"The World's strongest bolt action"

[reynolds357]

Where's the Remington ad saying the 700 is the strongest?
Denis

Saw the ad on Bone Collectors TV show last week.

[DPris]

Thanks. Anywhere else?
Denis

[Art Eatman]

This is the sort of claim that I generally ignore. First off, the 700 does just fine with factory pressures and loading handbook maximum pressures.

After that, I'd have to do comparison of designs, one aspect being the cross-sectiional areas of the lugs, since they are subject to shear forces.

Then I'd have to know the metallurgy. The alloy; the heat treatment.

Absent that knowledge, you'll excuse me; time for a beer. Seems to me that this is just another deal about angels dancing on pinheads.

[reynolds357]

Thanks. Anywhere else?
Denis

One of the other shows also ran it. Don't remember which. The ad shows them shooting a new chassis 700 and talks about all the new engineers and new engineering going into the 700.

[LineStretcher]

Originally Posted by Art Eatman

This is the sort of claim that I generally ignore. First off, the 700 does just fine with factory pressures and loading handbook maximum pressures.

After that, I'd have to do comparison of designs, one aspect being the cross-sectiional areas of the lugs, since they are subject to shear forces.

Then I'd have to know the metallurgy. The alloy; the heat treatment.

Absent that knowledge, you'll excuse me; time for a beer. Seems to me that this is just another deal about angels dancing on pinheads.

Art, I'm with you.. It's marketing and you can basically say whatever you want until someone proves you wrong. When that happens, you quickly pull that campaign and flood the world with a new one.

[JRR]

A much more interesting discussion question would be. Which receiver is the safest?
I keep going back to the flanged bolt shroud or the three rings of steel. Two large bolt lugs or smaller more numerous.
On rare occasions, some careless individual might load a large 30 cal case to the top with bullseye. To make something totally idiot proof would add unacceptable weight and bulk.

[DPris]

That chassis 700 is kinda neat.
If I were ten years younger I think I'da kept the one I had here.

I'm looking for an ad so I can see or hear the exact wording on the strength claims.
I'm curious about what they'd base 'em on.

Denis

[reinert]

Here's a historical reference to the claim, in the paragraph right above the picture of Mike Walker:

http://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial...-rifles/248392

[LineStretcher]

Originally Posted by JRR

A much more interesting discussion question would be. Which receiver is the safest?
I keep going back to the flanged bolt shroud or the three rings of steel. Two large bolt lugs or smaller more numerous.
On rare occasions, some careless individual might load a large 30 cal case to the top with bullseye. To make something totally idiot proof would add unacceptable weight and bulk.

When you have the opportunity, take a look at what Roy Weatherby did when he designed the 9 lug Mark V action. I would love to see a head to head test by both Weatherby and Remington since they both claim to have the strongest actions.

[T. O'Heir]

"...saw a commercial..." Marketing departments say stuff like that all the time. Not enough people care to make 'em prove it.
"...the Enfield m1914 and 1917..." Don't recall if they were considered when the Arisaka was tested and found to be stronger than any Allied bolt action after W.W. II.
"...cartridge head separation..." Has nothing to do with the strength of the rifle.

[tdoyka]

i'll stay with the pinnacle of bolt actions, the 1898 mauser.

[Longshot4]

I remember years ago that the 1917 Remington endfield was very strong. I had one that was re barreled and sporterized by P.O. Ackley to a 257 Roberts. My gun smith had a hard time installing a scope mount do to how hard the action was.

[reynolds357]

I remember years ago that the 1917 Remington endfield was very strong. I had one that was re barreled and sporterized by P.O. Ackley to a 257 Roberts. My gun smith had a hard time installing a scope mount do to how hard the action was.

Hard does not necessarily mean strong. Hard quite often means brittle.

[Wyosmith]

^
^
^ This is true.
However the only 1917s that were super hard to a point of being britle as a rule are the Eddystones. And not all of them by a large margin either The Remingtons and the Winchesters were just fine, and yes, they are SUPER strong.
I don't know how the 1917s and 1914s compare to the CZs or the new Japanese Weatherby Mk5s but I can tell you that they are strong in the extreme.
I have seen a number of Remington 721s and 700s destroyed by idiotic hand loaded and by firing wrong ammo, as well as one that was fired with a barrel 1/2 full of ice. The receivers were set-back to a point they were un-salvageable, but in every case but one, all the shooters were unharmed. In the one case that there was bit of harm was the ice filled barrel where the man suffered some injury to his left hand.

In no case wound I say the fault laid with the action's design.

But to come full circle, I have to say the good 1917 and 1914 Enfields are indeed stronger then the M700. So is the CZ 602 and the CZ550. I am betting the Ruger 77 Mk2 is also. So is the Howa. So is the Weatherby Mk-5.

