quote:

I wish him well. We'll pick this thread back up in a year.

Rich

Rich,
Things wont have changed that much in a year. It takes a long time to establish oneself in any high end market.

If you are into motorsport you might be aware of an extremely sucessful New Zealand motor bike design- the Britten V1000. It kicked some rather large and financially serious butt in the superbike arena. It was the vision of one N.Z man - John Britten, who designed and made the V1000.
From Wikipedia- Renowned motorcycle journalist Alan Cathcart said of the bike:
"It’s an easy bike to ride, in the sense it’s got a very wide power delivery, but to really get top performance, you have to ride it like a grand prix bike.
And having ridden all the superbike contenders in the world today, I can say that the Britten is the closest to a grand prix bike. It’s incredibly ironic that instead of Europe or Japan, the most sophisticated and technically advanced motorcycle in the world comes from New Zealand".
Unfortunately John Britten died in 1995 of cancer, at the way too young age of 45.

Unfortunately also, for new gunmakers and designers, is the fact there is no race or competion that one can enter to establish international credibility quickly. I would gladly enter (in a heart beat) a "blind" competition whereby a gunmaker had to manufacture a rifle without any markings or name on it and for it be submitted to a panel of judges and scored on it's merits and not anything else (name).

In the upper end firearms market there arent many "early adopters", those that have the "cojones" to trust what they see and make a buying decision based on their perception of quality and price.
So knowing that I have to be patient.

As I said there is no race or competition to sort the men from the boys.

A year Rich? In terms what I am doing - its just a blink, well perhaps a long, lazy blink. Think 5 years minimum for the product to be accepted or not. But to protect those "early adopters" I have made 25 barrelled actions, of which 20 are in the U.S.(to a mirror bright finished polish, in 7x57, 270 win, 7mm Rem mag, 30-06, 300 H&H and 300win mag, 375H&H chamberings) so irrespective of what happens from here on in, there will be a minimum of 20 Soroka 07s in the U.S.A - enough to be a known design and a desireable collectors item in the years to come. There were approximately 350 Gibbs sporters made over 40 years (that's 9 a year) and they are now considered to be rare and around $25,000 plus for a mint example.

There are many perspectives available Rich. I think you and I are back to back looking in completely different directions.

And that is okay
As they say - it takes all sorts to make licquorice.

Cheers

Glenn

P.S - Trax, they're a couple nice bolts guns you displayed here. Nice finish, nice lines.

quote:

I would gladly enter (in a heart beat) a "blind" competition whereby a gunmaker had to manufacture a rifle without any markings or name on it and for it be submitted to a panel of judges and scored on it's merits and not anything else (name).

a great idea.

TT,MR and Glenn,
thanks for the compliments on the rifles.
They are virtually equal to the thorough build quality one would expect to find in say a current Echols.
I guess ive been spoiled for some time now, since that mauser was completed some 15+ yrs ago.
It didnt take much to recognise the same standards in the Soroka.
If i didnt have other projects in the pipeline, Id be ordering a Soroka.

quote:

I really would like you to succeed, but success is measured in units produced per year over a significant period of time. That and a readily available source of parts and service.

As I said Rich, you and I are facing in different directions. For you its about production numbers and for me its about making the finest shooting art possible.
And as for the parts, it's why I have 2 service agents in the U.S.A with way more parts than I would imagine be required in the next 10 years. The parts would be needed as a result of loss not breakage. In addition to this, a moderately dextrous young child can strip and replace any part in my rifle. Simply lower the under lever, remove the front hinge screw and the rear tang screw and the whole trigger plate assembly comes out. Around 30- 40 seconds. Show me another SS you can do that with. All parts are mounted on this assembly. Beautiful....

Additionally, I supply spares of all springs and screws with each rifle because I know what can inadvertently happen. And because I get them (springs) in batches of 2000, I have a few extra that enables me to include with each and every rifle.

The Shot Show is for "consumer goods" Rich. Why would I go there? I will be at SCI tho'

See ya there.

G

Re; Harley Davidson,....being a well established brandname with good supply of parts is not what saved their ass.
If not for Reagans 1983 tarrif on predatory Japanese imports [at HDs desperate request]
...and the recent $600m bailout of HD by Davis/Berskshire,..Theyd be well and truelly up shit creek.

quote:

I really would like you to succeed, but success is measured in units produced per year over a significant period of time. That and a readily available source of parts and service.

