This is a picture (hopefully) of the crack in my 3 month old Schultz and Larsen M97-DL.
I posted this on a UK site one of the members said you lot would be a better source of info for what may have been the cause.It has been to the range twice and fired a total of 100 rounds,
more than pleased with the rifle but gutted about the crack.It is coming from the middle of the stamping and turning the corner .The action i believe has no stress on it because the bolt locks directly into the barrel

Maybe jørgen will chime in. It's his company.

quote:

Originally posted by dave 67:
I posted this on a UK site one of the members said you lot would be a better source of info for what may have been the cause.

Unfortunately, without the benefit of actually eyeballing and examining the receiver, anything said would be speculative and not fair to the company who manufactured the rifle. I assume you are sending it back for their evaluation?

The Owner of Schultz and Larson (jorgen) posts here and you might try to PM him but in all fairness you need to contact the company before posting here.

IMO what has caused this is irrelevant....it's what S & L is going to do about it.....

Please send email and photo to Jorgen as I'm sure he will treat you fairly in correcting it!

Have you tried a dye penetrant on it to confirm it is a crack and not an unfortunate looking artifact?

Thanks for the replies,know it would only have been ideas you would have put forward not definate answers because you are seeing a photo not the thing in real life.I was aware that Jorgen knew alot about S&L did not know he was the owner,will PM him give him a chance to reply,at the moment the rifle has been return to my fire arms dealer in the UK to sort out.I am over the moon with the rifle and more than happy to have it back when this is sorted. This was not an attempt to slag of Schultz and Larsen,I just wondered if anyone had come across anything similar in their own shooting/gunsmithing experience

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
but in all fairness you need to contact the company before posting here.

Why the heck not? I am sure you wouldn't have that stance if it would have been a Winchester or Remington action.

quote:

Ignored post by Howard posted 27 January 2009 21:15

this "I" button works well for folks that want to attack others and not contribute to the forum!

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
but in all fairness you need to contact the company before posting here.

Why the heck not? I am sure you wouldn't have that stance if it would have been a Winchester or Remington action.

+1 Howard. It just all depends on who's ox is being gored. The man has every right to ask questions and post pictures.


Terry

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Ignored post by Howard posted 27 January 2009 21:15

this "I" button works well for folks that want to attack others and not contribute to the forum!

I actually thought it was a very fair question as you seemed to be attacking the original poster without adding anything to the topic.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Ignored post by Howard posted 27 January 2009 21:15

this "I" button works well for folks that want to attack others and not contribute to the forum!

I actually thought it was a very fair question as you seemed to be attacking the original poster without adding anything to the topic.

I agree:

if the original post was something along the lines of "look at this POS it's a cracked piece of junk bla bla bla. then yes contact first then post. But the original post was quite fair and not in any way lambasting

A question ;

Isn't this an area in which a crack would develop if a chamber pressure were an issue ?.

I understand it's a 6.5X55 and they're not a high pressure round , I'm simply asking .

quote:

Originally posted by Doc224/375:
A question ;

Isn't this an area in which a crack would develop if a chamber pressure were an issue ?.

I understand it's a 6.5X55 and they're not a high pressure round , I'm simply asking .

I don't think so. My understanding is the bolt locks into the barrel itself so there should never been any pressure from a fired round on the receiver.

I wonder if such a hairline crack could be caused by overtighening the barrel into the receiver? I have seen such cracks in plastic but not steel.

It appears to be a switch barrel system with the barrel somehow being "pined" into the receiver. No threads I can see.

quote:

the bolt locks into the barrel itself so there should never been any pressure

...Huh...?? The pressure is radial - which surfaces the bolt mate to aren't a factor. This only determines which area counters bolt thrust (much easier to contain than radial/hoop stress). It's certainly technically possible to have chamber/barrel expansion transfer to a receiver if the receiver is tightly fitted.

Could be anything - have the manufacturer check it out...

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

the bolt locks into the barrel itself so there should never been any pressure

...Huh...?? The pressure is radial - which surfaces the bolt mate to aren't a factor. This only determines which area counters bolt thrust (much easier to contain than radial/hoop stress). It's certainly technically possible to have chamber/barrel expansion transfer to a receiver if the receiver is tightly fitted.

Couls be anything - have the manufacturer check it out...

Agreed about the theory but it is less likely with this system which is a slip-fit like the Sauer 202. Plus, the chamber is completely forward of the receiver ring in this system.

This is a hi-res photo and blown up, you can see that the crack runs through the crown stamp and out the other side but looks peened shut in the stamping proper. It may have been there all along, overstamped and then the torque stress from clamping the barrel shank opened it large enough to be visible. Or it may have been created when the mark was stamped in the receiver; that is a pretty thin section.

We think the stamp raised a stress point with it being too near to the edge. It is easier to see the crack on this photo than with the naked eye,must say had not noticed the fact that it was out of the other side of the crown stamp. Not sure if some of you are up with UK gun law(if you are sorry for the next bit) but here it is law to have ever gun tested to proof(air rifles exempt)to make sure they are safe once tested they get a proof stamp, that is what the crown is, this is done with a hammer and punch at one of two proof houses London/Birmingham so it looks like they may have caused the problem.

