Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Best action for protecting the shooter

Not sure which is strongest but a Buddy of mine was given some powder from a "friend" who told him it was H4831. My buddy dropped a charge of 60 grains and proceeded to test it out. Turns out it was a fast powder for a 223 so in effect a full double charge of powder. It welded the bolt closed but no harm to the shooter. Remington gave my friend an entire new rifle too so very lucky. I was lucky too as this friend swore off reloading and gave me all his dies and components. I trashed all of the powder just to be safe as we didn't know which was the suspect jug.

Weatherby mark V. Im sure there are a few others as strong and offer as much protection.

I'd like to expand my question to custom actions (Defiance, Surgeon, etc.) in general, including push feed versions. Thanks!

Such as This ?

Originally Posted by Mule Deer P 3, 7/02/10

............
............
*****The worst popular action for protecting the shooter in my experience is the pre-'64 Model 70 Winchester. There is abilsutely nothing to keep gas and bits of metal from blowing directly backward into the shooter's face.

****The newer Model 70's are better but by no means great. I had a primer blow on a Model 70 Classic action and still got a face full of hot gas and a few primer particles. Luckily I was wearing eye protection.

Then there is the subject of gas diversion (as in the Model 98 Mauser) versus gas containment (as in the Rem. 700).

*<*< I have had primers and cases blow in both actions, and vote for the 700-type containment.

*<*<I have never gotten the slightest amount of blow-back from any 700, or a similar action.
John


hummm, whatdayano, well, well. There ya have it folks ! ! !


Jerry

Bolt action...Bighorn or Savage because of the gas block.

Much ado about nothing. Modern rifles are safe, due to liability concerns.

Uness you are a know-nothing (we all were once), or an idiot. Idiots abound.

Look, let’s be reasonable about this. You’re never going to have a post that begins: “I’ve had 50 blown primers/case splits/case separations occur in ten different actions, and based on my experience, the best action for gas handling is…” With modern cartridges and actions, these are RARE events, and we all tend to over-react to rare events that happen to US. Nowadays, these events occur more due to mistakes – wrong reloading powder, too much powder, wrong cartridge, etc., than anything else.

So, the only thing we can do is some sort of engineering analysis, but in order to do that in a fair way, we need to look at all the factors, not just one or two. So, to begin with, what are the primary functions of a repeating action? They are: feeding, lock-up, ignition, containment of the resulting ignition (a combination of the cartridge and action), extraction, and ejection.

As has been pointed out, actions that interpose a solid block of steel, e.g. single shot actions, M1, M14, Winchester 88 and 100, Savage 99 probably do the bast. I'm going to stick to bolt actions, however, as that was the type of action of the OP.

Now, let’s look at the Mauser 98. To begin with it was designed as a MILITARY action. This means that reliability of all the above functions was paramount in an environment which is highly likely to have dust, mud, powder or brass remains, and semi-trained operators who might have to go days or even weeks without cleaning. When it was designed, factory cartridge quality was far more variable than now, but even then, cartridge rupture was pretty uncommon, so this was a secondary concern.

Mauser’s solution was a controlled feed mechanism (note that some of his prevous designs were push-feed), a relatively heavy, slow firing pin that gave the primer a good whack, a thin, wide claw extractor, a slot ejector to mechanically ensure ejection under any circumstances, and “sloppy” tolerances so it could function even when dirty. If you want a modern example of something designed with the same philosophy, think AK47.

But these solutions made totally sealed chamber impossible, so he designed as many features to safely vent gas from a ruptured cartridge as he could think of – full gas collar (so called C-collar), blocking shoulder on the locking lug ejector slot, large bolt vents, open left boltway, flared front of bolt sleeve. Furthermore, the cartridge sits deeper in the barrel than most other designs, so that the thin brass of the cartridge body is fully supported and only the thick case web protrudes beyond the end of the barrel. Incidentally, if you want to have all, or nearly all of these features in your Mauser, you need to stick with military actions, pre-war commercial Mausers, Brno 21/22 and ZG47 or early (pre-1948) FN actions, because most post-war Mauser 98 actions do not retain the full gas collar of the original (so called H collar). This is probably the most thoroughly designed and best “vented” design bolt action IMHO, as evidenced by the fact that it is still one of the most popular designs for custom rifles, with only minor modifications done to accommodate scope use.