Then by that measure EVERY current custom gunmaker is a failure.

Since every one of their "products" will no longer have "parts and service" available.


Leunard Brownell, Dale Gowens, tom Burgess, all failures by that standard.

I am sure that it makes their guns "less than".

Not.


We are talking about very limited production semi custom rifles- not Remington m700s.

quote:

Originally posted by jim62:
Leunard Brownell, Dale Gowens, tom Burgess, all failures by that standard.
We are talking about very limited production semi custom rifles- not Remington m700s.

LENARD Brownell, Dale GOENS and Tom Burgess modified existing rifle actions with plenty of spare parts available on the used-gun market, they didn't make entirely new ones with no source of resupply in the remote future. One of the main reasons that H-D is still in business making bikes is that their products can always be rebuilt from a plethora of available parts, no matter how old or outdated.

The makers mentioned above used actions whose popularity was already well-established with parts supply well-assured, meaning that all they had to worry about was their own quality and their own name recognition. Soroka apparently has adequate quality but no existing action popularity and no name recognition, kinda like the NZ motorcycle mentioned as an example. That motorcycle is history now, worth very little or nothing if not in impeccable condition.

Similarly with the original Gibbs rifles, they've benefitted from the already-existing Gibbs name recognition and the popularity of the other Gibbs products, plus the already-existing infrastructure of the Gibbs dealer service.

If Glenn is still making and selling Soroka rifles 15 years from now then he'll be in the same category as Dakota, but IMO he'll need to diversify somewhat into other products in order to make enough profit.

I wish you luck, Glenn, your rifle is super-good-looking!
Regards, Joe
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

quote:

Originally posted by jim62:
Leunard Brownell, Dale Gowens, tom Burgess, all failures by that standard.
We are talking about very limited production semi custom rifles- not Remington m700s.

LENARD Brownell, Dale GOENS and Tom Burgess modified existing rifle actions with plenty of spare parts available on the used-gun market, they didn't make entirely new ones with no source of resupply in the remote future. One of the main reasons that H-D is still in business making bikes is that their products can always be rebuilt from a plethora of available parts, no matter how old or outdated.

The makers mentioned above used actions whose popularity was already well-established with parts supply well-assured, meaning that all they had to worry about was their own quality and their own name recognition.

Similarly with the original Gibbs rifles, they've benefitted from the already-existing Gibbs name recognition and the popularity of the

Joe,

Nearly every part on those "well established" actions was either modified or customized by those makers- which is the point of the whole exercise.

If the parts were customized or completely handmade, where the heck are the "replacement parts"??

In many cases the guns they are based on are long since out of production with spare parts non-existent. For example, most those makers built some guns based on Sakos. WHERE are you going to find "service and parts" for older Sakos?

If the stock was damaged beyond repair are you going to call up Numrich and order a Leonard Brownell stock ?

As a percent of the overall value of the rifle, I would bet you could get a part HANDMADE and fitted for a Saroka in the future more cheaply than you can a bone stock Factory Sako A1 made in the 1960s..

quote:

My old XK-E coupe was in the shop about one third of the time I owned it.

My new XK-8 convertible has been to the dealership for five visits. Three for oil
changes, once for tires, and once for something wrong with the computer.

I am going to drive it to St Louis for a Cards vs Cubs game the last weekend in July, 3600 miles roundtrip. I've made two 2000+ mile trips with it, and four over 1000 miles.

regardless of what soroka says here, I am not going to be able to flip open the new Brownell's catalog and buy a spare widget.

Rich
Unfortunately, I am somewhat disconcerted by your illogical and often irrational posts.

If one were to try and make any sense of your motoring analogy, one could only decipher as follows: XK-E - old original Farkie, (they break firing pins, wear out, get floppy, wouldnt take one on an international hunt as only rifle)

XK-8 - New Soroka (fixed all the problems, made from amazing modern steels, dosent wear out or get floppy, can take hunting anywhere, no problem)
Your point being what? It's better than an original and you cant buy parts at Brownells?

What Brownells has to do with my rifle I'll never know.


JD, I supect that if you wanted to buy one of the 10 Brittens made you'd be paying a small fortune to own one.

