From: email@example.com (Bart Bobbitt) Subject: Re: Pre '64 Win M70 actions Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site S.J. Orth wrote this comparison between rifles: : Remington 700VS Winchester Heavy Varmint : Barrel: 24" heavy Chrome Moly 26" heavy Stainless Steel : Remington muzzle diameter is .805 in, Winchester's is larger : Both barrels are free floated Having handled rifles of both makes/models and checked 'em out for free floating barrels, very few have such things. Most of 'em have irregular barrel contact with the stock's forend. If either claim free-floating, they need to look up the definition of the word.......it means nothing, absolutely nothing, not even a bedding pad an inch or so in front of the reciever, had better touch the barrel; except for the face of the receiver where the barrel tenon shoulder butts up against it. : Another posting in this group speaks of the lack of need for glass bedding : a rifle with an aluminum bedding block. : The bedding block and the : bottom of the action are not machined to tight enough tolerances to provide : a perfect fit (would be very difficult to do on a production rifle). An excellent observation indeed. I'm convinced factories have tried to short-cut proper receiver fit to the stock by mass producing aluminum blocks. Some of the top highpower shooters tried aluminum bedding of receivers near 25 years ago. The only way it worked was to use a spot tracer milling machine that cut the block to an exact, zero-tolerance fit to the reciever. It ended up costing more than, but equal in performance to, conventional epoxy bedding. I just about croaked when Remington came out with this scheme. To the unknowing, it appears absolutely great; to the knowledgable, it appears absolutely grungy. : However, if Winchester chooses to use the : post '68 action on the $700+ dollar Heavy Varmint and on the $1650+ : Sharpshooter, there must be some reason. ..... you decide. The primary reason is the Model 70 receiver is about 2.5 times as stiff as its nearest competitor for a box magazine action. If they werent, they would not have the unequalled track record of winning matches and setting records in highppower competition since 1937. Besides, its reliability and ease of maintenance has yet to be equalled for similar actions. Regarding the Model 70 stiff receiver, some tests are in progress that will provide real data on how much various receivers bend when subjected to the same force. Upon completition of tests and organizing data, it will be published for all to see. BB
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Bart Bobbitt) Subject: Re: Pillar bedding - how hard is it? Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site Pillar bedding seems to be the latest `in thing' regarding bolt guns. It is typically done in conjunction with epoxy bedding the receiver. It consists of making two round tubes about 3 times the diameter of the stock screw with a hole inside for the stock screw to fit in. The length of the tube, or `pillar,' is equal to the distance from the part of the receiver the stock screws thread into to the part of the trigger guard or floorplate at the top of it. An example: __________________ Bottom of receiver | | | | |P | | P| P = Pillar | |S| | S = Stock screw | | | | ------| |-------- Top of trigger guard/floorplate --- / stock screw Pillars are made of aluminum or steel. They are usually epoxied into the stock. Their ends are typically shaped to fit the receiver or trigger guard, respectively. Sometimes they are threaded or grooved on the outside to provide a better hold in the stock. A hole equal to their diameter needs to be drilled in the stock centered on the stock screws. Some folks think they are great. Others think otherwise as the receiver is held solidly at only two points atop the pillars and isn't held solidly in the epoxy bedding around the receiver. I think they are more widely used in benchrest competition rifles. In highpower competition rifles, the pillar-bedded rifles haven't shot as good as the conventionaly bedded ones as far as I've been able to detect and several others have noted. Pillar bedding is about fifth on the priority list of getting a rifle to shoot accurately, in my opinion. BB