So no, the Rem 700 is NOT the worlds strongest bolt action. Not even in the top 3.

But it is about 50% stronger then it needs to be for any shooter but the most careless, and those that need a stronger action should not be allowed to have a pair of scissors--- let alone a rifle.

Once a rifle action is so strong that you can't blow it up (without liberal amounts of idiocy being added added) I think it's strong enough.

To make a point, I saw a Weatherby Mk5 about 6 years ago that was destroyed by a "hand load". It was a 7MM Weatherby Magnum.

A case full of IMR4198 instead of IMR4831 will do that for you nicely.

Nothing is foolproof because fools are too ingenious.

[DPris]

And sometimes too ingenious, too!
Denis

[Wyosmith]

Oops.
That is the correct spelling. Thanks DPris.
I'll change it.

[DPris]

Looked more entertaining as it was.
Denis

[TX Nimrod]

AFAIK there is zero published data supporting what action is stronger than another. Yes, Ackley “tested” a number to destruction, but only one example of each - poor science. And what was the history of those actions? Stressed in the past by firing with mud/snow in the muzzle? Poor heat treating in a wartime factory? Arsenal “refinished”? Rifle in a fire at some point? The tests would make a nice “magazine article” but no real science there.

Bottom line, no pressure data so no definitive answer. But....lots of opinions.


.

[LineStretcher]

I think the conclusion is that until someone proves otherwise, whoever say's they have the strongest action can make that claim if they wish.

[Wyosmith]

Rechambering and re-throating the 6.5 Jap to 30-06 was an armature mistake, but it did happen now and then. (made them into 6.5 -06s without using 6.5MM bullets in the ammo. Unreal! But it was done. I personally saw one done that way, the the man who had it was the son of the GI who brought it back from the Pacific, and had been shooting it as a 30-06 for 35 years before I saw it.

Here is another such story which was in out local news just recently

https://county10.com/lookback-japanese-arisaka-type-38/

I can assure you all, a 700 is NOT as strong.

[Don Fischer]

I'd rad somewhere years ago that to prove the strength of the MK V action, Roy Weatherby shoved a 30 cal bullet up the barrel of a 300 Weatherby and fired a factory 300 Weatherby behind it,,,,from the shoulder. Now I find that abb but impossible to believe. Even if it were true, I strongly suspect the barrel would have blown. Bring's to mind, what good an action that's good to 80K if the barrel isn't? Although I think it was Ackley that tested the Savage rifle up to 80K. Wonder what that did to the barrel? Imagine some guy showing you his rifle with the barrel blown open like a banana smiling because the action held together!

[bobn]

from my feeble mind it occurs to me that strong does not also mean good gas control. I though I remember Remington saying the that the front of the bolt lip expands and seal itself and prevents gas from coming back to your eyes.(during a blow up) fwiw. bobn

[reynolds357]

Don Fischer
Senior Member

Join Date: March 2, 2017
Posts: 1,277
I'd rad somewhere years ago that to prove the strength of the MK V action, Roy Weatherby shoved a 30 cal bullet up the barrel of a 300 Weatherby and fired a factory 300 Weatherby behind it,,,,from the shoulder. Now I find that abb but impossible to believe. Even if it were true, I strongly suspect the barrel would have blown. Bring's to mind, what good an action that's good to 80K if the barrel isn't? Although I think it was Ackley that tested the Savage rifle up to 80K. Wonder what that did to the barrel? Imagine some guy showing you his rifle with the barrel blown open like a banana smiling because the action held together!

The Mark V has been tested way past 80K psi.
A bull barrel will handle the pressure to do the test.
Just for discussion, I saw a 270 WSM Squibb shot and then numbscull racked another round in and fired. It bulged the standard sported barrel, but not much. App. 1/8" for 3" long.

[Drm50]

The strongest action means nothing. If you are shooting a rifle that is more than capable of
pressures for the cartridge you are using, what's the point? I've heard Jap rifles were the strongest, so what I'm not shooting nuclear bombs. I have had rifles built on Enfields, Springfields, M98 and Win 70s and have yet to blow on up.

[44 AMP]

I though I remember Remington saying the that the front of the bolt lip expands and seal itself and prevents gas from coming back to your eyes.(during a blow up) fwiw.

I had a serious case failure in a model 600 Remington (due to my own stupidity), and gas did hit me in the cheek. I think a model 700 would be the same, under the same conditions.


As far as the strongest? does it really matter? The model 600 I nearly blew up survived somewhere between 90-100,000 psi, according to the signs on the case. I was told at the time that Remington proof tests to 80,000psi. Seems to me that claiming to be the strongest, based on blow up limits is foolish.

If you test and the action lets go at 90K and you test another and it lets go at 97K or 112K, technically its stronger, but practically, its a moot point, I think.