338 LM Improved Action

[jbone405]

Savage makes a singe shot MAGNUM target action specifically for the 338LM

The Savage Magnum target action is bigger than their standard target action.

But Savage also chambers the 338LM in the 111 Long range hunter which is a Large Shank action, same size as their standard target action and it's a repeater.

It's the Savage Small Shank actions that don't work well with WSM's RUM's RSAUM's 338 LM and the like.

Savage chambers several rifles in the long action large shank. The 110 BA (Stealth, Evoluton), 110 FCP, 111 long range hunter, are all 338 repeaters. The internet opinions all seem to lean toward those action being different than their other long actions, whether physically different or a different heat treatment. I have yet to read anything conclusive either way.

I have looked at the 112 magnum target, with my primary concern being finding a stock. Why run a long action when I am going to shoot it single shot anyway, while simultaneously severely limiting stock options, as far as I have found.

What I would like to see is some actual testing to see if it actually works. There was a post I read somewhere, I think either Kirby Allen or Shawn Carlock, where they chambered a 700 in 338, shot it a little too hot and actually measured the lower lug setback. This is a lot more convincing to me than "I wouldn't do it." I believe he went into some detail about CrMo being better than SS because it was a little more springy maybe. I will try to find the article.

I guess the whole reason for my question pertaining to the OP was based on if a Rem single shot short action might be suitable, where a long action repeater seems definitely not.

 

[dkhunt14]

Savage chambers several rifles in the long action large shank. The 110 BA (Stealth, Evoluton), 110 FCP, 111 long range hunter, are all 338 repeaters. The internet opinions all seem to lean toward those action being different than their other long actions, whether physically different or a different heat treatment. I have yet to read anything conclusive either way.

I have looked at the 112 magnum target, with my primary concern being finding a stock. Why run a long action when I am going to shoot it single shot anyway, while simultaneously severely limiting stock options, as far as I have found.

What I would like to see is some actual testing to see if it actually works. There was a post I read somewhere, I think either Kirby Allen or Shawn Carlock, where they chambered a 700 in 338, shot it a little too hot and actually measured the lower lug setback. This is a lot more convincing to me than "I wouldn't do it." I believe he went into some detail about CrMo being better than SS because it was a little more springy maybe. I will try to find the article.

I guess the whole reason for my question pertaining to the OP was based on if a Rem single shot short action might be suitable, where a long action repeater seems definitely not.

I believe it was Dave Tooley. Matt

 

[Zero333]

Savage chambers several rifles in the long action large shank. The 110 BA (Stealth, Evoluton), 110 FCP, 111 long range hunter, are all 338 repeaters. The internet opinions all seem to lean toward those action being different than their other long actions, whether physically different or a different heat treatment. I have yet to read anything conclusive either way.

I have looked at the 112 magnum target, with my primary concern being finding a stock. Why run a long action when I am going to shoot it single shot anyway, while simultaneously severely limiting stock options, as far as I have found.

What I would like to see is some actual testing to see if it actually works. There was a post I read somewhere, I think either Kirby Allen or Shawn Carlock, where they chambered a 700 in 338, shot it a little too hot and actually measured the lower lug setback. This is a lot more convincing to me than "I wouldn't do it." I believe he went into some detail about CrMo being better than SS because it was a little more springy maybe. I will try to find the article.

I guess the whole reason for my question pertaining to the OP was based on if a Rem single shot short action might be suitable, where a long action repeater seems definitely not.

Large shank and Small shank is the difference.

large shank barrels have more meat around the chamber.

Originally Savage chambered WSM's and RUM's in their standard Small Shank actions/barrels and right off the bat people were having extraction issues because the chamber didn't have enough meat around it to stop it from swelling during the firing sequence.

So they came up with the Large shank barrels/actions to remedy the extraction problem.
I know someone who has one of the original small shank Savages chambered in 300 WSM and you bet your ass he has extraction issues.

Here is what the difference between both Shank sizes looks like....

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Savage chambers several rifles in the long action large shank. The 110 BA (Stealth, Evoluton), 110 FCP, 111 long range hunter, are all 338 repeaters. The internet opinions all seem to lean toward those action being different than their other long actions, whether physically different or a different heat treatment. I have yet to read anything conclusive either way.