From: email@example.com (Bart Bobbitt) Subject: Re: Aluminum Bedding Blocks Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site S.J. Orth (den.mmc.com) wrote regarding Remington bedding blocks: : Why couldn't they just put in pillars? Pillar bedding requires quite a bit of time. That's something that costs the factory money and would no doubt be cause to increase the price. They could conventionally epoxy bed the receiver for about half the cost anyway. But pillar bedding has not proved itself worthy of the best accuracy anyway. I'm not sure who first did it, but having seen hundreds of rifles so bedded and shot in competition, they perform no better than conventional bedding. A conventionally bedded receiver has full pressure contact on all parts pulled downward by the stock screws. It solidly rests in a near vise-like grip by the stock. It therefore is in exactly the same place from shot to shot. If the stock compresses somewhat over time (typically only a very few thousandths of an inch) the same pressure points will remain in place. If the stock shrinks a tad in cold, or exapands a tad in warm, weather that is, the relative uniformity of full-contact bedding stays intact. A pillar bedded receiver is held in place by only two points; one at the top of the front and back pillar. The theory is those two points are all that's needed. And the stock won't compress from pressure caused by stock screws, nor effect receiver contact pressure due to thermal expansion or contraction. And all this is probably true. My point is, pillar bedding does not consistantly produce better accuracy than conventional bedding. If it did, then pillar bedded ones would most often produce the best highpower scores. Benchrest rifles may very well shoot better pillar bedded, but remember they are mild-recoiling jobs that don't put much stress at all on a receiver or stock in the first place. When the cartridge's boiler room starts burning over 40 grains of powder in 3 milliseconds, the energy imparted is at higher levels; some of it goes into the stock's bedding and bends the receiver in a vertical axis. Since pillar bedding first appeared years ago, I've watch the scoreboard and mentally noted which bedding system was used to produce those scores. Conventionally bedded receivers shoot the best scores by a factor of about 20 to 1 on highpower rifles. BB
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Toby Bradshaw) Subject: Re: Aluminum Bedding Blocks Organization: University of Washington, Seattle In article <CHC38z.Bx4@fc.hp.com>, Bart Bobbitt <email@example.com> wrote: #S.J. Orth (den.mmc.com) wrote regarding Remington bedding blocks: # #: Why couldn't they just put in pillars? # #Pillar bedding requires quite a bit of time. Only if you do it right :) For my rifles, it takes 3 bedding pours, with 24-48 hours between pours. #That's something that costs #the factory money and would no doubt be cause to increase the price. They #could conventionally epoxy bed the receiver for about half the cost anyway. # #But pillar bedding has not proved itself worthy of the best accuracy #anyway. I'm not sure who first did it, I believe Dave Hall and Marlin Bassett are credited with its development. Dave Hall set a slew of world records in benchrest with his pillar-bedded rifles, which is why it became so popular. Now glue-ins have become the most common bedding in varmint class rifles. #but having seen hundreds of rifles #so bedded and shot in competition, they perform no better than conventional #bedding. # #A conventionally bedded receiver has full pressure contact on all parts #pulled downward by the stock screws. It solidly rests in a near vise-like #grip by the stock. It therefore is in exactly the same place from shot #to shot. If the stock compresses somewhat over time (typically only a #very few thousandths of an inch) the same pressure points will remain #in place. If the stock shrinks a tad in cold, or exapands a tad in warm, #weather that is, the relative uniformity of full-contact bedding stays #intact. # #A pillar bedded receiver is held in place by only two points; one at the #top of the front and back pillar. The theory is those two points are #all that's needed. And the stock won't compress from pressure caused by #stock screws, nor effect receiver contact pressure due to thermal #expansion or contraction. And all this is probably true. Actually, the "Dave Hall" pillar bedding method has full receiver contact with the bedding, just like conventional bedding. Here's how I do it myself: On a wood-stocked Rem 700, I take about 1/4" of wood out of the receiver and tang areas, leaving "locator pads" around the receiver screw holes to keep the action at the right height (this will be removed later when I drill for the pillars, leaving no wood near the action). Then I "rough bed" with Steel-Bed or Devcon F. A day or so later, the action is removed from the stock and the holes for the pillars are drilled from the bottom of the stock. A piloted counterbore (37/64 counterbore with a 1/4" pilot) does a good job of keeping the hole aligned with the existing action screw holes, and doesn't require any kind of jig or drill press. I bore the hole until the aluminum pillars (9/16" x 1" for the tang and 9/16" x 1/2" for the front) will protrude about 0.010 - 0.020" below the stock wood, making sure that the pillar holes have removed all the existing wood and are well into the first bedding pour. The action has two headless stockmaker's screws installed to insure that the pillars will be aligned with the action screws (very