Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Metallurgy, Ruger Investment Casting, Action Strength?

met·al·lur·gy
ˈmedlˌərjē/
noun
the branch of science and technology concerned with the properties of metals and their production and purification

in·vest·ment cast·ing
nountechnical
a technique for making small, accurate castings in refractory alloys using a mold formed around a pattern of wax or similar material which is then removed by melting

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/9/24/casting-call-rugers-investment-casting-process


How can a "soup" of molten metal poured into a mold be strong enough to become a rifle action that must endure such high pressures?

Obviously the Ruger action holds up, but not understanding how it is done causes me to not have full confidence.

Can anybody put it in laymen's terms?

And to add to the confusion; how can/does Ruger make an investment casting stainless all that strong?

The "soup" which Ruger (and other companies) uses to form their products are dependent on alloys which differ significantly from the typical iron castings (or zinc, and other non-ferrous castings) we are accustomed to which are often inferior in strength for purposes such as guns.

Specialized metal castings are actually used a lot more commonly - not just investments- than we often realize. Investment casting just happens to allow more complex forms to be cast and done closer to final shape and size.

Not sure if this is simple enough, but actually investment casting can produce parts that are stronger than forged. The reason is that if very precise and accurately controlled powdered metallurgy is used you end up with a finer grained structure than can be produced from billet. Also actions forged from billet originally started out as a casting.

It all comes down to the care and quality put into the part. You can have good castings and bad castings. You can start with a high quality billet and forge or machine a great part, or you can start with low grade crap billet and end up with the same in a finished part.

It's not pot metal, the "soup" is 4140 steel in the case of chrome moly.

So it is all about the "fine grain" ?

How much stress does the actual action endure in a bolt action rifle? The end of the barrel forms most of the actual chamber. The bolt lugs lock into the action so the force is mostly to shear off backwards?

Am I thinking rightly?

By contrast the Remington 700 is machined from billet? But the billet was hammer forged? To straighten the grain???

Aren't you mixing two concepts here?

The Model 700 action has a much simpler shape than a Ruger 77. When the 700 was developed it was designed around being able to easily machine it from simple round bar stock. The machining operations necessary to mill a 77 from a billet would have driven the price much higher when it was developed.

There is also the matter of heat treatment involved in both the 700 and 77 actions. "Pot" metal castings aren't typically heat treated, nor would they respond to it the same.

"How can a "soup" of molten metal poured into a mold be strong enough to become a rifle action that must endure such high pressures?"

A billet was once a molten soup. Check out some pictures of blast furnaces, open hearths and steelmaking. Lots of hot soup there.

yep heat treatment not done right for either of those two would result into ugly instances. you can't look at investment casting done by Ruger and think "Dutch Oven" results.

I can remember reading the same questions and answers 40+ years ago...

The point of casting is to have an efficient way of making complex shapes, that are either impossible or cost prohibitive to forge. And forging dies - hard tooling - take a lot of abuse and tend to be relatively expensive. Casting patterns can generally be relatively low-strength, inexpensive materials.

Good castings will be clean and dense - not a lot of impurities in the metal, nor voids (air bubbles) that formed when the metal was liquid. Impurities can act as stress raisers, and cause premature failure of the part. Voids are an obvious problem.

Firearms receivers are generally designed to have good strength, but also good toughness, not brittle. A brittle part could shatter with an unexpected stress, like an overload, and be very dangerous to the shooter.

Good forgings will usually have better ultimate strength and toughness, but a Mauser-style receiver was designed in the days of weaker steels; a good casting is plenty strong enough. In higher-stressed, really critical parts, like barrels, you will still see forgings, and bar stock production.

Aside from clean, void-free metal, a good steel casting will then depend on a good heat treatment. In that operation the grain size and strength/hardness can all be refined to give the desired properties.

That was my first thought....steel always starts out as soup before it is shaped into something!