"Only 10 Britten V1000 bikes were ever built, and all of those are now with wealthy collectors or in museums. ‘I don’t really expect it will rival the Japanese bikes for production numbers. It will probably always be a hand-built motorcycle. Quality is what I’m all about, not necessarily quantity. I have no aspirations to get into mass production as such,’ said Britten in an interview once. And that is how it would remain. And the Britten V1000 will, forever, be the greatest motorcycle ever built anywhere in the world."

Heres a link to the full article, its an interesting read.
http://www.fasterandfaster.net...motorcycle-ever.html

How many nay sayers do you think Britten had shouting in his ear over the 12 years it took him to develop his dream.

I am not saying my rifle is in the same "revolutionary" category as a Britten, but its potential to be collected by wealthy single shot cognoscenti is unquestionably present.
With a little more time....


When you get a chance have a look at one of my rifles in the flesh without preconceptions and then tell me which single shot ever made is of finer quality or finer line.

Glenn

Rich, everyone is entitled to their own opinion (even when it appears to be cynical or illogical) but please be sure of your facts. You should be aware, for instance, that Australia is a separate country that is 1,200 miles from New Zealand and has a completely different history of settlement. New Zealand was settled by fare-paying immigrants (including many from the USA who came over for the gold rushes) and has never been a penal colony. You would not hear a Kiwi compare the chequered settlement history of the United States with Nicaragua or Columbia (both of which are within the 1200 mile range of the US) because our standard of education is higher than yours.

To get back to the point of this thread, the Soroka rifle is made to the highest standards to appeal to those who appreciate the finer things in life and can afford them. I fully appreciate the finer points of the Soroka and have had the opportunity to examine one in minute detail from a gunsmith's perspective. I can't afford one but I still admire the rifle for what it is. Good taste and appreciation of quality is a subjective thing, and is very much dependent upon your upbringing and education, tempered by an understanding of the skills required to create different things. There are those among us who would not find the fitting of a telescopic sight to a plain boxlock double to be the sort of thing one would like to be photographed with, but then that's just a matter of opinion!

quote:

You would not hear a Kiwi compare the chequered settlement history of the United States with Nicaragua or Columbia (both of which are within the 1200 mile range of the US) because our standard of education is higher than yours.

You might hear a Kiwi say anything. They have a bell curve just life everyone else. Gunsmiths are hardly rocket scientists.

quote:

You might hear a Kiwi say anything. They have a bell curve just life everyone else. Gunsmiths are hardly rocket scientists.

Yes, I am not a rocket scientist. I am just a plain Kiwi gunsmith with a good education, well travelled, a tool-maker and machinist, a qualified petro-chemical draftsman, and the owner of a world-class gun collection, that has been self-employed as a gunsmith and gunmaker for the past 41 years.

I am happy to leave rocket science to other Kiwis like Dr William H Pickering who led the US space propulsion programme for more than 20 years. He was after the other famous Kiwi, Lord Rutherford, who split the atom but that is another story...

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
As far as the paint thing, that is about as related to this as your family tree in Australia. Something about prostitutes and criminals...
Rich

quote:

Originally posted by soroka:
New Zealand was not a penal colony, only Australia. The convicts went to Australia. They are completely seperate nations. Not that it is of any relevance today. (Now you want to attack the lineage of 23 million Aussies.)

...and were only sent to Australia after American war of Independence, when England could no longer use America.
Prior to that America had been one of Englands primary dumping grounds for criminals,... ISS has unknowingly attacked the lineage of his own country!

North America was used for transportation from the early 17th century[1620's] to the American Revolution of 1776. In the 17th century, it was done at the expense of the convicts or the shipowners. The first Transportation Act in 1718 allowed courts to sentence convicts to seven years' transportation to America. In 1720, extension authorized payments by the state to merchants contracted to take the convicts to America. Under the Transportation Act, returning from transportation was a capital offence.
The gaols became overcrowded and dilapidated ships were pressed into service, the hulks moored in various ports as floating gaols. The number of convicts transported to North America is not verified although it has been estimated up to 160,000. These went originally to New England, some were sold as slaves to the Southern states.
From the 1620s until the American Revolution, the British colonies in North America received transported British criminals, effectively double the period that Australian colonies received convicts. The American Revolutionary War brought that to an end and, since the remaining British colonies in what is now Canada were close to the new United States of America, prisoners sent there might become hostile to British authorities. Thus, the British Government was forced to look elsewhere.
The first convicts arrived in Australia 1788, the last 1868, a period of some 80yrs, or about half that of America; 1620's -1776.