often the action screws are not perpendicular to the stock) and a Dremel tool is used to provide any needed clearance. Then the pillars are epoxied in place with Steel-Bed or Devcon, using the action and guide screws to keep everything lined up. I have the I.D. of the pillars drilled with an "F" letter drill to provide a close fit on the guide screws. After the pillars are set, I face them off if necessary with the piloted counterbore to keep them from sticking up too far. Then, a very thin, watery coat of Acraglas is painted onto the "rough" bedding (after lightly sanding the surface to remove any release agent) and the action and guide screws are eased in. The finish bedding is allowed to set for a couple of days, then the action is very carefully removed. The fit from the two-pour (three pours counting the pillars) bedding is very close, and the shrinkage of Acraglas is not a problem because the finish layer is <0.010" anyhow. On a Remington, I pour all the way around the recoil lug (after all, the sides of the recoil lug are the only good anti-torque surface on the whole action), but leave the bottom of the lug free. The barrel can be bedded for a couple of inches if you like (it doesn't seem to hurt in the light BR cartridges). A good pillar bedding job isn't necessarily any better than a "plain" bedding job, just more forgiving on tightness of the action screws. In any event, the less wood and the more epoxy, the better. Bob Pease has a good publication on the method, although he uses "poured pillars" of Devcon instead of aluminum. I don't like the shrinkage of tall poured pillars, so I use aluminum. Next to gluing the action in, pillar bedding is the most maintenance- free system I've used. Since glue-ins are a major hassle with anything but a custom action (try removing the trigger on a glued-in Rem action!), pillar bedding is pretty popular among savvy varmint hunters. It can be combined with a single-shot loading ramp to make the lousy-feeding Remington 700 action mimic a 40X. Some have even epoxied the ramp to the action, then bedded the whole works as a "poor man's 40X". If I thought I could get away with it in the facory BR class, I would do this. It increases the bedding surface several fold, which would be a plus on factory actions with short tangs. The same pillar sizes and general methods will work on the Win 70 varmint rifles, BTW, but the tang pillar is a close fit for length. -Toby Bradshaw firstname.lastname@example.org
From: email@example.com (Toby Bradshaw) Subject: Re: Pillar bedding - how hard is it? Organization: University of Washington, Seattle In article <C5uC5w.ALp@fc.hp.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Bart Bobbitt) writes: #Pillars are made of aluminum or steel. They are usually epoxied into the #stock. Many pillar-bedded rifles have "poured pillars" of epoxy, as well. #I think they are more widely used in benchrest competition rifles. Most winning rifles in the non-rail classes of benchrest have glued-in actions. I've heard that a conventionally-bedded (including pillar-bedded) rifle can shoot with a glue-in, but I've never seen one do it myself. I think glue-ins are inherently easier to get right than conventional bedding, making the average glue-in shoot better than the average bolt-in. Toby Bradshaw Department of Biochemistry and College of Forest Resources University of Washington, Seattle email@example.com "A well-educated electorate being necessary to the prosperity of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed." Do you think that banning legal possession of easily-concealed novels will stop criminals from reading?
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Toby Bradshaw) Subject: Re: Pillar bedding - how hard is it? Organization: University of Washington, Seattle In article <C5wyyC.6An@fc.hp.com> email@example.com (Bart Bobbitt) writes: #Ah yes; the old glue job. They are probably the best as the receiver #is held in place permanently and bedding pressure isn't an issue. #The pins that hold the trigger in the receiver are typically capable #of being pushed out through holes in the stock. All the custom BR actions I've seen (Stolle, Hall, Wichita) have trigger brackets removable from the bottom, usually with one or two screws. The action and stock of a glue-in are essentially one piece in a good BR rifle. All smithing, from a simple trigger replacement to barrel fitting, is done with the action in the stock (at least after the original glue-in is done). Toby Bradshaw Department of Biochemistry and College of Forest Resources University of Washington, Seattle firstname.lastname@example.org "A well-educated electorate being necessary to the prosperity of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed." Do you believe that all "inflammatory" books should be stored in libraries, since no honest person needs such a book at home where a child might read it?