According to a Brian Pearce article on 77s, the Ruger castings actually tested as stronger than the bar stock that many other actions are machined from. Supposedly, the bar stock can shear along certain internal stress lines if memory serves.

MIM parts, on the other hand, aren't as dense as other steels (95% if I recall correctly). Kahr economy model autos feature MIM takedown levers that are somewhat larger than the machined ones on the high-end guns. The MIM rear sight on a Kimber Target II my son owned sheared off at the top of the dovetail just from recoil stress.

As long as the material being poured is hot enough to go into solution before cooling and is properly heat treated and tempered for the specs. required it will work fine. Forging is used to shape steel but in practical terms does not induce magical properties into the steel above and beyond other methods of shaping steel, contrary to popular opinion.

I have a question; why do some of the older Ruger 77 receivers turn "plum/purple" as they age?

I have a 77R in 6.5 Rem Mag that is very "plum", while the barrel is still dark blue. I assume that they were blued at the same time and the receiver has turned color, while the barrel has remained dark blue, because of the alloy used.

I don't see any of the newer Ruger 77s turning plum color, or maybe I'm just not looking hard enough to see them.

Link: https://www.amazon.com/Materials-Processes-Manufacturing-Paul-DeGarmo/dp/047136679X

Taught this curiculum once,...GTC 105 / GTC 206 at a local CC, included in their 2 years associate degree tech program.

I DON"T advise buying anything newer than the 8th edition,...they "reprinted" with many errors, and deletion of material that should have been kept .

Just a GREAT book to have around when a bunch of young'uns start asking questions

Chapters 13, through 19 were my favorites,...covering casting, forging, rolling, extruding, etc.

Can't recommend this book highly enough, for those who take interest in threads of this nature.

GTC

Sorry, ....WRONG.

Etched Photo-micrographs will show superior grain structures in properly designed forgings AND castings that will not be present in the identical piece machined from rolled or cast billet.

GTC

Don't know, but the receiver on the little refinished Savage .410 I bought yesterday is kinda purple. I've also seen that color on the bolt release housing on a Garcia Sako .223 I used to own.

It means they are bruising when you shoot them and will soon fail. Please shoot me a PM and I can help you dispose of them.

In the case of the REmington 700 the barrel at one point was a casting and then heat treated and then hammerforged. The action is a blank of SS or CM and then heatreated, there is no forging.

Investment casting orients the grain structure in to the shape of the finished object and results in enormous strength.

The 'investment castings' (lost wax process) that Ruger and others use to make products are strong and well engineered.

I bought those and other castings and have toured Ruger's Pine Tree Investment castings foundry in N.H.

In the case of the 700 barrel there are a few stages besides heat treat between casting and hammer forging.

All steel starts out as a molten metal soup...that's how steel is made...then it's poured into some type of a mold to await it's final form...that's the basic process for making all steel.

Once you have a blob of steel, it's steel, with very different properties from the iron from whence it came.

When casting methods were primitive, forging used to have some advantages in some applications, but for some applications casting is stronger.

Now-a-days, casting technology is computer controlled to fractions of a degree, as is heat-treatment...that is also digitally controlled and the process is precisely optimized to favor the alloy being used.

It's high tech stuff...

Today, it's an extremely precise manufacturing process compared to the heavily bearded and muscled blacksmiths of olden days beating lumps of steel into primitive shapes...most guys alive now don't remember those days anyway.

But cast it or forge it...it's still steel...the rest of the story is all about engineering.

All things being equal, its the heat treat that makes the difference.

It's difficult to discuss something this complex in off the shelf , cryptic sound bites, and vague generalizations.

Example:


not at all sure just what you're trying to say,...

GTC

Heat treat makes a big difference, but if it's got impurities or casting voids, that's a problem.

Lots of critical items are still forged, even in the modern age.

Not that difficult to understand. All starts as soup. Some is cast as bar stock some is cast as something specific. All the same.

Machining which tears the grain during the process.

