Todays investment casting is excellent...Ruger re introduced investment cast receivers with the Ruger 77, and that action has no flaws that I know of....

As far as I know Ruger is the only bolt action with a cast receiver, but I could be wrong...

I believe post 64 M-70s to be forged actions, but again I may be mistaken...

My next question is does anybody make a non investment cast rifle anymore? I know Ruger is, assuming the above statement is correct Winchester is, I thought Remington was still using billet, what about CZ, Browning, Savage, the new Sako's I think are cast, I know Kimbers are, Dakota?

Remington is billet as is Savage,Sako,Dakota,CZ,Browning . I believe the Winchester is forged and then CNC machined it is definitely not cast. Parts of the new Kimbers are cast not sure which but they definitely alude to it on their website.

Montana Rifle Company's 1999 is a cast receiver, done by Ruger

I think some of the newer Sako receivers are castings, but I could be wrong.

I think Weatherby Mk V's have always been cast - I believe they were one of the first (maybe even before Ruger in rifles).

I think Weatherby Mk V's have always been cast - I believe they were one of the first (maybe even before Ruger in rifles).

Weatherby claim...forged and machined steel....

Mike

Actually, MRC receivers are done by Pinetree, who also make golf clubs for the high-end club companies. I saw a LH long action magnum in unblued steel at a gunshow in Reno, NV in mid-November and I was very impressed with it. I can take possession of my stainless LH long action magnum on January 5.

Jim Farley casts his actions out of stainless and the lug ways are perfect. Most of the action makers using new tooling are EDMing the bolt ways.A lot faster and more accurate than broaching.

schromf,



I tell you what, I would take an investment cast receiver over a billet receiver ANY DAY. Having said that, I would much prefer my receivers to be forgings.



So from most desireable to least:



1.) Forged receiver (properly stress relieved)

2.) Investment cast receiver (properly stress relieved)

3.) VERY DISTANT billet receiver



Same goes for engine crankshafts and connecting rods.



Investment castings can easily hold +/- 0.005". While it is true a broach can significantly better than (order of magnitude) I have NEVER EVER seen a rifle which had that level of accuracy machined into lug raceways, for one thing machined that tight and the darned things would bind up and be INCREDIBLY sensitive to dust let alone dirt. Shapers are no more accurate than the investment casting for all practical purposes. Investment casting also isn't cheap, it may provide some small capital investment benefit by eliminating the purchase of machining equipment, but much of that "savings" is offset by the actual cost of the casting to begin with.



ASS_CLOWN

Really? Nice people there, at Ruger...

I notice this year that investment cast actions are available in semi-custom and custom rifles with prices up to $4,000 for the finished rifle.

The most recent example is the Nosler Custom Rifle, the action is cast by an outfit in Orygun (one source says the folks who also did the Kimber of Oregon actions). Nosler reports they take the action from the casting house, and send it to another facility for polishing and truing. Then they run it through a series of quality control checks.

jim

All,

Thanks for the posts. I spent last night digging around to find the old post to verify the statement made, and I guess the consensus is that it is BS. I also want to emphasis I make no comments at all about suitablity, strenght etc about the differences, I am certainly not qualified to do so. The math and stress analysis to figure out the differences would be a danting engineering task I have niether the time, resources or energy to perform right now.

Were any of the post 64's cast? Has there been a change in prodcution technic?

From what I gather from the posts (all current production):

Winchester-forged-machined
Remington- Billet, tube stock
Dakota-machined billet
Sako-cast
Ruger-cast
Weatherby-cast
Savage- Billet, tube stock
CZ-???
CZ#3-cast (MRC action)
Kimber-cast
Browning-???
Daly Mausers-???

I am sure something is wrong on the list, and let me know if its wrong and I'll correct it, or expand it as neccessary.

CZ 550's are cast.

Weatherby is forged/machined

I would be suprised if Sako is cast due to the image issue

Mike

Bother said POOH!!!!!!!

I can see straighting out this list is going to take some effort. Example I think the vangard Weatherbys are cast in Japan, but the magnum actions are machined ( no I am not certain). And I have two conflicting opinions on CZ's already.

Its a work in progress folks, and I will spend some time this weekend trying to document what I can.

The Wby catalogue I have says the Mark V is forged/machined. Like the Sako I think that would be the case because of the image issue.

Like you I have heard both for the CZ. Perhaps an email to them might clarify.

schromf,

The Kimber Manufacturing receivers from Yonkers NY are not cast, they are machined from bar stock.

Investment cast parts are not as strong as parts machined from bar stock, forgings or MIM. The molicule structure is not as close as those of the other processes mentioned. Also, quite often the bluing will turn a little red after time due to the larger quantities of sillcon used.

Headache

Headache,

Quote:

---

The molicule structure is not as close as those of the other processes mentioned

---

Are you certain about that?

Quote:

---

Also, quite often the bluing will turn a little red after time due to the larger quantities of sillcon used.

---

Large quantities of silicon used, would you mind explaining that in greater detail, please?

ASS_CLOWN

Winchester-forged-machined
Remington- Billet, tube stock
Dakota-machined billet
Sako- Machined billet
Ruger-cast
Weatherby-Machined billet
Howa/VAnguard--Machined Forging
Savage- Billet, tube stock
CZ-???
CZ#3-cast (MRC action)
Kimber- reciever machined...bolt cast
Browning-Billet
Daly Mausers-???