Subject: "Pillar Bedding" part 1 From: Kelly McMillan <email@example.com> Date: Apr 17 1997 Newsgroups: rec.guns I would like to start an informative thread that might help some to learn a little about rifles, stocks and accuracy. It's been my experiance in the group that I tend to lose interest in very long posts and though there is a lot of info I can pass on about my first subject I have choosen to do this in multiple post. If any group member has an opinion about me continuing this thread feel free to e-mail me to express your support or rejection of the fundamental idea. Questions on topic of course will be encouraged. Part 1 In the firearms industry it seems there is always a "trend" that is accepted as the state of the art for a period of time, and then something else will come along and replace it. Right now aluminum bedding blocks seem to be the "trend". I recently posted our views on the ABB so I won't get into that today but there is a related trend I think needs to be addressed. "Pillar Bedding" or bedding using aluminum pillars. First a little history: Many years ago when wood stocks ruled the world there was very few things that would improve the accuracy of a rifle as much as "glass bedding" would. Almost no factory guns came bedded and most shot barely acceptably. Glass bedding usually enhanced the accuracy as well as increasing the dependability by limiting the effects of humidity and weather which played havoc with point of impact (POI). By using an epoxy based product that was reinforced with some fiberglass (thus the term glass bedding) one could form a much better mating surface between the stock and the receiver. By reducing or eliminating any stresses cause by poorly match surfaces it allowed the rifle to shoot more consistantly. In the benchrest community they found that by torquing both guard screws with a torque wrench they could actually tune the way the gun would shoot. They were constantly checking the torque, between matches and even between groups, and most found that the more they shot the rifle, the more the amount of torque would decrease. They reasoned that the stocks must be compressing some due to the pressure and stress associated with shooting. As a result they drilled out the holes around the guard screws to the next larger size (usually from 5/16 to 3/8 or 1/2 inch.) When bedding the action they would allow these larges holes to fill up with bedding material. After removing the screws (of course they waxed them first) they would then drill out the screw hole to 5/16th for some clearance, but that would in effect leave a pillar of 1/16 to 3/16" wall thickness of bedding material. The bedding material was dense and rigid so it made a nice pillar that would keep the stock from compressing under the pressure of 40-60lb or torque, plus the stress of firing the rifle. to be continued -- McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots" 21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B Phoenix, Arizona 85027 (602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com/mfsinc_n/mc_test.htm
Subject: Pillar Bedding Part II From: Kelly McMillan <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Apr 20 1997 Newsgroups: rec.guns Not long after the pillar bedding process was developed, fiberglass stocks came onto the scene. While benchrest shooters were convinced that pillar bedding had a positive effect on the accuracy of their rifles they assumed that the same process would help to improve accuracy of a fiberglass stocked rifle. The process quickly adapted itself to "glass" stocks. When Chet Brown and Lee Six first introduced fiberglass stocks to the competitive world in the late '60's, they used a process that left the stock with a "foam' core. The stocks were made of fiberglass cloth outer shells with the action area and barrel channels actually molded during the intial process. They would use a low density urethane foam to expand the material from the inside and force it out against the walls of the mold to form the gunstock. As a result between the receiver area and the bottom of the stock (where the guard screws are) there was a foam core. The foam was light weight to keep the weight of the stock within reason and when cured was rigid (unlike polystyrene of foam rubber) but had very little compression strength. In short order it was found that pillars were absolutely required in order to keep from compressing the stock when tightening the guard screws. As a general rule, the same proceedure was used to make the pillars as was used with wood stocks. Simply drill the guard screw holes over size and fill them up with bedding material. The draw back to this technique was that occassionally there would be some excessive shrinkage in the bedding material due to the volume of bedding compound that flowed down around the screws. Though this resulted in a less than perfect job from a cosmetic stand point, it had no adverse effect on the perfomance of the bedding. When guys like my father and Wally Hart and Fred Sinclair started to take on this type of work for their fellow competitors they felt a nedd to produce a better looking job and the use of precut aluminum pillars was introduced. ( I'll get back to the technical info on aluminum pillars in part III.) When Gale McMillan introduced his fiberglass stocks in 1973 they were made in pretty much the same manner as the Brown Stocks. Urethane foam was a major component and thus pillar bedding was a main ingrediant in all benchrest stocks he made.