Keep in mind that the billet or bar that is machined or forged was also once "soup".

Castings get a bad reputation because the alloying elements used to increase fluidity (generally silicon and carbon) make the material brittle and reduce its impact strength.

A very high degree of process development and process control means that steel castings can be made with standard alloys and without inclusions, voids or other casting flaws. It can be done, but you are not going to buy those castings for $2 a pound.

Even with high silicon and carbon, tiny amounts of alloying elements can be added that make the graphite inclusions spherical. Given proper annealing, these cast irons (called nodular irons) are suitable for automotive suspension applications, like steering knuckles, that are high shock applications.

Not really true. Yes, it all comes from the furnace as molten steel, but bar stock is not "cast as bar stock..." Bar stock is rolled which results in aligning and refining the grain structure.

One of the more interesting parts of Stuart Ottesons book on bolt action rifles was the part where he describes craftsman taking Ruger 77 actions out of the mold, placing them in a jig with dial indicators and then beating the hell out of them until they are straight.
I never really cared for the brick of steel look, the crude unfinished action rails or the wacky bottom metel, but reading about the actions being pounded on sealed the deal for me.

TRW made the best M14 of all time. Receiver was cast if I remember correctly.

I recall reading where the purpling of parts is due to a high silicon content. Have seen this on Rugers, Weatherby's, some Kimber parts etc.

I think the silicon makes the metal easier to mold.

Cheers, Chris

8620 steel

....The stuff's a DREAM to work with, and smiles back at you as you weld it.

GTC

I believe Ruger Investment Casting also manufactures the Montana 1999 action which seems to be heald in high regard on the fire.I own one Hawkeye and one Montana, both work just fine and are strong. I am a designer in the fishing industry and work mainly with aluminum of various types and they all work. We also use different types of steel and titanium for guide frames. It all depends on applications. I am no expert on investment casting steel but back when Ruger developed the process they are using I think it was pretty new( I could be wrong). I may be wrong here but I think the tolerances on some fully machined actions are a bit tighter.

Glad you're bringing this up,...it's more catch phrase vagueness, with no basis in reality.
Closest thing I can buy as "cast bar stock" is some specialty CONTINUOUS POUR FE ( PURE IRON) that's specific to making quality magnets, and such.
Outside of that, there is no such thing,..."bar stock" by industry definition is a ROLLED material.
Simplistic generalizations may not be be "difficult to understand".
....that doesn't make em' RIGHT, either.

GTC

GTC

Here is Ruger's Pine Tree Investment Casting co's site:

Rugers Pine Tree Foundry

Here is a pic. from their site:

The bottom line......... no rifle (or revolver) is any stronger overall than its weakest point functionally. Rugers are anything but flawed when it comes to weak points. In fact, some have complained about them being overbuilt.

Certainly, if I was stranded some place out in the wild parts of Alaska and my only source of supply was a single fly-over via SuperCub dropping 50 pounds of stuff, my Ruger stainless M77 223 and a hundred rounds of ammo would give me more confidence than any of the Winchester, Marlin, or Remington rifles and equal weights of ammo that my safe might hold.

The fella' that wrote this knows more than a wee bit about making quality steel parts and pieces.

There's a good reason he chose the word bolded above.

Ruger and his team started scratching around on this process with SLIDE RULES, and vacuum tube based process equipment,....the staggering advances forward from that base in the last 40 years sees investment casting an industry byword, and reliable material qualities they were only DREAMING of at the beginning.

GTC

I've owned four, including the two Hawkeyes I've got now. I've not had a single functional issue with any of them, not one.

I wouldn't pick one for a high-end custom, or to base a bench gun on, but for a reliable hunting rifle, they're hard to beat.

What happens to the aligned and refined grain structure when you normalize it and then heat treat it?

TRW receivers were forged.

Forging parts was the common state-of-the-art and a reliable way to manufacture and reduce machining considering the technology available at the time...it was 60 years ago.

