If you look at the thread, featherweight barrel accuracy , You will see why I am asking this question.
Is there a problem with the way a model 70 would handle escaping gas ? I have 5 of them. I find it hard to belive they would build an unsafe rifle for 70+ years, where is ralph nader when you need him ? If they are unsafe mabye I should hang on to them for a few decades, I would love to have 5 corvairs to sell !!!
...tj3006

I think the pre-64's can't handle a ruptured primer or case as well as the newer CRF's

You know, it seems like at times a large percentage of people on this site are afraid of shooting rifles.

I don’t have the statistics in front of me but I would guess that you are far more likely to have your gas stove or BBQ blow up in your face than have a rifle do so.

I had a primer leak when shooting my 700 7mm Rem mag. burned a nice little pin hole on the bolt face(which had to be replaced) but other then a stick bolt handle not any clue that something bad had happened.

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:
I had a primer leak when shooting my 700 7mm Rem mag. burned a nice little pin hole on the bolt face(which had to be replaced) but other then a stick bolt handle not any clue that something bad had happened.

If one wants to go to top load and blow primers than there is probably better options than a Model 70. On the other hand, I have used them for 50+ years and never had a problem.

At the same time I I have seen several people have trouble with gasoline along with BBQ's of one kind or another.

I think how a gun handles escaping gas is a very valid question. I'm not afraid to shoot safe guns, but putting my face behind an action that's not safe is a different thing all together. I never gave it much thought till I saw a M1 Garand let go in this guy's hand at the range years ago. He was OK except for minor cut's, bruises, hurt pride and shooter's flinch that will probably never go away.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:
I think the pre-64's can't handle a ruptured primer or case as well as the newer CRF's

OK, but what about post 64's and pre CRF's ??

A good reason to wear glasses anyway.
JL.

quote:

Model 70 gas escaping

My wife and daughter have complained about my gas handling abilities in the past. In the cosmic scale of the universe this has more importance than worrying about your Model 70. If it hasn't been altered or bubba'd somebody is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

For those afraid to shoot mdl 70's, please send them to me, you'll be safe and I'll also be very happy

quote:

Originally posted by schromf:
If it hasn't been altered or bubba'd somebody is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Wrong tact. You are referring to alteration of the gun. That's not the problem.

The problem will be manifested by a failure in the ammo. The incidents of this.....without inclusion of reloading......are rare.

As alluded to before....if it does happen.....the way the pre-64 handles gas down the left bolt raceway may not be pleasant.

These discussions needn't become so polarized that accurate information isn't disseminated.

GV

As Grandview said, most of the problems with gas handling stem from the ammo. Early high pressure ammo was more prone to case and primer failures than it is today. Paul Mauser was well aware of the fact and designed his M98 rifle with this in mind. Despite modern technologly, brass and/or primers have, can, and will fail on occassion.

The current Model 70 now incorporates a gas blocking flange (ala M98) on the left side of the bolt shroud. This was introduced about a year ago and is a long overdue improvement.

Brad

Could you go into a bit more detail as to what was added as a gas blocking feature?

22, not sure how to describe it... it's a gas flange. It wasn't on any pre-2004 M70's and is now on every M70 that leaves the factory. It blocks gas escaping down the left raceway from smacking the shooter's eye.

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:

quote:

Originally posted by schromf:
If it hasn't been altered or bubba'd somebody is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Wrong tact. You are referring to alteration of the gun. That's not the problem.

The problem will be manifested by a failure in the ammo. The incidents of this.....without inclusion of reloading......are rare.

As alluded to before....if it does happen.....the way the pre-64 handles gas down the left bolt raceway may not be pleasant.

These discussions needn't become so polarized that accurate information isn't disseminated.

GV

The problem is a lot of folks consider the pre-64 M70 to be the best ever made. If someone questions any weak points about the action a lot of people seem to take offence.

Terry

quote:

If one wants to go to top load and blow primers than there is probably better options than a Model 70. On the other hand, I have used them for 50+ years and never had a problem.

Actually they were very below max loads just a loose primer pocket a detail not picked up by at that time an amateur handloader.

quote:

Originally posted by Thomas Jones:
If you look at the thread, featherweight barrel accuracy , You will see why I am asking this question.
Is there a problem with the way a model 70 would handle escaping gas ? I have 5 of them. I find it hard to belive they would build an unsafe rifle for 70+ years, where is ralph nader when you need him ? If they are unsafe mabye I should hang on to them for a few decades, I would love to have 5 corvairs to sell !!! ...tj3006

NO bolt-action rifle handles escaping gas from a blown primer or a rupturd case head as well as the M98 Mauser! But none of the others can be considered UNSAFE either! You should always wear eye protection regardless og what you happen to be firing! The Model 70 is like all other rifles in this respect, and is certainly NOT UNSAFE! (What a crock!!)

