Every gun related web site talks about blue printing your action, etc.

Does anyone know a source for actual blue-prints of the Remington 700, Savage10 & 110 series, and/or the Sauer 202 series?

Happy to pay for those.

Thanks,

LD

Hope you can find these. I looked around for a long time for real production drawings of both the Mauser 98 and the Martini-Henry actions, without luck.

Have you searched the US patent office? They have full text and drawings for all patents issued since 1976 available online. You might get some action drawings there...

LD,

I just now punched in "firearms blueprints" into Google. Got hits up the ying yang. You might check it out if you haven't already.

I'll try Google under the broader rubric of firearms blueprints. I had tried Remington 700 Blueprint(s), and got "we blueprint, and here is how..."

Thanks much,
LD

Most companies consider their blueprints as confidential information and even vendors that supply "to print" are informed that the drawings are not to be divulged under penalty of law.

It's not likely that the drawings will be found but good luck trying.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
Most companies consider their blueprints as confidential information and even vendors that supply "to print" are informed that the drawings are not to be divulged under penalty of law.

I could see defense contractors doing this with top secret stuff, but a heavily produced rifle action? If you have a Remington 700 action, then presumably, you have a working copy of the blue print. Shouldn't be that big of a secret. Heck it wouldn't be too tough to draw a picture of one using blue ink and draw in some numbers. Then you could sell them on Ebay right next to the cheese sandwich with the image of Elvis in the Mayo.

Mark Stratton has a Mauser drawing on CD. I haven't been able to download it though. go to www.homegunsmith.com. If you are a paying member several prints and drawings are available to you.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
Most companies consider their blueprints as confidential information and even vendors that supply "to print" are informed that the drawings are not to be divulged under penalty of law.

It's not likely that the drawings will be found but good luck trying.

Vapo,
I agree totally. I don't know any company that allows it's drawings to be public information. They contain a record of engineering changes, material specs, heat treating specs and finishing data.

I'd be very surprised that Remington drawings are available. Possibly Mauser as there is no company left to complain. But no American company I know of lets their drawings become public information.

Ya,

I keep looking anyvay.

I tink I get an internal micrometer to go vis de externals. No sense to make a copy, but maybe it give a little insight into zee proportions.

I need someting to test Rigby sized ammunition, da bebe 700 not eet.

LD

At one time Cliff LaBounty had acquired the original Winchester shop drawings for the first iteration of the Model 70. He still runs a bed and breakfast in Washington state and might be willing to sell a copy.

It might take the rest of your life for the government to process the request but records of the Enfield, Model 17 should be in the public domain. They should include drawings and that action is the right size. Only problem is the 17 million separate set-ups to machine one.

Can't you go to the patent website and get prints and drawings?
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
It might take the rest of your life for the government to process the request but records of the Enfield, Model 17 should be in the public domain. They should include drawings and that action is the right size. Only problem is the 17 million separate set-ups to machine one.

hence the birth of the 700 round tube reciever

I will hit the patent office website this weekend.

I'm also looking for a beat to snot action and bolt to section longitudinally. The pictures of that one in Jerry Kunhausen's book about the Mauser really helps my understanding of the proportions and relationships. If anyone has a total beater that they would sell me before or after sectioning, I would be interested.

Is there a reasonably priced computer mechanical drawing program that doesn't take a master's degree to understand? That would surely help.

LD

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
Can't you go to the patent website and get prints and drawings?
Butch

I suppose you could but the drawings used in patent proposals are not at all the same thing as manufacturing specifications commonly found on blue prints.
Patent drawings show onlt the specific items presented as patentable. One could not reproduce a product using patient drawings.

Reverse engineering as previously suggested is the best way to get drawings and it's not that hard to do but does take some time.

LD,
None of the basic CAD programs are easy to learn, and the advanced ones are truly wild. I've used full autoCad and the lite version. They're helpful if you are really designing something and multiple changes are expected. If it's a one-off dimensional drawing (blueprint) paper and pencil are the way to go.

I truly doubt that many bolt action rifles are patented...though I (think I) read that Springfield Armory did have to pay Mauser for infringments on the '03 after WW1.