You're right, I should have clarified. I'm on the side of high carbon tool steels used in knife making where heat treat makes or breaks the final product and forging is used as another means of forming the steel vs stock removal, which unfortunately has a certain following that thinks the forging process produces a superior steel/grain structure strictly by virtue of pounding the steel.

My guess is you are coming from the low carbon structural steel side where cold forge/forging those steels has its positives not as evident in knife making.

This guy has a lay men's explanation for the basics in forging and heat treat http://www.cashenblades.com/images/articles/lowdown.html for knife steels but I think still has validity in general terms for basic steels in general.

It really does come down to the type of steel and what it is going to be used for as to whether or not forging has a place in the production of the product.

I make a lot of odd things



an unsuccessful try at making springs from Tungsten wire



yes that's a pen point for scale

Has anyone passed the ABS journeyman 90 degree bend test with a knife made from one of the Carpenter wonder steels that have been shaped by grinding and with a proper heat treat?

A really worthwhile book to have, if you are interested in this sort of stuff. I bought mine 30-odd years ago and still occasionally get it out.

Without rehashing a lot of what has been said, there are a range of methods of casting. Investment casting, especially as is done today, is a method which can give rise to very good dimensional control, very good finish with minimal need to machine and, with attention to design, excellent soundness, toughness and strength.

That element of design's important too: you can't usually take a design intended to be produced by forging and machining and replicate it as an investment casting without giving it some thought. Considerations such as how the metal will flow into the investment play a part, for example. Having taken these sorts of factors into account though, investment casting is more than capable of making a good tough and safe receiver. It is used in a range of applications where strength and toughness and reliability are key factors, including components for aircraft as well as firearms and a myriad of others.

FWIW my own experience includes experience in production of such things as shear blades, rock-drill bits, handcuffs, track plates for armoured vehicles and some others, and I've made, analysed, and tested - sometimes to destruction - a fair few investment castings. I don't happen to own a Ruger 77, but I wouldn't have any reservations about their strength or safety based on them having investment cast receivers.

fwiw & afaik,
That is correct. TRW 8620 FORGED Receivers have life spans of 450,000 rounds plus... It says something that NO ONE has been able to even approach this level of quality or longevity given the age of CNC finish machining. LRB Receivers are known by those who build them to be borderline nightmare and Smith has been unable, or unwilling, to try and duplicate the small batch made during the 80s that is talked about in reverential tones. I want to say, again AFAIK, that they made something on the order of 200 of the original forged receivers and evidently have been unable to approach that product since. Oddly enough there was talk, and pictures of partially machine receivers, that said new SEI Receivers were just around the corner. Once again something bit and they have, afaik, been unable to deliver on the product. The LRB product CAN be made to run, however, any M-14 smith I have run into generally hates the receiver and says it requires FAR more work to get to function due to poor QC. Something Brown SHOULD have taken care of several years back...

It never fails to amaze me how people/companies go through such herculean efforts only to have final finishing from allowing the product from becoming in the industry standard. As much as it grates me I had to buy a double lugged Springfield Armory to send with my build and it never did live up to a proper forged receiver. Compare a WWII forged M1 Garand that has been shot in a bit to SA M1A that you can build into anything you want and frankly there is NO comparison. The old forged parts fit together like they grew together. The SA receivers clink and clank and completely lack that organic feeling...

All that being said find a better basis to build a .475 Linebaugh when it comes to strength. Ruger, for all intents an purposes, cannot be beat. Freedom Arms, for all of their incredible tolerance is ANOTHER cast frame and cylinder product. One that lacks the safety of the Ruger but I digress(referring to the 83). Love the 97s...

