Well it finally happened. Started to install bases on a Remington M700 SPS today & had to re-tap two of the screw holes because they were barely tapped at all(threads went half way through rear bridge holes & screws would not start at all). The third hole was canted about 10 to 15 degrees to the right! The fourth hole was good. Quality control really went to sleep on this one!

I will bet you lunch if you were to take it apart and check for concentricity and co axial alignment between the barrel and the action you would find the TIR to exceed .008. I'll bet you a second lunch the bolt handle is welded on crooked and the primary extraction is out of time. I'll bet you a third lunch only one bolt lug is engaging the action when in battery.

I can taste that Ribeye now.

Longshot

Longshot, either you really don't like 700's or there are a bunch of them messed up! Sounds like you do know a good steak though

Doug,
There most likely are no or limited post production quality checks. The trends in manufacturing over past decade has been to build the quality into the process. This places even more emphasis that people actually do their jobs correctly. Apparently the operator on the drill press was otherwise occupied while working on your action.

quote:

Originally posted by Longshot:
I will bet you lunch if you were to take it apart and check for concentricity and co axial alignment between the barrel and the action you would find the TIR to exceed .008. I'll bet you a second lunch the bolt handle is welded on crooked and the primary extraction is out of time. I'll bet you a third lunch only one bolt lug is engaging the action when in battery.

I can taste that Ribeye now.

Longshot

I'll take that second lunch bet with you.

I've seen way too many out of whack axes (had to go online to check the spelling) across the manufacturing spectrum to take the first and third lunch bet on almost ANY massed produced gun today, but you're on for the second lunch bet.

quote:

Longshot, either you really don't like 700's or there are a bunch of them messed up!

No he has probably just had the pleasure to work on a bunch of them.

The bolt handle is ok on this one but the bolt would not close ( right out of the box ).

Do you think remy test fired this rifle?

I had to .018 off the end of the front locking screw. It was too long blocking the bottom lug & was stopping the bolt from closeing.

The lug engagement wasn't all that bad for a factory remy. At least both lugs engaged. Top lug about 10% & bottom about 30%.

My remy 700 made in about 1974 looks better every time I see a new remington 700!

quote:

Apparently the operator on the drill press was otherwise occupied while working on your action

Maybe he was text messaging!

Luckly it was not my action.

quote:

Originally posted by D Humbarger:

Do you think remy test fired this rifle?

Was there powder residue in the bore?

quote:

I'll bet you a second lunch the bolt handle is welded on crooked and the primary extraction is out of time.

Is this pretty common then? I built a rifle based on an XR-100 that seemed to have this problem. Instead of re-soldering the handle I put a bead on there and ground it down:



I've been using Pierce actions since. The rear scope base mounting on the remingtons doesn't seem consistent either. What is the radius and offset of that surface actually supposed to be? Is shimming the rear base almost always required? The Pierce is the same diameter the whole way so it's simple.

I also bet that with all those problems it is still very accurate.

I have a Rem. 700 P (Police), mfg'd in Feb. 2009. .308 Win. Leupold Mark 4 scope, rings. Jewell trigger. I've had a smith take it apart and look it over while installing the trigger. It's perfect, shoots in the realm of 0.5 MOA if I do my part.

Doug:

Does your action click when opening? What is the gap measurement between the bolt handle and the action? Is there a gap in time between lug release and primary extraction begining? It is rare that a factory Remington bolt handle is timed correctly. I think you will find more experienced smiths will agree.
John Pierce, Jim Borden, Jerry Stiller, Jim Kelbly, Barney Lawton all corrected the problems associated with the Remington bolt timing.

Just ask Dan Armstrong in Fairbanks AK. He has made it a business.
Longshot

quote:

Originally posted by 1894mk2:
I also bet that with all those problems it is still very accurate.

Groups were all 1 hole, but only because I couldn't eject the case to fire a second one! lol It is quite accurate now, but I attribute most of that to the barrel and handloads.

But I am curious what the radius and offset of the rear scope base mounting surface is supposed to be on a remington. I measured ~2.1" radius at 0.103" lower than the front of the receiver.

I've been searching for the "correct" dimensions for remington scope bases on this forum, but I'm not seeing them. Anyone have this or is it secret information? Calling up remington certainly didn't get me anywhere...

I measured another action at 0.116" height difference between the front and rear. I didn't measure the radius though...

Shot some loads in a 257 Weatherby I am working up for a friend. His rifle. Late model Remington 700. Has the new trigger, so I guess it is probably a year or so old. I did notice the action on this rifle seemed to fit the bolt better than my 700s. The rifle shoots 117 Hornady round noses very well. It really felt "right", which I cannot say about my Remingtons.

Weaver Specs for Rem 700 bases.

Base number from:
http://www.weaveroptics.com/mountcharts/default.aspx

Base dimensions from:
http://www.brownells.com/.aspx..._Base_Specifications

-----------------------

35 front base

1.168 long

.860 hole spacing

1.290 Diameter

.147 thick

--------------------------

36 rear base

1.401 length

.604 hole space

3.900 diameter

.272 thick

----------------------------------

Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by bcp:
1.290 Diameter

Thanks for the reply. All the remington actions I've measured are ∅1.350 or more, so I wonder if they use a 1.290 diameter to make sure the base touches the action at its outer edges?

If the "thickness" translates into the elevation difference between the front and rear base mounting surfaces, that comes to 0.125" which would put that first action more than 20 thou off!