(Gale made only benchrest stocks for the first 2 years he was in business) Due to the weight limitations in benchrest, light stocks were a must and the materials used where not nearly as strong as they could have been in a stock weighing much more. Pillar bedding was one way to make up for their lack of strength in the receiver area. to be continued 4/28. I'll be in Fla. for the Chevy Truck Challenge Nationals all next week. -- McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots" 21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B Phoenix, Arizona 85027 (602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com/mfsinc_n/mc_test.htm
Subject: Pillar Bedding Part III From: Kelly McMillan <email@example.com> Date: Apr 28 1997 Newsgroups: rec.guns When pillar bedding as was described in the earlier parts gained acceptance, there wasn't much arguement about how to to it right. It seemed almost everyone in the competitive arena used pretty much the same technique. Upon the introduction of precut aluminum pillars experts began to disagree on what was the proper way to install the pillars. As with standard pillars, the function was the same. That was to insure that the action area of the stock would not compress when tightening down the guard screws. How to best accomplish this became the topic of debate. I won't suggest that the way we install our pillars is the only right way to do it, though it is our belief that it is the best right way. To be perfectly honest the difference in performance of the different types of techniques used is probably unmeasurable. But, we believe that whether or not you can prove your ideas to be the best, it is important to use the technique which you believe produces the best results. When installing aluminum pillars we measure the depth from the bottom of the receiver to the bottom of the stock where the pillars are to be installed. We then cut our pillars about .035 shorter than this measurement. We apply the bedding materials to the stock and the receiver to insure uniform nonporous surface finish, filling the pillar holes with bedding material. We then place the pillars (with the screws inside of them) in the stock from the bottom of the stock. Holding the barreled action in the vise we bring the stock up to the barreled action and start the screws. We tighten each of the screws a half turn at a time cleaning off the excess material as we go. By placing the pillars in from the bottom, along with the fact that the pillars are shorter than the distance between the bottom of the stock and the action, we create a small space between the top of the pillar and the action. This .035 gap between the pillar and the action is filled with bedding material. By using this technique we have created a completely uniform bedding surface that is 100% consistant. One of the objectives of glass bedding is to produce a stress free union between the action and the stock. By bedding the entire receiver area (as opposed to the recoil lug and rear tang) we have effectively created the only "perfectly stress free" union possible. By not allowing the aluminum pillar to come in contact with the receiver we have eliminated one possible source for unwanted stress. While some use other techniques, we believe ours to create the perfect relationship between stock and action. (Part IV, other techniques used with aluminum pillars) -- McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots" 21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B Phoenix, Arizona 85027 (602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com
From: Kelly McMillan <firstname.lastname@example.org> Newsgroups: rec.guns Subject: Pillar Bedding Part IV Date: 5 May 1997 16:23:16 -0400 A number of well respected, very succesful gunsmiths and gun builders use other techniques than the one I described in Part III. As I said they are very succesful, the guns they build are very accurate and no one can say that there technique doesn't work. As I stated we "believe" that ours is the best way but realize that having choices is always a good thing, so I'll discribe the other technique most widely used. Kenny Jarrett of Jarrett Rifles in Jackson South Carolina is one of the most respected gun builder in the south. He specializes in high dollar hunting rifles that perform like benchrest rifles. As a matter of fact he uses "benchrest" techniques for building all his rifles. His pillar bedding differs from ours in that he allows the pillar to come in contact with the receiver. As a matter of fact he countours the top of a 1" diameter aluminum pillar to match the radius of the receiver (that is of course allowing that the receiver is round, he uses almost exclusively Remington 700's for actions). He had a special tool ground to cut a 1.365 radius so