Sent a PM to Jorgen,had a prompt reply he was aware of the problem as his UK supplier had phoned him, he is going to replace the action then take the issue up with the Proof house in the UK what more could i ask for more than over the moon with the rifle i own and now the service and back up more than i asked for or expected
Thanks for all the input i got now i know of this site i will stay here an hopefully learn more
Thanks Dave

Sounds like a professional response from a reputable company. Good deal!

quote:

Originally posted by dave 67:
Sent a PM to Jorgen,had a prompt reply he was aware of the problem as his UK supplier had phoned him, he is going to replace the action then take the issue up with the Proof house in the UK

That is exactly the way it should be. Take care of the customer and deal with the issues afterwards. Good job Jorgen.

Such action is the cheapest advertising you could ever have.

Please keep us up to date as to what caused this crack .

For my own curiosity , how far back does the barrel set up slip into the receiver ?.

Does anybody have a cut away view of a similar rifle set up ?. As the Barrel isn't threaded correct !?.

It some how slips into the receiver and is pinned ?. I wonder what the Rockwell scale is on the receiver

metal ?.

The barrel on their web site looks to have about 1.5 inches of shank, just like my Sauer 200. ON the 200 and 202 the front receiver ring is split on the bottom and has ears with three screws that clamp the barrel in place with friction only; no pins. The bolt runs up into the back of the barrel so the receiver is never really under stress from firing. It is just a platform to keep the functional components aligned. The receiver is springy so that the clamp releases the shank when the screws are backed off and I bet its fairly hard steel.

tiggertate Thank You ; Explanation understood .

The action has a split on the bottom that clamps the barrel by the use of 2 5mm allen bolts and a locating pin in the back so the barrel lines up correctly for bolt alignment,
the action is also case hardened. I have had an email today from the UK S&L importer he informed me that when he spoke to the UK proof house when he first started importing they told him the proof marks would be engraved so as not to cause stress. He has checked his stock and they are engraved so looks like this one slipped through the net.Think the buck will stop at the proof house.

A little facts on this action/lockingsystem

Bolt locks directly in the barrel
The reciever is as said, only an carrier/platform

The reciever is produced from medium carbon steel, with an core rupturestrength of 550Kn/mm2
The surface is gasnitrated 0.3mm deep to an surfacehardness from 550Hv to 600Hv (apx 55Hrc)

The boltbody is a all in one part produced from 42CrMo4 / 4140 /SS2244 With a corerupturestrength of 1000Kn/mm2
It is gasnitrated 0.3mm deep to a surfacehardness of 600Hv to 650Hv (apx 58hrc)

The barrel with integrated luckingpart is made from 42CrMo4 / 4140 / SS2244 with a rupturestrength of 1000Kn/mm2 elongation >15% (17-20%) Hardness 29HrC

The lockingsystem is tested on a hydraulic press, The readings was Deformations started at a static thrust of 12 metric ton.
The lugs sheared of at 14.9 metric ton of static thrust.

The luckingsystem has been tested with extremepresure loads in a standard 6.5x55 caliber loads were gradualy increased showing friction on boltlift at apx 8000bar. Heavy boltlift at 9500 Bar, and total failure at apx 10500bar

To comparason, does a standard cartridge loadet to cip or saami max deliver a thrust: at apx 3800Bar
In oiled chamber apx 3.0 metric ton
In dry chamber apx 1.7 metric ton

A magnum (as a 300winmag) loaded to cip or Saami max delivers a thrust: at apx 4000Bar
In a oiled chamber apx 4.2 metric ton
In a dry chamber apx 3.0 metric ton

So what your saying is that steel will with stand 152,300.00 PSI before rupturing Roughly 10500 Bar.

So what did they stamp it with , a wrecking ball dropped from 20 stories ?.

Seems pretty fragile if it can't hold up too a Punch mark or it's way over hardened !.

Doc224/375
The figure JÃ,rgen states for the barrel/bolt locking area
Quote
"The barrel with integrated luckingpart is made from 42CrMo4 / 4140 / SS2244 with a rupturestrength of 1000Kn/mm2 elongation >15% (17-20%) Hardness 29HrC

The lockingsystem is tested on a hydraulic press, The readings was Deformations started at a static thrust of 12 metric ton.
The lugs sheared of at 14.9 metric ton of static thrust.

The luckingsystem has been tested with extremepresure loads in a standard 6.5x55 caliber loads were gradualy increased showing friction on boltlift at apx 8000bar. Heavy boltlift at 9500 Bar, and total failure at apx 10500bar"

10500 bar is not to do with the strength of the receiver this is under very little stress as it is as stated it is only a carrier for the bolt.