My partner in my co. Shadetree Engineering and Accuracy is an engineer and designer. We bought a solid modeling package called cadMax. He says that he can't imagine you trying to draw something without solid modeling. He said if you buy the manual and go through all the tutorials you could handle it. Thom has used a lot of high priced programs and really likes the cadMax program. It cost us $327.50. If you would like to visit with him email at opireed@gmail.com.
Butch

When people talk about blueprinting an action, don't they really mean "truing the action"? Even if you have the blueprints and the action was made to specs orginally then the action should be factory blueprinted. If by some chance the receiver ring was a hair undersized, how would you bring that to blueprint specs? You wouldn't. You would just true it up. I may be learning impaired but wouldn't a set of specs work just as well? That would be the only thiong the blueprints would give you, right?

quote:

Originally posted by Pegleg:
When people talk about blueprinting an action, don't they really mean "truing the action"? Even if you have the blueprints and the action was made to specs orginally then the action should be factory blueprinted. If by some chance the receiver ring was a hair undersized, how would you bring that to blueprint specs? You wouldn't. You would just true it up. I may be learning impaired but wouldn't a set of specs work just as well? That would be the only thiong the blueprints would give you, right?

Pegleg,
You are 100% correct and there is no need at all for "blue prints" or engineered drawings to do this.

I thought LD was building an action. I did see blueprinting also though. I guess I remembered the other post when he was talking about drilling and reaming for raceways.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by Pegleg:
When people talk about blueprinting an action, don't they really mean "truing the action"? Even if you have the blueprints and the action was made to specs orginally then the action should be factory blueprinted. If by some chance the receiver ring was a hair undersized, how would you bring that to blueprint specs? You wouldn't. You would just true it up. I may be learning impaired but wouldn't a set of specs work just as well? That would be the only thiong the blueprints would give you, right?

The term "Blue printing" really came on in the late 60's and early 70's with the builders of race cars and high performance engines. To "Blue Print" something was to take a stock product, and go from one end to the other and make it perfect. Same with the rifle action, or, anything else you wish to perfect. An actual blue print wouldn't do a bit of good 'cause by the time you went from one end of an action to the other, you would be well outside the published tolerances. But I think having actual blue prints of the more popular actions on hand would be cool and a nice conversation piece. Probably make interesting wall paper for the shitter.

Hi Y'all,

I do plan to build an action; something simple and beefy to use for accuracy testing the larger cartridges (338 Lapua, 416 Rigby, etc.).

I'll buy a chunk of steel from Butch, and have Mr. Stiller EDM the raceways after I cipher out the design.

If'n I'm real carefull building it, I won't have to go back and blue print it .

LD

quote:

My partner in my co. Shadetree Engineering and Accuracy is an engineer and designer. We bought a solid modeling package called cadMax. He says that he can't imagine you trying to draw something without solid modeling. He said if you buy the manual and go through all the tutorials you could handle it. Thom has used a lot of high priced programs and really likes the cadMax program. It cost us $327.50. If you would like to visit with him email at opireed@gmail.com.
Butch

I'll send him a note. That sounds cool. I did well in mechanical drawing in middle school and high school, but my hands were steadier then.....

Once you get the hang on it, cad programs aren't too terribly difficult to operate. They're just like every other computer program you have encountered - one more thing to learn.

I used AutoCad Lite and a computer operated two axis mill to make a CO2 powered race car and I didn't find it too terribly difficult to "cypher out." Of course I barely scratched the surface of what the program can do, but I only had an hour a day for nine weeks to tinker with it too. Your mileage may very.

I found a sacrificial Mauser action.

I'll check the pawn shops for a truly grubby 700 action.

LD

At one of the Air Force career school (SOS?) I was priviledged to meet an 81 year old active duty Navy Rear Admiral named Edna Hopper. She was part of the Uniac and Eniac teams that worked on the first computers (designed by John Van Neuman) that were used in the Manhattan project. An IT specialist in 1943! Anyway, she told us punks in the audience that computers should have been designed to serve our needs, but it worked out to be the other way instead.

Venturing way OT, but the brilliant Ms Hopper is also credited with taking the manufacturing term "bug" and inserting into the IT lexicon. Those early computers weren't solid state, but used rooms full of physical relays to create the logic patterns. The Eniac would not complete a computation and Edna found a dead housefly stuck in a relay. She removed it, taped into her notebook and noted "found the bug".

I think this site and our access to it is "computers serving our needs"

Amen to that, yeti.

I found that the action I envisioned in my head is already available.

It is the XL, by Surgeon Rifles.

Thanks for everyone's help.
LD