Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Mule Deer - Rifle Accurizing ?

John, I read your rifle accurizing article in this months Rifle magazine and enjoyed it very much. One question, I know you categorize mausers with the action screw in the bottom of the recoil lug as benefiting from a bedding pad under the barrel shank. I know you categorize other actions like Remington and Savage as not needing the pad because the front action screw attaches behind the recoil lug. How do you categorize Ruger M77 Hawkeyes with the angled front action screw, do they benefit from a bedding pad under the barrel shank? Thanks for a great article.

Glad you liked the article!

In my experience they do not need any bedding under the barrel shank. Even though the screw enters the recoil lug, the angle pulls the lug backward as much as down, and the lug isn't all the way at the front of the very stiff action--as it is in the relatively flexible 98 action.

I liked the article as well JB it has caused me to revisit the bedding on several of my Mark V rifles.

Good luck and shoot straight y'all.

Thanks for the reply John. Your answer makes a lot of sense, I've only owned one 98 mauser and the action certainly was way more flexible than the Ruger action.

Bedding is all about creating equal support around the action screw. It is ok to break the rules to try options because that is how you learn. I have bedded a lot of rifles based on the way I was taught but still tried variations which sometimes worked on individual rifles such as putting bedding compound under the shank on a Model 70.

Because I never do these days, I still have one rifle that responded exceptionally well so left it there. Also had a rifle I bought off a mate who bedded it and the action moved slightly before the Devcon hardened. It shot so well he left it. I shot it so well, I left it too.

Bedding articles are always interesting.

Leave well enough alone is my method. Shoot it before you start futzing around. In your case, you did it "wrong", but it shoots well so you very wisely quit while you were ahead.

To the OP: My Hawkeye Predator was stringing just a touch, so I floated it, and filed the mag box to make sure it didn't bind. My groups didn't change dramatically, but were rounder. The AW .223 I have is tightly bedded in the plastic stock. I did the mag box, but otherwise left it be, even the trigger, which is quite crisp.

I dont qualify to mix MD's bedding compound, but I was taught to look at the action, consider where the
action bolts exert their force, and bed so that the action is supported there.
Dont provide the fulcrum,
and you deny the lever.

[quote=Pappy348]Leave well enough alone is my method. Shoot it before you start futzing around. In your case, you did it "wrong", but it shoots well so you very wisely quit while you were ahead.

I used to "leave them alone" too, until I started having warping/swelling issues from rain/snow/temp changes. I sealed, waxed, ha, all the usuall and I found I like Pillar Bedding/free float but 1-2" of barrel shank bedded too. Then sealed well. This works for me. I have had a few rifles that were floated from the action forward and none ever, ever shot well for me. I like how synthetics shoot, but they are as cold as a "well digging Witch's Teat in Wyoming" in my arthritic old hands. Wood is just easier for me....and has more character to me now.

if its a wood stock bolt action or a Ruger # 1 rifle i generally always bed the rifle`s barrel about 3 inches in front of bedded action,the rest of the barrel is floated , my reason is outdoor weather rather wet or dry can make the wood stock change barrel point of impact,which has been said and posted already,most of the time the rifle that i bed always shoots better too after its bedded, i have even rebedded Remington Senderos and these rifles improved a little too, rifle actions need to be tight and solid in the stock.

Love me some Remington Sendoras.

I love how the senderos shoot....just hate packing them!

For years I hunted with a gray rat pre-64 .270 that had to be resighted every season because the stock was mostly without finish. I finally had a Decelerator fitted, then refinished with matte spar polyurethane. I thinned the first few coats (some here claim that does nothing, but it didn't hurt), then applied several coats, scuffing the previous one lightly beforehand. Some 20 years later, that rifle stays put. No changes were made to the bedding at all. Seems the 1950 crew at Winchester knew what worked. All my current bolt guns are synthetic or laminated, except my recently acquired Husky. That one is about like the M70, but after fixing the split tang and changing the trigger spring, four went under an inch. Hard to say what humidity will do to that beechwood, but we shall see. Not going to refinish it until I'm sure the split tang is stable.

All of them are different, and if someone wants to tear into a new gun and futz with the bedding or whatever, they have my best wishes and blessing. I'm going to shoot 'n see before I start messing around with mine.

One thing I found interesting is the bit about oversized recoil lugs. I had always thought it was a solution to a problem that never existed. But I didn’t know it was a detriment.

Last year I bought a “project”. The good news is I bought it for the price of the barrel.
This 700 Remington action project has an oversized recoil lug, wider and deeper than factory. Now I wonder...
I have a spare recoil lug. Would it be worth while to replace the lug with factory?
It would mean some lathe work and chamber work.
I did not get time last fall to work out loads as it sets. Hunting got in the way. The barrel now has Dyna Bore coating. It is chambered 280 AI with a premium varmint weight 9” twist 26” barrel. It wears a Kevlar stock. I traded the bolt that someone converted to a Sako extractor (which I consider an abomination) with a factory bolt.
I installed an after market trigger, the one it came with was trashed/crushed. It has a VX3 scope, which might change.
It’s all ready, I suppose. So far maybe 50 rounds down the tube. Fire forming loads were quite impressive accuracy wise. .

So, how bad is the over sized lug?

Bugger,

Quite often readers "read" something I didn't say. A good example occurred years ago, when I wrote that Kenny Jarrett's rifles were the most accurate I'd ever fired. Somebody wrote into the magazine, saying I claimed Jarrett rifles were the most accurate ever.

In this instance, I wrote:
" However, oversize recoil lugs may actually be counter-productive, according to research detailed in the late Harold Vaughan's remarkable 1998 book, Rifle Accuracy Facts. Vaughan was a prominent rocket and artillery scientist, who also happened to be a rifle loony and bench shooter, and his research contradicts many long-time assumptions. (Today original printed copies of Rifle Accuracy Facts, like the one I purchased new for 30-some bucks, sell for anywhere from about $150 up to several hundred. Luckily scanned computer versions are readily available for free.)
"Vaughan conducted his experiments on bolt-action rifles using technology often unavailable to even advanced gunsmiths, and discovered considerable barrel vibration during firing was caused by the recoil lug momentarily bending the front of the action. This is partly why some 21st-century factory rifles feature smaller recoil lugs, or even eliminate the traditional lug entirely, instead using "bedding blocks" in the stock fitting into notches in the action."

That’s what I read.

There’s evidently a miss-connection on my part. “However, oversized lugs may actually be counter-productive... Considerable barrel vibration during firing was caused by the recoil lug momentarily bending the front of the action. This is partly why some 21st-Century rifles feature smaller recoil lugs,”

My thought (miss-connection): If smaller lugs are better, and oversized lugs are counter productive. Well, I’m missing the point.

Musing: Comparing to the competitors recoil lugs back in the 40’s, the Remington’s lugs seem generous at least to me. Just guessing, maybe they noticed compressed wood behind lugs of other/earlier designs, I don’t know. Walker was an accuracy guru for his time.

Maybe Vaughan’s writings reflect the advantages of glued-in actions with no recoil lugs.

Thanks for your articles. I read every one I see. I appreciate your work.

Bugger,

They key word here is "may." Other factors, such as a really stiff action (especially the front end) may cancel the effect of a larger lug.

If it shoots that well - why mess with it?

I personally wouldn't worry.