Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors I'm Always Amazed

Steelhead - I should clarify that I have no issue with your post nor do have any issue with the gunsmithing you perform on your rifles. I think you know what you are doing and you are adequately cautious. I don't see that what you are doing bears similarity to cutting stocks and installing recoil pads, drilling swivel holes and the like. I was responding to a small slice of this thread to clarify my position of the alteration of collectable firearms. I don't expect everyone to adopt my position and who knows, maybe through the discussion I might modify my position a bit. I shouldn't expect others to listen to me if I am not willing to listen to them.

I think i'll go out and get those hard kicking High powers and 250-3000's i have Magnaported that way i wont have to put on a recoil pad !!!!!!!!! Don

For Saddlering:

I've got a bit of extra time on myhads this AM..and read back through this entire thread...for MY edification..and to see where and why it went so 'foul'. I read one of your posts. These comments are with regard to your post:)

If one examines the lug channel in the breechbolt carefully you'll notice, in a well used rifle, some (to me) fairly obvious metal to metal wear to the both the upper and lower 'walls' of the channel. It occurs on each of them respectively, in slightly different areas, easily correlated to both the travel of the lever through it's course, and to the specific fuction each 'segment' part of that travel accomplishes.

If you look at what I (the 'observer') calls for lack of a better 'name', the top rail...which I describe as the upper arm of the lever, where it is milled 'thinner' and flows 'into' the lever lug, you'll notice obvious wear on both the rail and the corresponding portion of the breechbolt channel it contacts in the very last stages of achieving final and full battery of the bolt,up and into the receiver's lock stop. In this very same absolute final stage 'snick' of final 'full' battery, is when the very front of the upper lever rail comes to 'bear with tension' (i.e. a spring effect) on the 'upward protruding' 'pillow' in the forward bottom of the action. Very close inspection will reveal the end of the lever does not actually rest directly on top of the pillow, but rather 'snicks' in just slightly rearward of it. If it 'snicks' in, no lever 'droop', and/or if the the safety id 'off' you cannot 'bump loose' the action. If it deos not snick...you do have lever droop, AND your action is NOT at full battery. I offer only that "I" would in no way be comfortable firing the (any)rifle in that condition. It is (was) my assumption, that to bend a lever top rail downward to 'fix' lever bite, with or without 'wear' evident on eitherbthe rail, orit's corresponding bearing surface within the lug channel, negatively affects the final upward seating of the breechbolt to full(solid) battery. What I was trying to say in my initial post to this thread was, in my mind, it's a 'rob Peter to pay Paul' type transaction?? And, either way...bottom line...the action is NOT fully 'closed' and 'tight'. If that is not 'headspace' inducive, I'd be truly suprised.

I have tried since my first 'visit' here to 'credential' myself only as a VERY observent artist/craftsman. My gunsmith is my 'new' gunsmith, I met him through this site/forum. We are in contact nearly daily, and not at all solely on the subject of firearms. I'd like think I am not a complete idiot, I do not 'buy' any concept at face value, nor do I place any premium on credential or education. I have known some incredible minds, never finished school. My "gunsmith" and I just seem to see things...eye to eye..with reason. I've never 'left' a firearm with any gunsmith until I have seen their work. I simply find complete concurrence in all theory and practice of this particular 'smith..and the satisfaction of working 'with him' is indescribable. I would want the same level of confidence in my physician:)

On the suject of factory "jamming" to 'adjust'final tolerances...I am sure it WAS done. That might well explain the mashed back bolt stop in 1899 32-40?

On the subject of final battery..all I can offer is the several 'proof tests I did', under the guidance of my 'smith, showed his advice accurate, and the one to one relations ship between lever lug and rail/breechbolt channel wear and headspace..right on the mark, with lever 'bite' accounted for.

All considered...I would always choose the finesse and skill of a true craftsman over the bump, pound, and hammer of industry...any day of the week, twice on Sunday. To me the latter is the stuff this forum wags head over most. I certainly did not mean to offend anyone, it is not my style.

The profane and vicious lashings were a bit of a disappointment. The assumptions of too many that any historian or highly educated individual is 'unquestionable'..or that any 'layman' is an idiot, not worthy of study is 'in the box' thinking..and that is also not my style.

A lot of tolerance is the best tool any of us can own.

