I'd rather see it in a 257 or 6.5mm. Or have the action made with a standard boltface, attached to a varmint barrel and stock, chambered in 6mm BR. Oh, and have it feed from the magazine, too.
quote:Originally posted by jeffeosso: would it be any advantage over the 7br? or a 7x300sav (aint that ipsic?)
woudl be neat, and clever... wish it could fit on a baby tiny tiny action, and weigh about 4 lbs
jeffe
The 7x300 Savage you're thinking of is the IHMSA. It and the BR rounds can be fitted to the Daly/MarkX Mini Mauser action, which is factory available in .22-250. I plan on short-chambering one in .260 Rem Ackley Improved to a 1.75" case length. 4 lbs. will be tough to get (without going weird like the Kifaru rifles), but 5 lbs w/o scope will be easy.
Posts: 131 | Location: Arkansas | Registered: 09 August 2003
I like the concept of the super light, super small action in WSSM, but there is a trade-off with the WSSM's that makes it moot.
You can go shorten up the action a little with the WSSM, but then you have to go with a fatter barrel to maintain the safety margin. For example, Savage now discourages barrel makers to chamber for the WSM, WSSM on the standard actions. They are using their Safari action, which adds about 1/8th to the diameter of the barrel shank.
So the weight you lose in the action, you gain in the barrel. The result is that you only gain a tiny reduction in over-all rifle length. This is one of those cases where the effort results in little gain over, say, a 308 or 7-08 in a lightweight action. JMO, Dutch.
Posts: 4564 | Location: Idaho Falls, ID, USA | Registered: 21 September 2000
You can go shorten up the action a little with the WSSM, but then you have to go with a fatter barrel to maintain the safety margin. For example, Savage now discourages barrel makers to chamber for the WSM, WSSM on the standard actions. They are using their Safari action, which adds about 1/8th to the diameter of the barrel shank.
So the weight you lose in the action, you gain in the barrel. The result is that you only gain a tiny reduction in over-all rifle length. This is one of those cases where the effort results in little gain over, say, a 308 or 7-08 in a lightweight action. JMO, Dutch.[/QB]
This is a good point Dutch. Now I recall a topic here saying that the threads on the M 70 action are different and somehow will handle the large body of the WSM's better. Was there a statement that a chamber bulge might happen in other actions?
As stated above for a very light, short rifle I would start myself with a Kimber 84 and pay the price to get it right. Others might use a Sako or a Titanium and a good choice of a cartridge would have a 308 Win look to it.
Savage, I don't recall reading anything regarding a barrel bulge. If you make the barrel thinner, and keep the pressures the same, you are going to reduce the margin, that's just elemental.
I do believe Dan Lilja was campaigning against using the standard 700 action for RUM cartridges, though his analysis was based on the increased amount of bolt-thrust, not the thickness in the chamber area.
Savage, am I correct in the assumption that the threads in the 700 are deeper, and the shank is 1-1/16th of an inch? The standard shank on the 70, is 1-1/8th, I believe. FWIW, Dutch.
Posts: 4564 | Location: Idaho Falls, ID, USA | Registered: 21 September 2000