The Soroka is a beautiful rifle made in a beautiful country by an obviously skilled smith. It's only problem that I can see is I can't afford it. Maybe that will change someday. Good luck with your rifle and may you get all the business you need.

Jerry Liles

Glenn,
George Hoenig with his unique rotary double design remains a regular appearance at SCI, no doubt he had his fair share of naysayers as well, however he continues to prove them wrong.
A new manufactured classic design Farq. using superior materials to the old, with improved more reliable design and better tolerances, is no where near as revolutionary, so should prove to be an easier path.
Anyway, it seems thats some folk are pleased that Jaguar has improved their game to produce a better product, but your attempts to do the same with the Farq. design, are for some reason frowned upon.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Someone needs to tell the guys making that rifle that 17-4 PH is about the worst galling material on the planet. I would not have it for a breech block under any circumstances.....

17-4 is one of those metals that sticks to about any other metal.

SR4759, I have heard from several sources (including two metallurgists) since you posted this that you are way off base.

quote:

Glenn,
George Hoenig with his unique rotary double design remains a regular appearance at SCI, no doubt he had his fair share of naysayers as well, however he continues to prove them wrong.

Hi Trax,
George was displaying on the other side of the same booth as me at Reno- the NECG booth. We had a good chat about his path and success. He said, or words to the effect- "keep making them and keep displaying them at the big shows and people who want them will eventually buy them. Some come back every year for 3 years and then hand over their deposit. A lot of people want to make sure you are going to be around for a while first".

And Mike, indeed you are right. There have been a few PM's that have talked about the high road being a better alternative.
Anyway, all is now abundantly clear.

Thanks

Glenn

quote:

Originally posted by soroka:
My immediate goal is to make and sell 50 Soroka 07's before I fall off my perch. I am only 47 so have a few years to fulfill the goal. And having done so, I believe I will have achieved a significant mile stone in single shot history. After that who cares.

I'm sorry Glenn, I was laboring under a misapprehension. It was my impression that you intended to build a company to make a profit in an ongoing manner by producing a marketable rifle that would become popular enough to continue.

Not like the Britten, now only a minor and largely forgotten footnote to history. Certainly a fine bike, but who's riding one today?

I can easily understand you being very proud of your fine creation but I have one question. Have you ever considered precision investment casting? It's at least as strong and accurate as machining from a billet and LOTS less expensive.

Kinda like a stock pantograph. The steel or wood really doesn't care HOW it's shaped, it's really only the final shape that matters. Of course a truly bespoke gun would have different stock dimensions for each client but all the actions SHOULD be basically identical, no?

I assume that all your parts will interchange.....
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by Michael Robinson:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Someone needs to tell the guys making that rifle that 17-4 PH is about the worst galling material on the planet. I would not have it for a breech block under any circumstances.....

17-4 is one of those metals that sticks to about any other metal.

SR4759, I have heard from several sources (including two metallurgists) since you posted this that you are way off base.

Poor Michael,
So you have heard WRONG.....
Look at the galling data posted all over the internet. Nitronic 60 and Gall Touigh are two materials specifically developed to avoid the galling characteristics of 17-4. As far as your metallurgists go ask them the question in a different way. What is the worst galling stainless steel? If they don't know maybe they need some practical experience.

Galling characteristics table


So whatever you HEARD....it was BS.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Poor Michael,
So you have heard WRONG.....
Look at the galling data posted all over the internet. Nitronic 60 and Gall Touigh are two materials specifically developed to avoid the galling characteristics of 17-4. As far as your metallurgists go ask them the question in a different way. What is the worst galling stainless steel? If they don't know maybe they need some practical experience.
Galling characteristics table

So whatever you HEARD....it was BS.

Interesting reading, but I fail to see what your proffered sales brochure has to do with the question at hand.

And the question at hand is not what is the worst galling stainless steel.

That is a question so abstract that its answer is irrelevant to nearly any inquiry.

The question at hand is whether 17-4 PH is suitable for the use Glenn is making of it (or any other specific use).

We are not talking about a high speed application, like a semi-automatic pistol slide (or valve seats, for God's sake) or the like.

This is the breech block of a finger lever operated falling block rifle.

What I have been told is that 17-4 PH, when properly heat treated, is perfectly suitable for that use.