(Ralph Nader would love to separate you from your guns! And all the rest of us too, if he could figure out how!!)

El Deguello, well you can now rejoice as the M70 now incorporates essentially the same gas flange as the M98... as I said, an important, simple and long overdue design modification.

Now if Remington would fix their Walker trigger design we'd have something MUCH more serious corrected...

quote:

You should always wear eye protection regardless og what you happen to be firing!

Jeff

I have a separation experience with a M70. The rifle was orginally a 1939 supergrade chambered for .300 H&H. It was rechambered as a 300 Weatherby. I got confused which powder was in the measure and used too fast of a powder. After a big bang, which cleared out the shooting range, the bolt locked and I had a black eye and bruised thumb. There was some gas that escaped around the firing pin and a cut a hole deep into my thumb. The hot gas cotterized the wound and it was not important. The case head had separated and came out in 2 pieces with some pounding. I still have the action but removed the barrel and have yet to rechamber it.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
The current Model 70 now incorporates a gas blocking flange (ala M98) on the left side of the bolt shroud. This was introduced about a year ago and is a long overdue improvement.

anyone know if this can be retrofitted to a pre-2004 M70 ?

Free Miner, contact USRAC. I have/have had plenty of M70's without the left flange and don't worry about it.

Like Jeff said... wear glasses.

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
Free Miner, contact USRAC. I have and have had plenty of M70's without the left flange and don't worry about it.

Like Jeff said... wear glasses.

I don't worry about it. In fact all my hunting rifles are pre-64's which do not even have the little gas block in the extractor collar or bolt body vents.

But as you said yourself, it is an important, simple and long overdue design modification, and if it is a matter of switching in a $20 factory part, I would do it.

FM, you're quite right. I haven't looked carefully at the two versions side by side to make an informed post about how easy a mod it is. I suspect the bolt release lever had to be modified/moved to give space for the flange... just a guess. Regardless, we should call USRAC and try to get the skinny!

quote:

Originally posted by Rick 0311:
You know, it seems like at times a large percentage of people on this site are afraid of shooting rifles.

I don’t have the statistics in front of me but I would guess that you are far more likely to have your gas stove or BBQ blow up in your face than have a rifle do so.

Or handloads !

quote:

Originally posted by Brad:
FM, you're quite right. I haven't looked carefully at the two versions side by side to make an informed post about how easy a mod it is. I suspect the bolt release lever had to be modified/moved to give space for the flange... just a guess. Regardless, we should call USRAC and try to get the skinny!

That's not a problem considering the gas block is smaller than the locking lugs that have to clear that same bolt release.

That part's usefulness as a "gas block" is far less than it's other features...First and foremost; they can use the same bolt stop for all calibers within a particular action length by simply modifying which gas block they throw in there.
The other advantage is the fact that when cycling the bolt, the locking lugs are not slamming against the small bolt release and ejector....Instead, they're hitting a gas block, which is dispersing the force over the entire lug on that side, decreasing the chances of damaging the lug.

If you see what happens to a "Classic" Model 70 when she's given the "blue pill"....The extractor goes for a wild ride, as well as the spring collar and gas block. This gas block will do little to nothing for saving an eye.

The best solution is a gas flange for both sides of the receiver on the bolt shroud. After that; venting the gases into the mag box with larger holes than Winchester has used. Two venting holes on either side of the front receiver ring that ride approximately .080" above boreline....as in above stockline.

That's the best solution, which doesn't depart much from the original concept that Paul Mauser had over a 100 years ago.....

Imagine that ehh

C'Mon now Matt, don't go muddying-up this thread with facts...

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:
The best solution is a gas flange for both sides of the receiver on the bolt shroud. After that; venting the gases into the mag box with larger holes than Winchester has used. Two venting holes on either side of the front receiver ring that ride approximately .080" above boreline....as in above stockline.

And are you selling the gas flange as a drop-in part?

quote:

Originally posted by Charles_Helm:

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:
The best solution is a gas flange for both sides of the receiver on the bolt shroud. After that; venting the gases into the mag box with larger holes than Winchester has used. Two venting holes on either side of the front receiver ring that ride approximately .080" above boreline....as in above stockline.

And are you selling the gas flange as a drop-in part?

It'll be dropping in to our actions, but I'm afraid you're SOL on the Winchesters.....There's a limit to the amount of turd polishing one can do..

Triggerguard

Speaking of "our actions", where in the hell are they??????????

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Triggerguard

Speaking of "our actions", where in the hell are they??????????

The puzzle is coming together pretty quickly now.....One of our last big hurdles is getting our shaper tooled up for the raceways.