I still think Ruger 77s are a first rate tomato stake. The FEEL like complete junk that no amount of time on lathe or mill is going to correct. That is a personal opinion that no one asked for and by all means pay it no heed. I had a close friend bring back a 77 in 6.5 Creedmoor from the FTW Ranch while his group was visiting there for a little Long Range Rifle Practice. He was amazed to see, another long time friend, shoot this same particular rifle into three straight .250 MOA 3 shot groups that were on the shy side of the aspersion figure and shot with Hornady Factory Match Ammunition. Needless to say I am attempting to buy the rifle as a gag gun to irritate other friends at the range who are fellow rifle snobs. Nothing would be any sweeter than to outshoot them with a POS Ruger 77. If I did not know my friend to be an officer and a gentleman by natural selection, to say nothing of congress, I would have questioned that purchase. Might trade him a Navy Match Grade Mark II B Grade for that rifle in short order. Apologize for the digression...

Regards, Matt.

Btw, The NEW IN PAPER Brookfield Precision Mount that went on my rifle was worth twice what the Receiver would have ever cost. Should have kept the parts and sold the receiver. What a junker... Could not get my mind around buying a Polyptych, however, I have since been told it was the best I could have found at the time... Forged I might add.

That is impressive

Greg, et al, ABE BOOKS has over 200 copies of this book in various editions for less than $10.00, some with free shipping;

LINK

Ed

Well, it would be nice to have the latest, but OUCH (!) new textbooks are spendy. Guess the 11th focuses on the newer composites, and mfg. processes now in play therewith.

The Eighth had a foot in both worlds, so to speak, and was a bit weak on the cutting edge in composites

The ninth edition turned up with contradictory (and,to the students, extremely confusing illustrations regarding reading the vernier scale.) At the time this was a $150 book ! This is not on DeGarmo and his team, it's on the buffoons proof reading final drafts prior to running off a gazillion copies.

I actually had to generate the "paste in" revision / correction and hand em' out, on my own dime.

Critiques aside, I'l advise ANYBODY who enjoys threads of this nature, regarding ANY of the broad strata of materials we use and consume daily,... if you own this book, and have it handy, you WILL find yourself pulling it off the shelf on a regular basis.
Those who find this sorta' material boring, but who have kids that show interest in it should have a copy,...

GTC

I'll just say I've never even heard of Ruger cast receiver failing.

Yes; you never hear about them failing, just the opposite they have a rep for ruggedness.

What makes their alloy and process so strong?

No doubt they are rugged guns. They are also pretty damn crude IMO and that's why they sell forless than something like a model 700 or a model 70.

Many of the so-called "wonder steels" are not a good choice to forge in the traditional manner because of the complexity of the materials involved as well as the critical temps needed for proper heat treat and temper, not to mention hitting the right temp.( usually by eye) during forging.

It should also be mentioned that the ABS testing for journeymans cert. has more to do with proving temp. control over different areas of the steel and how it is applied in the forge, than building a knife that can be bent into a 90 deg. without breaking. As I recall small cracking in the bend is even allowed as long as it doesn't migrate past a certain point. Besides, a bent knife is a bent knife. It is now in a weakened state and straightening it out only adds to the issue.

The advantages of forging knives are in the artistic nature of the process, the ability to blend different steels together for the patterns visible after etching(the so-called Damascus steel look)and taking advantage of the strengths of two different steels and blending them into one blade, such as O1 for its edge holding and L6 for its toughness and tensile strength. Best of both worlds and looks beautiful too. However, if the forger is also heat treating in the forge as opposed to a computer controlled heat treat oven, he/she better have an accurate eye and know their steel, because if they don't hit their numbers spot on, the steel will not be hardened to its full potential and produce and inferior product.

Stock removal gives you a much larger pallet of steels to choose from, and with less complexity in the building process, since in most cases the steel comes to the knife maker in a clean, precision ground and pre-forged state from the foundry. With the use of a proper heat treat oven the stock removal maker can hit the required temp. numbers with extreme accuracy and bring out the best in the steel with superior control over that from a forge.

Ya' know, I can't remember ever seeing a true Damascus Steel rifle action, though I have seen some mouth watering accoutrements in that form,....usually WAY out in the higher $$$ realm.