Nothing you have posted contradicts that in any way.

quote:

What I have been told is that 17-4 PH, when properly heat treated, is perfectly suitable for that use.

Nothing you have posted contradicts that in any way.

Exactly.

ANY steel part's tendency to gall is as much dependent on it's final heat treatment, as it's alloy composition.

quote:

I'm sorry Glenn, I was laboring under a misapprehension. It was my impression that you intended to build a company to make a profit in an ongoing manner by producing a marketable rifle that would become popular enough to continue.

JD, It depends on how you define "company" and "on going" manner. From the little I know of the single shot market I dont believe there is enough demand for higher end single shots for what might be termed a company. Forgetting the legal reality, which is just a few pieces of paper, which amount to a separate "legal person" primarily designed to protect wealthy people from liability. For me a small company might comprise of say 4 full time employees. Unless there is some sort of new found interest in falling blocks I cannot see sufficient demand to support that many full time employees. My statement re the 50 is a medium term goal, an arbitrary line I have drawn in the sand which would indicate commercial acceptance of a high end boutique product. I have heard rumors that the Ruger #1 is a product that Ruger looses money on, a loss leader if you like. It was only Bill's love of single shots that ensured its survival.

With regard to the investment casting option its not really going to work for my action. Joe, have you spent anytime around CNC's? If a billet is well supported big roughing cutters can shape a piece quite quickly. Its the final scanning and surface profiling that really takes the time. What no one really gets is that Gibbs Farquharsons have more compound curves than any other commonly known receiver. If you examine one really really closely you will see what is involved- the main lever pin bosses, the trigger guard, the under lever. Then there is the tolerancing between the surfaces. They are in a completely different galaxy to a bolt action. If one is to use investment cast the items, than one has to accurately drill the hole to establish a datum from which one can finish machine. CNCing drills the holes first which gives one a datum. My initial experiences with investment casting were enough to put me off. Martin Hagn has been there and now CNC's his actions. He has a boxful of cast receivers and underlevers but now gets everything CNC'd.

I think what needs to happen is for some generous rancher in Wyoming or Montana that has a good sized shop (with a bunch of work benches to offer the use of it to the AR single shot nuts and for me to ship a bunch of unfinished actions over and have everyone who's interested in owning a Soroka at a factory price, finish off their own action in this centrally located workshop.) I would then have a whole bunch of guys that could comment after first hand experience what it takes to just hand finish a Soroka Gibbs. Even if they are cast they will still require finish machining and then hand filing. It's just the reality. No doubt these actions could be made far more economically that what I am doing but that would no doubt involve millions and millions of dollars of equipment. And as we have already established the single shot market is small so how does one justify the investment?

I was offered a Gibbs many years ago and the guy wanted a ransom for it. (They are very rare here) I looked at the beauty of its lines but couldnt bring myself to fork over the $10,000 the guy wanted. I am not a starry eyed romantic, I wanted some thing that I could shoot a modern high intensity cartridge in. Some thing that really goes bang. And I wasnt convinced that the Gibbs would deal with it.
Anyway I knew about the ignition issues and broken pin issues of Farkies and decided I wasnt prepared to pay what was asked. I decided that I would wait for someone else to build what I was after. An updated Gibbs. After 15 years or so that didnt happen so I took the challenge up myself. The rest is history.

The sad reality is that being bitten by the single shot bug is a financial challenge for all those afflicted. They cost more to make and so they cost more to buy. Both manufacturers and customers get the rough end of the stick. JD, I didnt really want to share this with the world but... I didnt make my rendition of Gibbs actions to make a whole bunch of money. I did it because I thought it just needed to be done, for the love of single shots. I have invested sufficient money to buy a half decent house into this project. Will I get my money back? Maybe, if I am lucky but over a long period of time. I walked into it knowing full well that it was an unwise financial decision, but I did it anyway. Why? Because it needed to be done- for the sake of it.

So please bear this in mind when you experience any frustration re what my rifles cost. I have sunk way more into this than what any of you would believe. Knowing what I know now, I would love to be in the position you are all in now. You can just pick up the phone and order one without putting in 4 years of hard graft and a whole bunch of cash.
I know this probably comes across as some sort of "tear jerking violin solo", but I can assure you it is not. If I could turn the clock back and choose to do it again I would. Its been a very intersting journey, and I am one of those people that is more interested in the journey than the destination.