All the lathe work is within a week of being completed.

A few more minor fixtures to make and we'll be getting something ready for testing.

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:
It'll be dropping in to our actions, but I'm afraid you're SOL on the Winchesters.....

Story of my life...

Fact of life........The Model 70 does not handle escaping gas well, never has, it squirts it rearward in your face and makes little curly q's of smoke come out of your skin...

I love the pre 64 model 70 and properly loaded you will never have to deal with that scenario...if it happens? look within yourself.

The 98 Mauser is the only action that handles escaping gas well IMO....

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Triggerguard

Speaking of "our actions", where in the hell are they??????????

The puzzle is coming together pretty quickly now.....One of our last big hurdles is getting our shaper tooled up for the raceways.

All the lathe work is within a week of being completed.

A few more minor fixtures to make and we'll be getting something ready for testing.

Triggerguard

It would really be interesting if you would film the process from start to finish so that everyone could see how an action is made. I know I would plunk down a $20 bill for a Tape of it.

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Triggerguard

Speaking of "our actions", where in the hell are they??????????

The puzzle is coming together pretty quickly now.....One of our last big hurdles is getting our shaper tooled up for the raceways.

All the lathe work is within a week of being completed.

A few more minor fixtures to make and we'll be getting something ready for testing.

Triggerguard

It would really be interesting if you would film the process from start to finish so that everyone could see how an action is made. I know I would plunk down a $20 bill for a Tape of it.

Well, I can understand the curiosity about the process, but I'd be cutting my throat to our competition. I'd hate to give the recipe for making these actions at a 1/3 of the price the rest of the folks are charging.

I've given a lot of thought about how I could present some good info on the subject, but I've yet to be able to see how I could do it without compromising our proprietary processes.

The same is true on our bottom metal....There's a reason why we sell our parts for the price that we do....It's because of the fixturing and machining techniques that we incorporate that no one else is using. Letting that info out would be business suicide.

Sorry

How does anyone know that their action is safe to shoot? Yes we put a trememdous amount of pressure close to our head every time we squeeze the trigger. Are you going to have your action/barrel x-rayed and checked for cracks /stess fractures and other possible troubles after every shot? Don't shoot hot loads. They aren't accurate anyway. I would much rather have a slow bullseye than a fast miss.

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:

quote:

Originally posted by triggerguard1:

quote:

Originally posted by 22WRF:
Triggerguard

Speaking of "our actions", where in the hell are they??????????

The puzzle is coming together pretty quickly now.....One of our last big hurdles is getting our shaper tooled up for the raceways.

All the lathe work is within a week of being completed.

A few more minor fixtures to make and we'll be getting something ready for testing.

Triggerguard

It would really be interesting if you would film the process from start to finish so that everyone could see how an action is made. I know I would plunk down a $20 bill for a Tape of it.

Well, I can understand the curiosity about the process, but I'd be cutting my throat to our competition. I'd hate to give the recipe for making these actions at a 1/3 of the price the rest of the folks are charging.

I've given a lot of thought about how I could present some good info on the subject, but I've yet to be able to see how I could do it without compromising our proprietary processes.

The same is true on our bottom metal....There's a reason why we sell our parts for the price that we do....It's because of the fixturing and machining techniques that we incorporate that no one else is using. Letting that info out would be business suicide.

Sorry

Make the tape anyway, and after you have saturated the market with your actions you can then let us good guys here on AR have a look see.

So if hunting with my pre-64 I should always wear glasses. I always wear glasses at the shooting range but very rarely do I wear them hunting . I am willing to bet unless their eyes warrant it that most hunters don't wear glasses hunting. Am i wrong in this regard.?

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:
I am willing to bet unless their eyes warrant it that most hunters don't wear glasses hunting. Am i wrong in this regard.?

I think that's changing.......slowly.

I believe there are more hunters wearing both eye and ear protection when afield. And it's a healthy move. I suffer from tinititus, and although I started wearing ear protection quite early for practice and shooting sports, 45+ years of hunting has likely taken it's toll.

GV

quote:

Originally posted by GrandView:

quote:

Originally posted by SempreElk:
I am willing to bet unless their eyes warrant it that most hunters don't wear glasses hunting. Am i wrong in this regard.?

I think that's changing.......slowly.

I believe there are more hunters wearing both eye and ear protection when afield. And it's a healthy move. I suffer from tinititus, and although I started wearing ear protection quite early for practice and shooting sports, 45+ years of hunting has likely taken it's toll.

GV

GV,

Boy, ain’t that the truth. I too have that GD ringing in my ears and I have no doubt its from my macho youth where I thought that wearing ear plugs was for sissies.

I’ve also learned over the years that eyeballs come one pair to a customer...and I never shoot without protective eyewear now.