You here to discuss RIFLE ACTIONS, or sell knives ?

Would really like to drift back towards the subject at hand.

I've read some WEIRD text regarding Pine Tree castings using 30-40 % "scrap".

When an extremely well equipped team of Metalurgists choose to dope their crucibles with ALREADY certified, Mil-specced "scrap", I say let them run. Torsion bars offa' tanks, barrels and breechblocks, Rockwell Eaton Gears, Landing gear components off Davis Monthan...etc
....can't get to awful offended by the addition of such "scrap", me.

GTC

I'm not trying to sell anything, just responding to 458 Lott's assumption that forging was better than stock removal(machining) as it pertains to the process ie. forging steel vs. machining to "make" steel better, along the lines of the OP wondering how casting steel can be as good as forging or machining solid steel.

As to the "scrap", if you know what it is, and fits the bill, who cares if its secondhand or not. Steel is Steel.

Sure,...the way that the addition, or lack of one tenth of a tenth of one percent of an alloying element completely changes ternary and quartenary phase equilibrium diagrams is just kid stuff.

So's running those gas chromotography tests,....I hear they let the janitors do it for overtime.



GTC

Model 700 actions are NOT machined from billets, but are made from heavy wall CM tubing.That is why there is sometimes anomalies in their dimensions. It is a major cost saving in labor as compared using billets.

Ruger is machining a lot more stuff now than they used too. 5 axis CNC machines have become more common place and it makes sense to machine rather than to cast.

As far as casting being strong or not, consider the turbine vanes for a jet engine. They are cast from single grain super alloys. Nothing else will hold up.

Robert_White: I worked for a time at the same foundry that my father (and Clint Eastwood!) worked at, Pacific Car & Foundry (Renton, Washington).
They made train cars, frames, axles, trucks for the wheels and axles and train wheels!
The trick to castings which I had something to do with, is many of the parts I dealt with were cast in molds then got heat treated in ovens for various amounts of time and then quenched in certain oil baths and some treated again and quenched again.
IF... you think cast iron pieces are not strong go take a bite out of a railroad car wheel!
Cast iron CAN be made into incredibly hard/strong items.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

In a book by De Haas and Van Zwoll** a Remington engineer named Mike Keeney states that the Rem 700 receiver starts out as bar stock. Furthermore he states that seamless tubing in 4140 is expensive enough that it is actually cheaper for Remington to start with bar stock and do their own machining.



**Bolt Action Rifles, expanded 4th edition, page 420, ©2003

Cast iron isn't really the subject. Ruger's actions are investment cast steel, either 4140 or a 400 series stainless.

I seriously doubt that Ruger would phase out their quality line of rifles, the incredibly durable M77 without replacing it with something of equal or better performance (which the American is certainly not). I really don't think they would want to turn over such a signifcant market share to some other company(s). So it wouldn't be a huge surprise if they come out with a basic, rugged, CNC machined "M77" at some point with certain critical part perhaps still investment cast. (I don't think anyone else is making their own bolts which have the same reliability or at this price point.)

But I really have no issue with their "crudeness". They are excellent hunting rifles. LOts of stuff that sees the benches of the local range will never taste much if any blood.

Much less when you factor in the cost of replacing the 700 bolt or having the handle bolted down so it won't come off in your hand and replacing the trigger so it doesn't go off at odd moments of its own choosing.

If I remember correctly, Jack O'Connor wrote an article about the Ruger 77 when it first came out and said that during a stress test, it took 180,000 psi to start to shear the bolt lugs and even at that they were not completely sheared. Not 100% certain on that figure but that seems pretty strong to me.

John

I have never had a 700 bolt handle come off. And not from lack of shooting. That said the old model 70, 1 piece forged bolt is the best mouse trap.
As for the trigger. I run Jewell triggers on both my model 70's and model 70's for the most part. I do have a Neil Jones and an Eddie Fosnaugh tuned 700 factory triggers and they have always worked great.