I hope this rather long and tortuous post puts to rest the pricing issues, finally. The Gibbs Farquharson aesthetic is as bad as it gets for financial torment for all those bitten.
Which I guess is why no one else has made them for how long??

P.S SR 4759 - For once and for all be told that the 17-4 block in my rifle doesnt even begin to gall. It slides up an down in its one thou oversized mortice like duck shit on ice. The block is Rc 35, the received case hardened to say Rc 62. The difference in hardness and the difference in composition negates this issue completely. It is time for you repectfully apolgise to me and the others you are insulting on this post. Or are you like most loud mouthed porcines and not honourable enough to do so?

quote:

Originally posted by jim62:

quote:

What I have been told is that 17-4 PH, when properly heat treated, is perfectly suitable for that use.

Nothing you have posted contradicts that in any way.

Exactly.

ANY steel part's tendency to gall is as much dependent on it's final heat treatment, as it's alloy composition.

Exactly NOT true in the case of 17-4 PH.

17-4 PH is a poor choice for any sliding or rotating part application. Baby design engineers learn this all the time trying to use it for surgical instruments. Then they find out they have to use something like Custom 455 if they need the strength or Nitronic 60 if they need the best possible anti-galling properties.
All these materials represent something of a compromise. 17-4 compromises in galling properties. There is no place for it in a design intended to be the very best of it's type.
Soroka - how many galling tests have you ran on your baby? Remember this post when one of your customers wants his rifle repaired and you realize they may all have to be repaired.

quote:

All these materials represent something of a compromise. 17-4 compromises in galling properties. There is no place for it in a design intended to be the very best of it's type.
Ask the designer. He used it because it is easy to heat treat.....

Not true, I used it because for a stainless steel it is exceptionally strong, corrosion resistant, dimensionally stable and hard.

It is an excellent, but expensive material.

I repeat- For once and for all be told that the 17-4 block in my rifle doesnt even begin to gall. It slides up an down in its one thou oversized mortice like duck shit on ice. The block is Rc 35, the received case hardened to say Rc 62. The difference in hardness and the difference in composition negates this issue completely. It is time for you repectfully apolgise to me and the others you are insulting on this post. Or are you like most loud mouthed porcines and not honourable enough to do so?

Because you can hide anonymously behind you AR handle it doesnt give you the right to be rude and ignorant without risk of suitable reply.

Glenn.

The top quality BR bolt receivers are built of 17-4 and I believe the Satterlee mauser clone that I had was 17-4 also. A BR receiver gets many thousands of overloads every year without problems. We do lube the lugs occasionally. It is just not a problem for us.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by soroka:

quote:

All these materials represent something of a compromise. 17-4 compromises in galling properties. There is no place for it in a design intended to be the very best of it's type.
Ask the designer. He used it because it is easy to heat treat.....

Not true, I used it because for a stainless steel it is exceptionally strong, corrosion resistant, dimensionally stable and hard.

It is an excellent, but expensive material.

I repeat- For once and for all be told that the 17-4 block in my rifle doesnt even begin to gall. It slides up an down in its one thou oversized mortice like duck shit on ice. The block is Rc 35, the received case hardened to say Rc 62. The difference in hardness and the difference in composition negates this issue completely. It is time for you repectfully apolgise to me and the others you are insulting on this post. Or are you like most loud mouthed porcines and not honourable enough to do so?

Because you can hide anonymously behind you AR handle it doesnt give you the right to be rude and ignorant without risk of suitable reply.

Glenn.

Glenn
I have had to scrapped more $$$ in galled 17-4 in a month than you will ever make use of in your lordly rifle. I speak from long personal experience. Read the engineering data. I owe you no apology.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by jim62:

quote:

What I have been told is that 17-4 PH, when properly heat treated, is perfectly suitable for that use.

Nothing you have posted contradicts that in any way.

Exactly.

ANY steel part's tendency to gall is as much dependent on it's final heat treatment, as it's alloy composition.

Exactly NOT true in the case of 17-4 PH.

17-4 PH is a poor choice for any sliding or rotating part application. Baby design engineers learn this all the time trying to use it for surgical instruments. Then they find out they have to use something like Custom 455 if they need the strength or Nitronic 60 if they need the best possible anti-galling properties.
All these materials represent something of a compromise. 17-4 compromises in galling properties. There is no place for it in a design intended to be the very best of it's type.
Soroka - how many galling tests have you ran on your baby? Remember this post when one of your customers wants his rifle repaired and you realize they may all have to be repaired.

