Many reference works on stockmaking say to inlet the bottom metal on a Mauser or Springfield short of contacting the reciever. Some give a dimension, some like Roy Dunlop, just say stop just short of contact. Looking at the machined magazine boxes on these rifles, it seems to me that bringing these parts into full contact would greatly increse resistance to bending in the vertical plane. I have stoped short on several rifles, and done one, a M38 Swede, in full contact. Both ways seem to feed fine and are accurate, although the Swede is the most accurate rifle of this type I have put together. Anybody know the rational of not bringing the magazine box into contact with the reciever?

I've always been told about 1/32". If they contact you might have an accuracy issue. The bottom metal could keep you from firmly pulling the action down into the bedding. Or just making the screw tighter. Hard to bed so that you have contact just as the action is pulled firmly into the bedding.

Paul's right..
if you screw it together with 100% contact, the "pinch", if any, resulting from the screws is holding the action down, and the through holes in the action are taking a beating backwards...

it's designed not to bind together.

jeffe

I guess I could see a problem with full contact if the wood shrunk and the guard screws were bending the reciever over the magazine box. I bedded the Swede on pillars glued into a hard maple stock. The pillars were fitted to allow the screws to just clamp the magazine box against the reciever. I would think Paul Von Mauser's ferrels did the same thing. In any event, it worked out so well that I am doing a .257 Roberts Springfield the same way. Thanks for your thoughts.