So which of Rugers semis use cast barrels??? All of them?




Btw, thanks for the heads up on that book Greg, and to Ed for the link. Got one coming to learn/peruse.

Silver brazing is very strong, if done correctly, and can't be disassembled without some serious abuse well above and beyond hard use. The problem is that some of them don't get assembled correctly. Can you tell by looking? I can't, so I don't trust them as much as some others.

All my current bolt guns: two Hawkeyes, two FNs, and a Vanguard S2, have one-piece bolts; the Rugers cast, the others forged. One less thing to go wrong. I used to belong to a hunt club in VA with 30 members. Two had Remmy bolt handles pop on them.

The book by R.L. Wilson is full of interesting details about Ruger and Ruger guns.

It tells about tests done on their investment cast bolts, comparing them to Mauser, Model 70 and 700 bolts, the Ruger investment cast lugs outlasting all of them. (p.105)

The Ruger Old Army got its design testing accomplished by loading the cylinders full of Bullseye...without failure. (p. 126)

The P85 was tested with military high-pressure M882 ammo while the bore was completely blocked with a steel rod. Some parts were ruined: (extractor...) but the barrel was undamaged. (p 207)

That's a few, there are more I'm quite sure but I don't recall specifics offhand nor do I care to look for them further. It's a book worth having if Ruger guns hold any appeal.

Having read this thread two things come to mind.

First is that Greg knows his subject and is a good read when he is on it.

The second is that tex n cal's failue to turn TUNGSTEN wire into a spring is an impressive endeavour regardless of success or not.

The format is a little hard to follow but there is some good information in this article to answer your question.

After heat treating according to these guys 410 stainless can have a yield strength of 140,000 PSI.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120219095722/http://www.precisionmetalsmiths.com/PMIalloyEngineeringGuide.pdf

Excellent, excellent thread. I'll be ordering the book Greg linked to when I get back from deer hunting. Bravo!

A brief comment on 700 bolt handles. Had one come off during safety testing after lightening trigger pull. Yes, I give it a hard test including a workover with my rubber hammer simulating a hard fall with the bolt handle landing on a rock. On examination the braze didn't fuse with the bolt, I'd guess around 20% fused properly. Could be not enough heat though I'd guess contamination. No industrial process is perfect. Properly done you'd have trouble getting one off with a big steel hammer.

Anyway, had the owner call Remington who sent a prepaid box along with profuse apologies and repaired it quickly.

My impression of a similar process (as with every other dealing I've had with Remington) left me rather soured. It went like this:

-Called the warranty/service number to see where I should ship it.

-Was told to send it to a "local" service center (which meant a 500 mile plane ride to Fairbanks (My cost: $25)

-Service center received my rifle and, after enough time to re-braze it many times over, I was informed that it had to be sent to the factory. "Please send money to cover shipping."

- Me: "Uh, I already paid to ship a warranty problem to the "Service Center" the factory wanted it shipped to!"

- They: "Well, if you want the rifle to be repaired you'll have to pay shipping."

- Me: "Alright, well have them ship it back to me then so I don't have to pay shipping a third time."

- They: "They can't do that. It has to be returned to us. They can only ship to the original shipper that sent it to them."

- Me: "Fantastic. Screwed three times is perfect!" (When the factory should have done it correctly to begin with.)

Remington has a great investment cast bolt handle. It's how they attach the damned thing that needs to be corrected. I'll just stick with the fully cast bolts which my Rugers have on them when I need rifles I can really depend upon.

That mirrors my experience.

Called Remington after the first bolt handle fell off and they said send it to a local service center, which happened to be in Western Oregon. I called the service center, they said to send it to them 2nd day air for about $50 at the time where they would evaluate it and then send me a quote for repairs. I told them the bolt handle came off. "Oh, okay, that's a $100 repair".

