Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Winchester M70 - is this a good bedding job?

greydog,

Your DUMB Fhuqktitude is plum amazing. Congratulations?!?

Hint...................

greydog - Again, great information. Thanks again for being willing to teach.

Hey Dip Stick,
It's plain you don't have a clue but you can probably buy one. When you do, get back to us. Maybe show us a picture of a fish. GD

Slow morning.



Hint................

That's a very handsome fish. Stick to what you know and you'll be alright! What's the right word? Oh, right, laffin'! GD

greycog,

You couldn't staple paper,by yourself. Congratulations?!?

You poor poor(literally) Retarded Kchunt.

Hint.................

Hard to screw up a dab.

when I bedded my Mk-V Wbys in synthetics, I threw out the rules and just bedded the whole action. with no 'taped' clearances anywhere,
including about 2" of barrel...if I did it 'wrong' and something was supposed to go wrong ( that didn't),
can someone please tell me what I missed out on.

It was a snug fit, that took careful effort to get the barrelled action out of the stock, ..but so what I say.

I learnt in engineering if I don't want something to move or rattle loose, then don't give it clearance or loose tolerance.
Hence why we would machine fit each individual bolt in high torque drive coupling installations, that were regularly subject
to shock loading over 16 hr days 365 days a year.

As far as M70 centre (3rd) action screws go,.. Why did Win. introduce that feature..?
you can still build an accurate rifle without employing it.

If you read carefully, you'll notice I say bedding methods often at the whim of the one doing the bedding. The MK V is an action which is a little different with the screw going into the bottom of the lug. It is often best to bed lugs like this at the bottom since that is where the screw tension is. The rest of the receiver is not all that rigid and how it is bedded probably doesn't matter a whole lot but I generally bedded the whole thing. I still like clearance at the sides and front of the lug for two reasons. First; it was easier to remove and re[lace. Second; the sharp edges of the lug could shave bedding material when you put the thing together and this debris could keep the lug from bottoming out. I'll confess also that I usually bedded some of the barrel shank on them . There was no clearance required at the tang because it just sat on top of the stock anyway. Sako rifles actions were another which had the lug right at the front with the screw going into the lug and they were treated much like the front of the Weatherby. The sako needed clearance at the tang though or the stock would chip or split behind the tang.
Who knows why Winchester chose to go with two-piece bottom metal and the third screw? bedded in the wood, that third screw can't do much more than hold up the front of the trigger guard; just like the one on the Ruger 77. Still, it's there and I kind of like to use it. I feel like it adds to the integrity of the bedding system although, as I have demonstrated, it probably doesn't make any difference.
'Stick, I think what makes your missives such great reading is your command of the English language. Do you photoshop those fish? GD

Endless display of fish, partially submerged rifles, fishing poles, the same bear wearing a baseball hat, pictures that were posted 15 years ago and insults never does get boring. What a psycopath

If bedding the bottom of the Lug is best (not just a whim)

what are the real world negative effects of not bedding the bottom face of the Mk-V lug..?




Sharp edges; ...Theres something called metal preparation, do that properly and I don't see a problem,
I certainly did not encounter any bedding material being shaved off after repeated assembly-disassembly,
and that was without having to alter the lugs in anyway..but every job needs to be assessed on an individual basis.

I am inclined to say the type of bedding material one uses can also effect the propensity for such to occur.

BTW: I did at some point temporarily put a bedded stock on another mK V barrelled action just to see/experiment how it would fit and shoot,
(without custom bedding it to that particular metal),..the fit was still snug, and I did notice a couple ever so very slight streak lines
travelling down in the corners of the lug recess...but just a few reassemblies meant that once that rather minuscule amount of
bedding material was gone, ..shaving no longer occurred.

There are no negative effects to not bedding the bottom providing there is support forward and aft of the lug. I know I have done Sakos both ways with acceptable results. Look, if you have no issues with bedding the lug tight all around, then, by all means, do so. As I said, I will, now and then, do that as well but my preference is to not . Most of my glass-bedding methodology was established forty-five years ago but I still experiment a little from time to time. Back in the seventies, when all stocks were wood and glass stocks were just starting to come into use, I probably bedded a dozen or more every week. Virtually every barrel job also got bedded, at the customer's request, so I did a lot. I'm not trying to critique other's methods or preferences and I'm not trying to say my way is the only way, I'm just telling what has worked well for me for over forty years of rifle building. There is certainly no requirement for you to do things my way.
I pointed out my reasons for preferring clearance. If you have, in your experience, found those reasons to be invalid, well, there you have it. GD

I did not read your responses as suggesting your way is the only way...I understood very well that variations of methods can be subject
to personal whims.

My question specifically related to you saying that its best to bed the bottom face of the Mk-V lug.

that seems to suggest there is some technical - scientifically explainable reason why its best to do it that way,
just saying ..'because that is where screw tension is '.. , sounds somewhat vague.



If I was only bedding the action I would be sure to also contact bed the bottom of the lug,
but I have to say If I was also bedding a good part of the barrel with the action, the option of creating
some clearance on the bottom of the lug would not really bother me, for obvious reason.



I really don't mind people that do, as long as its healthy discussion ,combined with good questions and good answers
where there's a chance or opportunity for readers to learn something.

I appreciate the effort you have put into your posts.

You are right; if there is significant support fore and aft, clearance at the bottom of the lug might even be the best way to go about it. In the end, any system which is stress free is likely to work out well.
There are some actions which are more challenging than others and the Winchester is one of them. The Ruger 77 is another. Neither one is difficult to get to shoot well, the bedding is just a little complex due to the shape of the bottom of the receiver.
One friend and fellow BR competitor, Bob Forslund, was positively obsessive about bedding techniques and theory. I listened to him because either he or his brother usually won. This was before the glue-in became the default method for setting up a BR rifle and most were conventionally bedded. One day he demonstrated what he considered to be a good bedding job by removing the barreled action between shots and firing a five shot group of about 1/4 inch. On this rifle, if he removed the screws, he could just tip the rifle over and the action would fall right out. This action was a flat bottomed action with and angled front screw and was built by Bob Forslund. By the way, he also admitted he had seen bedding jobs which he would have considered to be completely wrong which shot every bit as well as his. In the end, if it works, it works. GD

It's reliability...fhuqks with MANY heads.

Hint....................