Just wondering,

What would the end results be as in differances, spliting hairs ofcourse.

If you started out with a VZ24 Mauser action
and did it all, Blackburn bottom metal & trigger, LaPour safty, new bolt handle, new springs, surface ground, laped lugs, the WORKS.

Compared toa Prechtl M98 action?

The Prechtl would have a slightly larger bolt dia. Could have square bridges if wanted.

What else would be differnt when your done?

Not counting cost, Even with all the work the VZ would probably be less.

What would the finished product differences be?
Spliting hairs so to speak.

I would rather have the VZ24, but that is purely a personal preference. And if I want single or double square bridges, integral scope bases to fit certain rings, shortening, or whatever is no problem at all on the VZ24. Odds are high that the Precthl would have tighter tolerances, but it is totally trivial on a sporting rifle and actual field accuracy. Also, like the thumb cut on a military Mauser. Unless going to some caliber based on a .505 case or something, I see no advantage to having a bolt bigger than .700".

I thnk what they did to the bolt dia. is make the bolt .02 mm larger and the bore in action smaller to have less "play" in the bolt when open.

I think I understand that's what they mean.

Thats one of the things I was wondering about
when you hear that a Prechtl or GMA heve tighter tolerances than a military 98. And that is usually touted as better or best.

Why is that better and what tolerances?

I'm not saying a Prechtl is better. I am wondering what the differances in final product
is or would be.If one is better than the other,why?
Trying learn and understand.

It is not really "better" as for as actually performing any better in the field or on the range. TIchter tolerances mean there is less work required to get the action ready to go on a fine rifle. They will still take work, just not as much. You are paying a higher price up front to spend less hours later.

Basically, some people like to know that the tolerances are tighter on their action than on some one else's action. And there is nothing wrong with that. As far as function, zero difference. Oh sure, you can come up with all kinds of engineering and theoretical advanteags. But in the real world we all operate in, no difference. People will try to argue theroretical positions, but it is straining gnats and swallowing camels.

Would the the bolt to reciver play be a practical benefit as far as dirt and dust
causing a problem? On the VZ24

As opposed to a tighter fit in that area of the Prechtl action.

I remember an article that commented on the Dakota's action being almost to close of tolarance for hard use in the field.

And since the milatary Mauser being designed for such conditions, might be the better?

Or does it not really matter in the hunting fields?

By the time you went thru a VZ24 about the only left orignal thing on it would be the bolt and reciver.Everything else would be a close tolarance fit.

Yes, you are correct about the military being better able to digest dirt, mud, plant particles, and other debris than most other acions. I have had guns go belly up and seen other ones do it on several occasions in the field.