An unending curiosity..the only ticket to a good ride.

best,
ed

Jeez, I go away for a few days and come home to this? What's wrong with doing simple repairs to a firearm, no matter its value if you know what you're doing, have the right tools, and have the mind-set to undertake the work? In the end, the gun is the property of the owner and it's his inalienable right to do with it as he pleases. We as collectors may gnash our teeth, but so it goes. As far as these guns increasing in value, compare the value of a high end "collectors" grade Savage with a lot of condition with what it cost new. Not a helluva lot of price difference when inflation over 100 years is factored in. That increase in actual value that may well have occurred is laughable compared to how much that amount of money would have earned by wise investments over those same 100 years. That means that collecting/using these things is a labor of love-- not a sound investment. Would that I had been around in 1939 and dropped the cost of a new 99EG into IBM stock instead, or bought a couple ounces of gold.

The reaction by a dedicated collector to witnessing malfeasance perpetrated against a classic firearm should be based on outrage over the marring of a loved/cherished item, not over how much the monetary value will be diminished now or 50 years from now. After all, it really isn't about the money, is it?

As far as lever bite goes, what the hay? All one is doing is tweaking it so as to hold everything in tight battery. If the bloody thing is drooping, what are the odds that the bolt isn't seated against its bearing surface 100%, or worse yet, on the verge of falling out of battery due to the (admittedly slight) drag put upon it by a droopy lever? Correcting the lever bite merely helps insure that the bolt is where it needs to be, excess headspace is caused by a bunch of other factors not the least of which is bolt set-back.

IBM stock in 1939 would be an awfully amazing thing!!

That's what I was thinking too.

Gnoahh, for me please, describe 'bolt set back' ?? For the novice..if you would?

Thanx..
ed

Reading the whole thread, I think I'll chime in that if you own a classic rifle, working on it (successfully) adds to the appeal, not unlike handloading for them. As long as one is careful, it is satisfying to know you've taken one apart, carefully cleaned & lubed the whole thing, and every hidden inch of metal now has a fresh coat of break free, or whatever wunderlube you use to assure rust protection or good lubrication for the working parts. It's now protected for years to come. Mess up and bugger up a screw slightly? That's a little disappointing, but not to the magnitude of drilling new holes, or cutting a stock, which are things I don't do.

I guess if one wanted to be really worried about what other people do, you could also claim there is a risk of loading the wrong powder, so you should never handload for an old rifle - which I think is a position most here would not accept. I lived in a state for a few years, where lots of people like to mind other people's business - and it ain't much fun.

Ed- bolt set-back= bolt face peening where it contacts the receiver (Where it's buttressed so to speak when in battery). It can happen to any gun subjected to a diet of heavy loads in conjunction with steel a little softer than optimal. Pretty rare indeed, but possible.

My best pard's grandfather was a dynamite salesman for DuPont in the late 30's. One of the DuPonts told him to beg/borrow/steal all the money he could and buy IBM stock. He did, to the tune of $7000- a helluva lot of money back then. His grandson, my buddy, was afforded the opportunity to purchase three large farms for cash on Maryland's Eastern Shore with his share of inheritance. I don't think $7000 worth of 99's bought new in 1939 and salted away 'til now would have increased in value to $6 million.

OK..and now..how does that affect headspace? A "peened" bolt face allows for more forward travel of bolt? Is that possible if the lever is reaching its forward travel potential to rest with the pillow, before the bolt face contacts the cartridge base?? Is not the overall effect, a 'shorter' bolt, and less final battery contact with the rear of action lock face?? More 'gap' between fore and aft? More curious than ever..and that, for me..is all good

Lets it sit back a skinch farther away from the breech of the barrel, hence the increased headspace. Pretty rare, but Gary (Grogel) had that very situation. He corrected it by building up the rear face of the bolt with weld and dressing it down until proper headspace was achieved. The lever does nothing more nor less than moving the bolt in and out of battery, and holding it in position when in battery. If the lever is worn and doesn't push the bolt all the way into perfect battery I'll surmise that an instance of "artificial headspace" (strictly for lack of a better term) would exist and hence allowing the bolt to get a tiny little running start before it smacks into full contact at the bolt/receiver interface which would promulgate the peening I referred to. In short, if the lever is adjusted properly, and the bolt locks up properly nothing untoward can happen, but if the back of the bolt is peened from misuse all the perfect lockup in the world won't deny the fact that excess headspace exists. How much excess headspace there is will determine case life of handloads, and in (only) extreme cases allow rupturing of first-time fired cases. Lord knows I've fired enough different old guns with headspace issues and never blew one up or had gas spill into the action from a ruptured case, but cases were used once and thrown away because of nasty stretching. (Had that happen with the one M1920 .250-3000 I owned.)

I'm using the distance from boltface-to-cartridge rim as the definition of headspace. Rimmed or rimless cartridges, it doesn't make a difference.