So I took it to a local smith who had it back to me in a bit over a week for something like $35 total.


When the second one fell off I didn't even call Remington, just took it straight to that same smith.

I love a good apology, and Remington is getting good at it by now, but my time is valuable...as is all of our time...

I wouldn't waste any of my time and money sending anything back to Remington for anything.

Why waste time letting the same monkeys who couldn't manage to do a very simple job right the first time take another whack at the banana tree?

I would just have it tigged for $50 if I wanted to keep the rifle.

On the subject of bolts, I recently bought a PT&G one-piece bolt for an upcoming build. Any thoughts on the metallurgy & manufacturing processes they use on those?

Thanks

That little tungsten spring sure did puzzle the heck out of me. Annealed wire, dead soft, 99.99% pure. We could wind it, but as soon as you cut it, it would split, like the example above. Maybe someday someone will figure it out.

The stuff that really is interesting is a tantalum/tungsten alloy. It's used for extreme corrosion service - like boiling chlorine, for example - where even titanium does not survive. Decent strength, extreme corrosion resistance, maybe some high temp properties. Frightfully expensive, too

Get The Metals Handbook-Forging.
Case studies. Lots of examples.
Others available
Welding
Machining
Over a dozen now.
SAE standards.......tomes of wisdom.

A great reference source, many's the hour I've spent happily reading it. They call it ASM Handbook now, and it runs to 34 volumes LINK . Pricy to buy new - $8990 for the set ($6750 for ASM members). You can buy individual volumes though, or buy second-hand for a great deal less. You may also find it in a library if you're lucky.

I bought all mine second hand.
The case studies are the best. Real world. Not BS.

Let me know when I can get a Ruger M77 for less than the Wally World 700's everyone's getting for builds. Usually seeing things like 379-420 a piece for them.

I'll buy them all day at that price OVER a 700 - EVERY TIME.

So lets review...

A $500 Ruger...pricey!

Not standing in the woods holding your bolt handle in one hand and your johnson in the other...priceless!

Anyone know, is PT&G making their one-piece bolts from bar stock?

Also, anyone care to talk about anodizing? The finish on scope tubes for instance is pretty amazingly durable. Does it impart any other properties to the AL beyond just the surface?

Finally, how about cyro treating of barrels to relieve stress? Real or marketing?

Hard anodizing is harder than the hubs of hell. Don't mess with it. Though it does reduce the fatigue properties

Anyone know, is PT&G making their one-piece bolts from bar stock?

I don't know, possibly they're made from a forged steel/platinum/gold alloy to justify the price...but however they make them, as long as they are one piece they should be relatively idiot proof.

Also, anyone care to talk about anodizing? The finish on scope tubes for instance is pretty amazingly durable. Does it impart any other properties to the AL beyond just the surface?

Anodizing is harder, wear resistant and doesn't oxidize...yes, it's just a surface treatment, but that's a lot on the plus side right there.

Finally, how about cyro treating of barrels to relieve stress? Real or marketing?

I'd spend the money on nitriding...it's like a reverse cryo that actually has tangible benefits.

Anodizing aluminum creates a layer of aluminum oxide (aluminum rust) on the surface. The difference between hard coat and standard anodizing is the temprature of the acid bath during the anodizing process.

Are there dimensional changes with anodizing?

Reason I'm curious, I made this hub for a customer right before I left to go hunting. It's a prototype for an electric bike, so stronger than bike hubs, but compatible with bike disc brakes and chain rings etc. The recesses on the ends are bearing press fits. As I'm leaving he mentioned he was so happy with it he was going to have it anodized... I didn't have time to look into if the anodizing would change the ID's of those pockets.

Yes. Anodizing adds aprox .0002"~.0003" to the surface. If you're using close tolerances you have to plan for it. Also tapped holes, either plug the hole with a nylon screw or use an oversized tap. You won't be able to re-tap the holes once they're hard anodized.