On the other hand, let’s look at the Remington 721/722/700 series designed after WWII, when cartridge quality was far more consistent. And this was a COMMERCIAL action, so it was expected that the owner would keep it clean, hence tighter tolerances. A 700 action definitely feels slicker than a 98. If features a fully enclosed, counterbored breech, which seals off the cartridge in the event of a case rupture. Again, with factory cartridges this was extremely rare, but probably more likely with reloaded ammo, which could have been a concern, as the designer, Mike Walker, was also an avid reloader and bench rester.

But this also means that it is by necessity a push-feed action, the extractor grips over a much narrower part of the case rim, the ejector is spring-loaded rather than a hard mechanical impact, and the cartridge protrusion from the end of the barrel approaches the thickness of the case web. In theory, the extractor and ejector are more susceptible to impairment by dirt, powder remains, etc. However, this is the purest, and probably one of the best, “sealed” designs IMHO.

Now, in practice both of these are highly effective, reliable solutions to the same basic problem, but they are decidedly different. Both have theoretical problems, so choosing between them depends on which highly unlikely problem you are more concerned about. But the fact remains that the most likely failure mode is the nut behind the trigger.

How about the Ruger American's gas handling ability? Good or bad? There are lots of them out there and a couple live here.

Basically. the Ruger American bolt face design is a modern solid ring deign with a plunger ejector and a Sako blade extractor.
Probably not as good at sealing off gases as a Rem m700 or Savage, but better than a m98 or M70.
There is a vent hole on the right side of tge reciever and a hole in the bolt body at 6 oclock when the bolt is closed.
Should vent gases pretty well.

Having had a case separate and blow hot gas and particles back in my face, I think it's a more than fair question.

Th 98 Mauser is the best at porting gas away from the shooter. None better.

Only idiots make blanket statements like this one. I saw my buddy's Sako AII blow up on a mule deer hunt. The McMillan stock was shredded, the action blown apart, Leupy scope in pieces, BUT the bolt did not blow out the back of the rifle or he would've been history, on the spot. From 75 yds away I seriously thought he was dead. Turns out there was a metallurgy issue with a small production run of these actions. He had to send in all of his reloads (of which he'd shot a few hundred) for Sako to pressure test, and they came back well within spec. I couldn't believe Sako admitted it. What was unbelievable was that McMillan sent him a new stock because "McMillan's don't break", and Leupold (of course) sent him a new VX3, both for free. That's standing behind your product.

Sometime around 10-15 years ago Sako had the same thing happen, but with barrels. They never publicly announced it,but tried to contact owners who had bought the affected serial numbered guns.

Weatherby Mark V is the endall when it comes to handling something like that. No lug raceways and the shroud completely covers the rear of the bolt.

What's the story on the new MRC rifles? The Mauser 98 seems to be well regarded, the Model 70 less so. The MRC seems to be closer to the 70. Have they made any improvements to help protect the shooter? I've been considering a new X2, so this thread has me thinking...

No gas will get to a shooters face with a 98 Mauser, all gasses are ported through the magazine down and away from the shooter.

Redux. P 3 this thread.

Jerry

You said it was the best and it is not the best at porting gas, the much maligned Weatherby Mark V is in a class of its own. If you want to compare handling pressure same scenario.

It ain't any better, safe is safe and the 68 Mauser is perfectly safe it doesn't get any better than perfectly safe and I stand by my statement.

It's about impossible for a cartridge to rupture in a weatherby Mark V action. You need to research stuff before you go off spouting nonsense. I am not going to argue any further about this.