What I don't have a feel for is how well the 1899/99 action handles escaping gasses from a ruptured case, as I've never experienced that with one.

Later tonight, I will post a photo or two that possibly will help some to understand my concern for people bending their levers. I believe in my heart that when Savage put these levers in their rifles, they were checked for headspace and what ya'll call lever bite, before they left the factory. If a person chooses to change the geometry of any part of a firearm, they should at least do what the factory did----check the headspace and proof test their work. Those "blue pill" loads can be mighty vicious! Just seems to me that headspace issues are taken too lightly for the consequences they can cause.

gnoahh, I don't think the lever "holds" the bolt in position. The lever can definitely engage or disengage the bolt from it's seating, but the bolt is held independent of the lever.

Otherwise you'd feel an almighty push on the lever when firing.

Gnoahhh...:)

Thank you. But if I might..you and that Old Gunsmith have far more in common than you have in difference You're saying pretty much the same thing...just obtusely different vernacular

I knda like you, and celebrate the fact you haven't experienced a 'blow'. Doan want you to, either

Actually think the only thing I'd like to see from you......
...is to admit..metal fatigue and wear is what it is??

For me, it's pretty simple. When I touch one off, and the primer backs out one third to half it's length...umm, sumpin' aint right??? Right?

Therein and therefor..the diagnostic begins. Old guy from Texas still offers the best case solution Only my dumb-arse opinion

Rest assured though, you are, is, will remain a part of my think tank..which admittedly isn't all THAT deep...but the water is pretty clean :))) ..and refreshes on the long draught

ed

..and thanks for the 'edification'!!!

Ah yes. Collegiate discussions like this enables new ways of looking at things and providing food for thought. I'm gonna take a couple apart tonight and study on the Savage design a bit more. Now if I can only find my prized Craftsman paint can openers, er, I mean screwdrivers, claw hammer, and cold chisel I'll be all set!

Rory, I never thought of it that way, but I guess what I was trying to say is that the lever is responsible for camming the bolt into place. The firing pin can't trip if the bolt isn't the whole way into position, or can it if things aren't aligned "just so"?

Ahh..the "minds" come forth Credentials be damned...give me a thinking man..anyday

It's not "cocked" until the bolt moves that final last bit into a locked position.

But if the sear is seriously messed up/ground down/snapped off/etc, then it could definitely release and the firing pin let loose before the bolt has a full lock up. Not a pretty thought.

But due to the design, it's also something that's almost impossible to have happen short of bubba mucking with pieces/parts.

Which is the reason I shudder whenever I hear about folks tuning the trigger on 99's.

the rear of the bolt on the 1895,1899, 99, will usually move up or down a bit on how aggressive you close the lever,but the angle of the lockup area is so slight i doubt it would increase headspace by 1 or 2 thousands. i believe the bolt is cocked for at least 1/8" before full lockup ,thats why there is such a long sear engagement . JMO. Don

i have 2 rifles 1-22HP and 1 -250-3000-that i fired and found case seperation and primer damage . Placing a round in the chamber i found that i could wiggle the cartridge a couple of thou each way ,while trying in a newer rifle the case was snug,now i realise that full length resizins and new brass will not always fill the chamber ,,but this was excessive ,,
With this threads discussion and probable causes i must then examin both guns much more closely ,and see or determine if any of these factors are comming into play .
thank you all for your input

Hi Norm:)

Give our friend in Texas a jingle..and ask him about the shim tests he explained quite well to me to perform on the lug channel/lug contact area at final battery position. also..a pretty simple lil screwdriver test (not even close to a bubba procedure ...between action lower frame and bottom of breechblock. His teaching/method showed a perfect one to one correlation in that measurement of wear to the excess of headspace in my 1899 C, 32-40...which was an entirely unsatisfactory .01025 !!!! Too early:( < is that 10 and a quarter thousandths?? 7 thousandths of brass shim stock in the contact zone...and headspace is .003 . AND...the rear of the bolt is up tight and level with the rear surface of the action, ad the lever is 'snicked' up solid. Putting the Micrometer to the lugs of my 30-30 and the C shows a .005 difference, and miking the appropriate contact area of the breechblock lug channel shows the other .002.

I'm not the brightest bulb in the box...but the above was pretty convincing to me. Got to admit, Grogel's approach at the far end of the bolt is generating a bit of cerebration, too Not enough to brighten the bulb..but then I just read it 12 hours ago Not being a metullargist...Not sure which of the two 'fixes' might be easier or more sensible to affect??

I'll discuss it with my Gunsmith:)