We all are breathless awaiting to see ANY rifle you will ever desgin or build ,Mr "Metals expert".

Good luck with your petty little smear campaign.

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
The top quality BR bolt receivers are built of 17-4 and I believe the Satterlee mauser clone that I had was 17-4 also. A BR receiver gets many thousands of overloads every year without problems. We do lube the lugs occasionally. It is just not a problem for us.
Butch

Butch
But what is the BR bolt made of. It sure is not 17-4.
The sole reason that 17-4 is used in many applications is the very cheap and easy H900 heat treat.

quote:

Butch
But what is the BR bolt made of. It sure is not 17-4.
The sole reason that 17-4 is used in many applications is the very cheap and easy H900 heat treat.

No the bolts are typically 4140 or similar. Which is why they, and my actions dont gall- difference in composition and hardness.

quote:

Glenn
I have had to scrapped more $$$ in galled 17-4 in a month than you will ever make use of in your lordly rifle. I speak from long personal experience. Read the engineering data. I owe you no apology.

How much 17-4PH have you thrown out as a result of galling with case hardened 8620, when "rubbed" at falling block action speeds??

Roughly how much??

The Hall falling block was made entirely from 17-4 Ph, receiver and block, and I have never heard of anyone complaining about them galling. The one I inspected was completely fine. No advantage of dis-similar materials there either.

Sounds like you didnt do enough or any prototyping or read the relevant engineering data before the main production run.

Glenn

quote:

Originally posted by soroka:

quote:

Butch
But what is the BR bolt made of. It sure is not 17-4.
The sole reason that 17-4 is used in many applications is the very cheap and easy H900 heat treat.

No the bolts are typically 4140 or similar. Which is why they, and my actions dont gall- difference in composition and hardness.

quote:

Glenn
I have had to scrapped more $$$ in galled 17-4 in a month than you will ever make use of in your lordly rifle. I speak from long personal experience. Read the engineering data. I owe you no apology.

How much 17-4PH have you thrown out as a result of galling with case hardened 8620, when "rubbed" at falling block action speeds??

Roughly how much??

The Hall falling block was made entirely from 17-4 Ph, receiver and block, and I have never heard of anyone complaining about them galling. The one I inspected was completely fine. No advantage of dis-similar materials there either.

Sounds like you didnt do enough or any prototyping or read the relevant engineering data before the main production run.

Glenn

Lots' of other Manufactures use 17-4PH for frames and major parts. Including Freedom Arms.

I have never heard of any "galling problems" with their revolvers.

My guess is there will be zero issues.

Reminds me of an instance I read about when a Bugatti T35 threw a rod and punched a hole in the block. Wanting a proper repair, they analysed the composition of the aluminum block and it turned out to be comparable to modern...LAWN FURNITURE!
It sure did it's job for around eighty years of regular racing use but of course nobody would use that aluminum today.

ASTM test method (G98) Galling resistance. http://books.google.com.au/boo...ar%20galling&f=false

The new ASTM method (G196), which embodies a probabilistic approach to galling, is superior to the older ASTM test method (G98), which produces only a single threshold stress for a given combination of materials.

Although 17-4 has lower resistance to galling than other grades of SS,it can still be non gaulling in particular applications/design parameters.
There are many factors which influence a materials resistance to galling,these include;
Material properties like hardness,surface finish,yield strength and Service conditions like slide distance,surface speed and contact pressure.
Mating 17-4 with dissimilar materials further reduces likely hood of galling.

17-4 is used by Bat,Hall,Stolle,Farley,Stiller and McMillan.[Mac also makes receivers for Tubb2000,Lazzeroni using 17-4]

17-4 is used in manufacture of bearings http://ussbearings.com/index.p...roducts_article/875/

Several brands of HQ fishing reel [Daiwa,Penn,Accurate,Okuma] have chosen to have their main & pinion gears cut from 17-4.
Penn harden the main gear Rc36, the pinion Rc45.


17-4 articulated gear from a surgical stapling unit.





