gently pushed the bullet in until it just stops, no real force at all. Just feeling the resistance begin. This gave way too short of measurements. with Oal on the bullet at 2.55 (when it got down to the nitty gritty, OAL was not the method, I used the bullet comparator that allegedly sits on the ogive of the bullet.)....I knew this was short. The bullet, used over and over here was the 69 grain SMK, the gun my Savage 12FV in .223. Reading others techniques with the Hornady devices, my own methods and the notes on the hornady sight I got all sorts of results. I usually just tap it slightly with a finger, and this is what Hornadys notes say. If carefully done, it was fairly repeatable, but prone to show short. Others I have read tap it with a small spoon. or give it a reasonable push, etc.
These methods tended to result in measurements that ranged from similar to the finger tap, to way too long. Stiff pushes and fairly good tapping resulted in OAL as much as 2.3200! More reasonable tapping resulted in 2.3000. My own personal method resulted, or just a little shorter, mostly 2.285, to slightly more or slightly less. Once I did get 2.300...again, I measured with the ogive method first, then removed the insert, rezeroed, and measured OAL to compare.
I decided to see if the video method shown earlier would work with the far less expensive Savage action. Reading about it and watching a few other videos there was conflicting info on what needed to be removed. I figured the ejector would need to go, but I wasnt sure about the extractor. I didnt see how it would push, but I feared the bullet, if even slightly stuffed into the lands, might pull the round longer on extraction. This occurred on some of the above testing at the too long measurements using a dummy round to test...same SMK bullet, but a new Winchester brass instead of the modified Hornady unit.
I began by taking apart the bolt. I removed the ejector, and figured the firing pin would not interfere if in the cocked (retracted) position. I was wrong, or I was right about the inability of the Savage action to replicate the video method's "loose bolt." Took the bolt back out, removed the firing pin assembly, reassembled and low and behold, I had the "loose bolt" shown in the video. Raising the bolt handle resulted in only an ever so slight lag. For this method, I made a dummy round from a brand new Winchester case, and a 69 grain SMK bullet.
I went through 13 steps total. Why 13? well on the 12th step when I was reducing by 1/2 of a thousandth of an inch (per video) I screwed up and over did the reduction by1.5 thousandths. At this length, the bolt raised without resistance, but I couldnt help but wonder if I passed up the sweet spot. Using the bullet Comparator to test with, I was getting 1.8895. The over step went to 1.8880, and I corrected to 1.8890, which measured 2.275 total OAL.
This is close to where I was with the Hornady method, but this was a more definite end point using this method. If nothing else, it sure gave me a good feel for what the force level gives the closest actual result when using the Hornady device with the modified brass.. Plus, I was dead wrong that the Savage action wasnt sufficient to allow the fine "feel" required. Dead wrong. The firing pin does need to be removed, its spring preloads the bolts feel on lift, making the test impossible.
If you have used the Hornady method like I do, this is worth while either as a replacement method, or to give you a real world feel for how ti implement it accurately.
Hope this helps someone,
Russellc
Posting Permissions
The sole purpose of this site is to provide an online community for those who wish to interact with other Savage firearm enthusiasts.
The information and opinions expressed within this site are those of its contributors, and in no way should be viewed as the opinions or recommendations of Savage Arms.
This site utilizes affiliate programs to generate revenue and as such purchasing a product reached by clicking on a link on this site may earn us a small commission on that sale.
Bookmarks