that he could precut his pillars so that they fit a Remington 700. The rest of his technique is very much like ours, but he ends up with this large shiney aluminum piece embedded in the action of the stock. It is very visable when you take the barreled action out of the stock. In the case of ours, we have had customers question whether or not we even put pillars in because with .035 of bedding materials covering the top of the pillar you have to look really close to be able to see it. There are basically two things we don't like about this method. As I stated the top of the pillar is contoured to cut a 1.365 radius. Remington receivers are put through a process where they are actually polished by hand. Becuase each is done independantly not all actions are exactly 1.365. They may very as much as .005. I know that doesn't sound like much, and probably has little or no effect on accuaracy, but the purpose of glass bedding is to make a "perfect" union between stock and action. If you were to allow for at least the smallest amount of bedding material to cover the pillar, it would compensate for any irregularities in action diameter and come closer to making that perfect fit. Secondly, remember what the pillar is designed to accomplish. It's only function is to eliminate any compression of the stock material under the receiver. Why use a 1" pillar when 3/8" is enough and 1/2" is plenty. In our stocks we prefer not to remove too much of the material from the stock. Remember the front screw is always near the recoil lug, (in some actions it's screws into it) so having as much material in tact is important. Though pillars give the stock compressive strength they don't offer much in the way of shear strength which is whats needed around the recoil lug. One last item on pillar bedding. I'm often asked by customers who would like to bed their own stock but lack the confidence to try "pillar" bedding, "Do you need pillars?" Because of the construction techniques and materials we use in making our stocks it is not necessary to use pillars. With the exception of benchrest stocks which are almost always glued in and use a lighter fill in the action area than all other stocks, pillars are unnecessary. Test have proven that the materials we use to fill the action area of of stocks have less than 1% compression at 100lb psi. What that means is that there is not way you are going to be able to torque your guards screws tight enough to compress the material under the action. Why do we put them in every bedding job we do when installing our stocks? Because it's state of the art. It's what has become the excepted way to do things. It's not a fad. It is a valuable technique that is necessary when bedding stocks that use a different method of construction (which almost all other synthetic manufacturers do). It's just that with ours it is not really necessary. This ends the series on pillar bedding. If there are any specific questions that I did not cover please e-mail me. If there are any subjects in which you may feel I can contribute in another series, please let me know. I also encourage any others who may have additional info to share on the subject to tag on to the series. David Tooley, I know you're out there. Thanks Kelly McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots" 21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B Phoenix, Arizona 85027 (602)582-9635 http://www.mcmfamily.com
From: Kelly McMillan <email@example.com> Newsgroups: rec.guns Subject: Re: 700 PSS, Remington...Comments ? Date: 11 Feb 1997 09:47:32 -0500 Gunslinger wrote: # # Does anyone have any comments on the Remington 700 PSS in .308 ? # # Any problems or flaws with the rifle -or- stock. Also, what groups will # it show ? # # Thanks Well, you asked the right question. "stock" . Though we make several stocks for Remington, all of which are used on custom shop rifles, the PSS is not one of them. The problem with the stock on the PSS is the..... okay I'm going to say it now so hold on.....the...the.... the aluminum bedding block. Okay there I've said it. I know it sounds like sopur grapes because we don't use a bedding block in our stocks, but it's not because we can't, we just don't believe in the system. And with our stocks at least, metal to metal bedding is definitely a detriment as far as accuracy is concerned. As a matter of fact, my father put aluminum bedding blocks in wood benchrest stocks back in the 60's in an effort to combat the problem trhat arrise due to swelling from changes in humidity. The detraction in the accuarcy department was compensated for by the consistance in point of aim. It was a give and take scenario. With fiberglass stocks the warping is a non issue so to give up any in accuracy would be a losing situation. Now I know Remington and the maker of the stock used on the PSS have done a tremendous marketing job with the ABB, but we just don't feel like it's the way to go. It offers nothing that one of our stocks doesn't do without it. Kelly -- McMillan Fiberglass Stocks Inc. "Molding the Way America Shoots" 21421 N. 14th Ave Suite B Phoenix, Arizona 85027 (602)582-9635 http://mcmfamily.com