17-4 [Rc35] tensile And yield strength about 160,000/145,000, [Rc40] 190,000/170,000

Nitronic 60 [Rc38] tensile and yield strength about 195,000/153,000

quote:

17-4 is used in manufacture of bearings http://ussbearings.com/index.p...roducts_article/875/

Several brands of HQ fishing reel [Daiwa,Penn,Accurate,Okuma] have chosen to have their main & pinion gears cut from 17-4.
Penn harden the main gear Rc36, the pinion Rc45.

Well done Trax, good research.
I guess with 17-4 PH being chosen for those applications it blows some of the concerns about galling into the stratosphere.

I hate to think what response you are going to get to these facts.... groan
Beat me.....
...to death

Some of us are interested in a civil conversation, based on experience and facts.

quote:

The Hall actions are made from 17-4. Boy do his customers have a surprise coming. Several hundred have been sold and are in use today...

It can only be brain damage
undoubtedly caused by a spastic colon.....

There needs to be a "retard button" in the bottom corner of each post and if it is dumb or rude enough that a bunch of readers of the post think that the writer is a retard, the post gets deleted and the poster gets chucked out of that thread.

I am sure the software writers could sort this. It would stop repeated contamination by Idiot Shitshooters.

If anyone knows the Big Cheese of AR can they forward this idea to them. It is a democractic solution to pain reduction.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
By the way, have you ordered your soroka yet? Otherwise you are just, as the young folks say these days; a "Poseur."

A person may not always be able to afford what he desires. However its still ok to express genuine admiration & appreciation.
That does not necessarily make one a "poseur".
People who make such baseless/unfounded allegations can end up with egg on their face.

Mike & siberia, don't forget that all roads run both ways......
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
.. you all know this is a beautiful rifle, with no provenance by the builder or company that is overpriced by half, and in five years may not be able to even be found on the internet...

Rich how much do you value/would you pay for provenance?
Is an Holland & Holland Hagn worth the extra$$$ premium one pays over an Hagn built by say Heilmann or Ralf Martini?
If Soroka based rifles were being put out from the Echols,Weibe,Heilmann,Ralf Martini or Martin Hagn shop, would you then give it some worthwhile provenance?
Maybe you percieve ALL of them as being overpriced to some degree?


more detail Here ... Here ... and Here.

You know Holland & Holland has stooped low enough to built rifles on the agricultural Ruger No:1 ... hideous indeed!
You can keep such forms of H&H prevenance all to yourself, I dont care for it....give me an Soroka.

Rich, if you do not want one of these rifles, that is your decision, and we will all recognize that. What I don't understand though, is your continued berating of this man's work, to the point of insinuating he is price gouging and offering an inferior product at an inflated price.

I,for one, feel money means too much to you. If you don't want one, have the memory of not getting or owning one, but please have enough respect to remain quiet, stop insulting the man, and let the rest of us make our own decisions. I will never be able to afford this rifle, an Aston Martin, and/or several other things, but that doesn't mean I cannot admire them all as incredible works of art. This rifle fits that category. Period.

It is his rifle; he can price it as he sees fit!

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Trax, can you remember the first time you ever read about H&H, the company? A hundred & forty years ago your progenitors likely had......This is what I define provenance by. A history.

So you can justify/would willingly pay more than double $$$ for an H&H Hagn compared to a Hagn rifle built MartinHagn?....simply be-cause H&H has more provenance?

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
I was reading another thread here about somebody that is building a really fine SS rifle. The external as well as the internal design are his. Not a copy of anything,

Theres nothing wrong with copying and/or improving an existing design.

-Anson&Deeley design is copied by several makers,while the A&D design itself was based on an existing WR design.
-The current Purdey hammerless self opening mechanism is a development of the orig. Beesley design of 1880.
-The current Purdey U&O is a development of the Woodward patent of 1913 which was incorporated into the company on the purchase of J.Woodward & Sons by Purdey in 1949.
-Several people have also created new & improved renditions of M70 and M98,
-The Hagn is an improved design based on the older Heeren design single shot.

why do you have an issue with someone doing the same with the Farq. design?

If H&H are suposedly all about provenance and heritage, why is it they dont produce the Holland & Woodward receiver [patent no. 17,578 of 15 September 1894],... instead they select Ruger or Hagn.

Although Holland & Holland had been selling falling-block rifles since 1890, the Holland-Woodward action was the first design by the makers.
The first example was completed as a .303 in 1895. Total production is believed to have been in the order of only 140 rifles, the bulk being sold between 1899 and 1901, the last in 1926.