There is an article in the January 2005 issue of the American Rifleman about the Weatherby Mark V.The article states that initially the action components were investment cast in San Francisco by Precision Founders Inc.,J.P. Sauer & Sohn started forging the actions in 1959.

WC

Ruger made many of the most popular selling golf club of all time, the original Great Big Bertha titanium driver. It is easy to see which ones were made by Ruger, as they had "Ruger Titanium" stamped on the sole plate. Those not by Ruger were just marked by "titanium." They may still make many of the clubs, but they are not designated "Ruger" like they used to be.

CZ 550's are machined.That is part of their appeal. I still don't like casting because it is just a cheaper way of doing things. I like to see some craftsmanship in my rifles.

Well,

The two Brno 602 I had was not casted.

Cheers
/ JOHAN

Craftmanship? Try your hand at mould making for a custom action and report back on "Craftmanship"

eddieharren,

Save your breath. These guys would all refuse to fly if they only knew how many investment cast parts were in an airplane!

Most have no clue what craftsmanship is either, only excessive price tags.

ASS_CLOWN

with all due respect, a CZ 550 is one of the more lacking rifles in craftsmanship. It is usually very servicable, but I have never seen a CZ that was anywhere near what could be called "high craftsmanship". THey are made to a price point that allows many to be sold. THey do a good job of making a servicable rifle, but finely finished they aint.

You've got things confused. PM - powdered metal is compressed into a die [like making aspirin] the part is then sintered [high heat] which bonds the particles together. You can vary the density to get from metal filters to permanently lubed bushings, to mechanical parts and if you do double compress/ sinter you get properties approaching wrought material. Remington for many years has specialized in this.....MIM - powdered metal is mixed with a polymer[like a wax] to get a fluid which is then injection molded like plastic . The part is then heated ,first to drive off the polymer then at a higher temperature to bond the particles.For further info just do a computer search for 'MIM'. Investment casting goes back over 500 years ,the experts were in Peru.It is a precision casting method ,expensive ,and often uses alloys that can't be machined like jet engine turbine blades. But it's use has grown greatly , certainly in the gun field. In each of these processes there are many variables and the parts have to have appropriate use for the method and all the variables controlled .There are certainly those who think of castings as cheap pot metal or cast iron but modern investment casting [the art world calls it 'lost wax'casting] with good alloys is a very different world.

Allen,

FYI I have decided to not pursue the custom rifle route. I worked the numbers many times and they never worked. At best it would be blue collar charity work, and hardly pays for the cost of turning on the machines, in simple terms there is no margin.

A pleasant but bad idea. I will build one for myself instead.

mete,

Thanks for straightening me out on the MIM process a tad more. I am much more familiar with PM and injection molding and was trying to use that familiarity to understand MIM better. Personally, with regard to PM, I believe it is at it's best with sintered carbides, again only my opinion, but PM seems to go down hill fast from there.

triggergard1,

You price titanium and it's alloys lately. Your 5 axis CNC would waste a lot of expensive material! Besides that I find it hard to believe that the machining time could be made econimically feasible when one considers the surface finish requirements. How do you cut those contours, and do it as quickly as a mold cools?

ASS_CLOWN

With all of this talk, I am wondering if anyone has ever heard of a reciver that failed due to a casting flaw. ANyone? Seems about like opening up a standard 98 to take a .375. Sure it weakens it, but ha sanyone heard of the action failing from it?

IMHO We are left to conclude that how well something is made is usually more important than how it was made........DJ

Howdy all,
If anyone has a copy of Rugers book,big coffee table type,
you will notice that it lists many companies that use investment cast.Weatherby is one of the companies listed.
Golf clubs are one of the companies biggest money makers.
I do not have the book handy at this moment,it is at my father-in-laws,but it does make for an interesting read.
Good reading,
Z

Looked up most of these and verified a few of the the last actions:

(X) Winchester-forged-machined
(X) Remington- Billet, tube stock or round rod, machined
(X) Dakota-machined billet
(X) Sako- Hammer Forged - details from TRG and Hunter
(X) Ruger-cast
(X) Weatherby-Forged there were a few cast actions which are rare done in the early 50's which Roy W Sr. didn't like because of finish issues . then Sauer started making his actions which were forged.
(X) Howa/VAnguard--Machined Forging
(X) Savage- Billet, tube stock
(X) BRNO ZKK were hammeer forged, CZ-assume the same
(X) CZ#3-cast (MRC action)
Kimber- reciever machined...bolt cast
(X) Browning-Forged but not described as hammered on A-bolt
(X) Daly Mausers- Forging

Wasn't able to find the Kimber details, but I will close this after looking over the above list with there seems to be very few rifles which are cast, a few rifles and manufacturers certainly but most of the big manufactures other than Ruger aree still using more conventional methods.

You can add the circa 1970's Winchester 94's to the list. The receivers were sand cast from ductile iron. I saw these being made and had one of the rejected receivers that had gone all the way thru the commemorative processing to where it had been gold plated. This action was finally rejected due to obvious voids in the tang.

Savage99,

Do you know if USRAC is still using ductile iron for their M94 receivers? Also, do you know what grade of ductile iron they were using back in the 70's?

Thanks,
ASS_CLOWN