I've got a Remington 700 with the "J-lock" thingy on it. I wanted to replace it and got to looking at my options. One that I found was a speedlock system which has an aluminum firing pin body with a steel insert which is supposed to decrease lock time. I thought this was a neat idea because I could get rid of the J-lock and possible gain something in the process so I ordered one. I got it yesterday and it seems like a well built part, but something concerns me about it. It has an aluminum bolt shroud. I know with a mauser the shroud is the first line of defense if something goes wrong. What about the Remington 700? Would you consider this safe?

Thanks

The Remington handles gas differently than the Mauser. Of the dozens of Remingtons Ive seen that had case heads separate or had sustained gas related damage from people who didnt know what they were doing, the bolt shrouds were never an issue. with product liability as rampant as it is I cant immagine a reputable manufacturer these days sticking their necks out on something safety related particularly with regards to firerms. Or so Ive heard.

I think the function of that bolt shroud flange would be to divert (re-direct) any hot gases flowing its way, not bottle them up like a pressure vessel. For that purpose, I'd think it more than adequate.

I have seen a guy that was gassed by a M98 Mauser.
I can assure you that the flange is way over rated. He had 15 or 20 small leaks in his face but nothing hit his eyes.
The 98 has the slot in the top of the bridge that might benefit from the shroud. The M700 does not have that slot. They both sort of block the left lug race way. The 98s split locking lug may direct gas out of the bolt body receiver junction.
On both guns the right lug race way is blocked by the bolt handle.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:
I have seen a guy that was gassed by a M98 Mauser.
He had 15 or 20 small leaks in his face but nothing hit his eyes.

To me, that indicates the flange worked exactly as intended.

Even the rifles with very large and complex openings for handling gas do not prevent all damage when a cartridge case gives up the ghost. For instance, many are designed to divert the gases down through the magazine box. That often blows off the floorplate (or badly bulges it), and fairly frequently blows a chunk out of the stock near the mag box.

Either way, if one has his hand around that part of the rifle when the incident occurs, he can be pretty hurt by the process. But, at least he isn't always blinded...which I suspect is the major purpose of deflecting the gas.

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:
I have seen a guy that was gassed by a M98 Mauser.
He had 15 or 20 small leaks in his face but nothing hit his eyes.

To me, that indicates the flange worked exactly as intended.

Even the rifles with very large and complex openings for handling gas do not prevent all damage when a cartridge case gives up the ghost. For instance, many are designed to divert the gases down through the magazine box. That often blows off the floorplate (or badly bulges it), and fairly frequently blows a chunk out of the stock near the mag box.

Either way, if one has his hand around that part of the rifle when the incident occurs, he can be pretty hurt by the process. But, at least he isn't always blinded...which I suspect is the major purpose of deflecting the gas/ brass fragments.

Alberta,
The only reason his eyes were spared was good fortune. He was hit on both cheeks, the nose,and his forehead in multiple places each. The escaping gas on that 98 also split the stock back through the pistol grip when it bulged the magazine.
I have been hit by gas from a 22 rimfire, a muzzle loader and a side by side shotgun. Based on those incidents (plus the guy gassed by the 98 Mauser) I would say that depending on a flange for much protection is pretty silly.

Thats a good reason to wear eye protection when shooting. aside from not shooting, there is little a person can do to protect themselves from themselves. TC1 that shroud, though made from a high grade aluminum alloy, should provide the same level of protection that the original would. and thats all that matters. that, and paying attention to what you are doing.

I would agree that not wearing eye protection is foolish, regardless what one is shooting. Ditto hearing protection. At our range, both are mandatory for EVERY shooter. If they decline, they are not allowed to shoot.

Given a choice, I would still rather have a bolt flange than not have one, anyway. Every little bit helps. There is NO gas handling system that is absolutely foolproof, although the M-1 Garand, M-14, and M-16 do pretty well for the most part at protecting the shooter's face. But in bolt rifles, nothing beats reasonably mild loads, tough primers, AND good glasses.

quote:

Given a choice, I would still rather have a bolt flange than not have one, anyway. Every little bit helps. There is NO gas handling system that is absolutely foolproof, although the M-1 Garand, M-14, and M-16 do pretty well for the most part at protecting the shooter's face. But in bolt rifles, noithing beats reasonably mild loads, tough primers, AND good glasses.

I whole heartedly agree. I would add that good cartridge cases properly resized are a huge safety factor.

This was my concern. If you look at the picture where the threads are turned in shaft. The aluminum is VERY thin there. My concern is if I should have a catastrophic case failure, I just wonder if the part of the shroud that's supposed to protect you from escaping gas couldn't actually break loose and become part of the problem. The back of the shroud would in essence become a "sail" for an acorn sized hunk of aluminum. Now I'm not saying it would, I'm just wondering.

Yea, I agree. Always use safe reloading practices

Terry

TCI,
I suppose it is possible that it could separate. However the aluminum used for most such applications is 6061-T6. This is a tough heat treated alloy that is as strong as most low carbon steels. Due to the design the cocking piece would trap the back end of the shroud if it broke.
In such a worst case scenario I think the cocking piece would try to retract the firing pin compressing the main spring. Then the cross pin that retains the cocking piece would be the last thing to shear. While all of this is possible it is not likely.

Thanks ireload2! I never gave much though to it being a higher grade alloy. It'll go on the rifle. If it ever fails, I'll post a picture of my black eye and you all can poke me with sticks

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
Thanks ireload2! I never gave much though to it being a higher grade alloy. It'll go on the rifle. If it ever fails, I'll post a picture of my black eye and you all can poke me with sticks

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by Westpac: TC1 that shroud, though made from a high grade aluminum alloy, should provide the same level of protection that the original would.

deja vu

deja vu kinda fits, Thanks to you also Wes pac

Terry

The only failure that I think you may see is the joint between the aluminum firing pin and steel tip. Gre-TAn rifles makes a very nice one that is fluted steel and a 2 lb increase on the spring with the aluminum bolt shroud. I have two of his in my rifles and they work great.