As I hope you can see in the picture the bolt locks into the barrel so any over pressure should be contained in this area. There are also drillings in the bolt shaft and on the side of the barrel to release any gas in the event of case head separation,primer piercing. So making the design inherantly safer and saving people from the gap toothed grin of bolt removed teeth.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc224/375:
So what did they stamp it with , a wrecking ball dropped from 20 stories ?.

Seems pretty fragile if it can't hold up too a Punch mark or it's way over hardened !.

Well Doc, here's your big chance.

Since you know so much, you can design and sell your own brand of guns and make them perfect.

quote:

The reciever is produced from medium carbon steel, with an core rupturestrength of 550Kn/mm2
The surface is gasnitrated 0.3mm deep to an surfacehardness from 550Hv to 600Hv (apx 55Hrc)

The boltbody is a all in one part produced from 42CrMo4 / 4140 /SS2244 With a corerupturestrength of 1000Kn/mm2
It is gasnitrated 0.3mm deep to a surfacehardness of 600Hv to 650Hv (apx 58hrc)

If the surface of the receiver and bolt are casehardened (gasnitrated) then they can be quite hard in this area. However if the steel underneath the case is medium carbon then it shouldn't crack unless the nitriding went much deeper than the .3mm stated, which might be possible going around the corner or face of the receiver. On the other hand it might be "only" a surface crack, but regardless it needs to be replaced by the manufacturer. Jurgen has agreed to replace the receiver. It will make quite a study in what happened to the hardening process to cause the crack and whether or not the crack is a surface crack or a through crack.

quote:

Originally posted by duikerman:
Well Doc, here's your big chance.

Since you know so much, you can design and sell your own brand of guns and make them perfect.

Not sure why you say that. It seems like a perfectly fair and reasonable question.

Is it ok and acceptable for an action to crack when stamped with a proof mark?

OK ;


The reciever is produced from medium carbon steel, with an core rupturestrength of 550Kn/mm2
The surface is gasnitrated 0.3mm deep to an surfacehardness from 550Hv to 600Hv (apx 55Hrc)

The boltbody is a all in one part produced from 42CrMo4 / 4140 /SS2244 With a corerupturestrength of 1000Kn/mm2
It is gasnitrated 0.3mm deep to a surfacehardness of 600Hv to 650Hv (apx 58hrc)


So roughly 80K Psi receiver steel with a 55Hrc rating case hardened 0.3mm for a rating of average 575Hv

http://publications.drdo.gov.i...90439eeb.dir/doc.pdf


I was looking at some old notes of comparisons of Ballistic Armor testing . Went looking on the net

came back with the above link . Shows a correlation between higher hardness ratings tendency to

surface fracture under projectile impacts than with a lower surface hardening . Although higher surface

hardness caused more deformation of the striking projectile , it also caused much greater depth craters

with surface cracking .


I thank all of you who responded intelligently and informatively . It was my intention to learn something .

I have to wonder in this type of rifle if there is any value in having the receiver ring proof marked at all. Unlike conventional actions the proof strength here really applies to the barrel and contained bolt locking surfaces within the barrel and it's bolt. The barrel carries it's own proof mark and that seems sufficient to me.

No doubt convention played a role in how they stamped it and I wonder how likely British proof houses are to make changes in procedure.

I do recall seeing revolvers that had been sent to England for Home Guard use during WW2 that had been so heavily proof stamped as to distort the interior of the barrels slightly.

quote:

I have to wonder in this type of rifle if there is any value in having the receiver ring proof marked at all.

Makes no sense to mark that part

I would think it's written in the manuals !. Simply speaking as most actions being a receiver and barrel

set up constitutes a firearm . An FFL is required to purchase a receiver , yet not a barrel !.

I wonder how THAT works with this firearm ???.

It works because the fire control system isn't part of the barrel.

Just to close this matter I now have my rifle back with a new action which has been engraved.
Could not have asked for more to be done than was by the UK importer or Schultz and Larsen they have been great,
Guess the calibre of the man or firm is proved by how they react when things do not go right.I have not found either of the people I have had dealings with in this matter to be found wanting. One very happy customer

Dave ; Was any reason or explanation given as too the nature of the crack ?.

Did they simply just replace it and that was that ?.

quote:

Originally posted by dave 67:
Just to close this matter I now have my rifle back with a new action which has been engraved.
Could not have asked for more to be done than was by the UK importer or Schultz and Larsen they have been great,
Guess the calibre of the man or firm is proved by how they react when things do not go right.I have not found either of the people I have had dealings with in this matter to be found wanting. One very happy customer

I feel honored to have had Jorgen as a guest at my shop here in Nebraska. He's truly a fine person and a learned individual. There was no doubt in my mind that you would be treated honorably by Schultz & Larson.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc224/375:
Dave ; Was any reason or explanation given as too the nature of the crack ?.

Did they simply just replace it and that was that ?.

No offense Doc, but it's pretty obvious the proof house smacked the shit out of it after they agreed to only engrave them.

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
No offense Doc, but it's pretty obvious the proof house smacked the shit out of it after they agreed to only engrave them.

Its not obvious to me. Please explain just how hard you would have to "smack" something with a proof stamp to crack it.