All good points. My point about the large shank is not that it makes it any stronger at the receiver ring. My thought is that Savage did it be able to keep the barrel nut and still have thicker chamber walls for that portion that extends beyond the receiver ring. I agree that a larger action overall would be the better option. However, I've seen quite a few Savages in 338 Lapua (their factory action designed for the Lapua that is) with quite a number of rounds through them with zero issues. Something makes me think that if people are having issues with lug setback etc, (when using the actions that came from the factory made for the Lapua, not putting a Lapua barrel on a regular Savage action) are using over loaded rounds, or have oil in their chamber restricting the brass from gripping the chamber, etc. I say that because I can't imagine Savage continuing to make them and not recalling them if it was found to be inherently dangerous.

As kind of a side note, does anyone know the dimensions of the RPR that's chambered for the Lapua in comparison to the Savage? I'm curious because I've thought about getting one of them too and haven't heard of any issues with them and Ruger has always been know for building stout actions.