I have looked at the 112 magnum target, with my primary concern being finding a stock. Why run a long action when I am going to shoot it single shot anyway, while simultaneously severely limiting stock options, as far as I have found.

What I would like to see is some actual testing to see if it actually works. There was a post I read somewhere, I think either Kirby Allen or Shawn Carlock, where they chambered a 700 in 338, shot it a little too hot and actually measured the lower lug setback. This is a lot more convincing to me than "I wouldn't do it." I believe he went into some detail about CrMo being better than SS because it was a little more springy maybe. I will try to find the article.

I guess the whole reason for my question pertaining to the OP was based on if a Rem single shot short action might be suitable, where a long action repeater seems definitely not.

https://bordenrifles.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/338_lapua.pdf
http://riflebarrels.com/378-weatherby-cases-in-the-remington-700-action/

 

[jbone405]

The post I was referring to was a copy of another post
http://forum.accurateshooter.com/threads/action-options-for-338-lapua-magnum.3924839/page-2

 

[B23]

What I would like to see is some actual testing to see if it actually works. There was a post I read somewhere, I think either Kirby Allen or Shawn Carlock, where they chambered a 700 in 338, shot it a little too hot and actually measured the lower lug setback. This is a lot more convincing to me than "I wouldn't do it." I believe he went into some detail about CrMo being better than SS because it was a little more springy maybe. I will try to find the article.

I guess the whole reason for my question pertaining to the OP was based on if a Rem single shot short action might be suitable, where a long action repeater seems definitely not.

I'm pretty sure it was Kirby that posted something like that a few years ago. I don't remember exactly what his reasoning was but if I recall he thought that the CM receivers were harder than the SS receivers. I know Kirby has built some of his 338 Lapua based wildcats on Rem 700 actions because he built me my 300AX (Kirby's version of a 30-338 Lap Imp) on a CM Rem 700 LA receiver.

 

[jbone405]

https://bordenrifles.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/338_lapua.pdf
http://riflebarrels.com/378-weatherby-cases-in-the-remington-700-action/

I think that would answer my questions thuroughly.

 

[carlsbad]

Savage chambers several rifles in the long action large shank. The 110 BA (Stealth, Evoluton), 110 FCP, 111 long range hunter, are all 338 repeaters. The internet opinions all seem to lean toward those action being different than their other long actions, whether physically different or a different heat treatment. I have yet to read anything conclusive either way.

I have looked at the 112 magnum target, with my primary concern being finding a stock. Why run a long action when I am going to shoot it single shot anyway, while simultaneously severely limiting stock options, as far as I have found.

What I would like to see is some actual testing to see if it actually works. There was a post I read somewhere, I think either Kirby Allen or Shawn Carlock, where they chambered a 700 in 338, shot it a little too hot and actually measured the lower lug setback. This is a lot more convincing to me than "I wouldn't do it." I believe he went into some detail about CrMo being better than SS because it was a little more springy maybe. I will try to find the article.

I guess the whole reason for my question pertaining to the OP was based on if a Rem single shot short action might be suitable, where a long action repeater seems definitely not.

I always hear the anecdotes of problems with R700s and 338LM and the guy who actually saw it is never available...friend of a friend. That said, I've already said I'm look for other actions, not remington. As a Rem fan, I'm not a big fan of the Savage design. Not being critical, just not my cup of tea. Still leaning toward BAT.

Whatever action I get, it will be a single shot, providing good support for the lower lug.

--Jerry

 

[rcparker1]

I believe whats being referred to is Hooke's law. Been a long time, maybe if someone is a engineer or knows one they can contribute. Been a long time since I worked with it and a limited amount. Very interesting useful information for this though.

 

[carlsbad]

I am a registered professional engineer with a degree in physics from the University of Chicago. Hooke's law is for springs. I recently did a lot of work with hookes law to develop some rules for shortening firing pin springs. A search will find that thread.

I am resisting the urge to get techanical and point out errors in the 2 links provided above because I don't want this to turn into a remington 700 debate.

I've already said that I don't want to use the Remington because it isn't available single shot.

I haven't gotten any discussion of Stainless Steel vs CrMo. In a linked thread, Kirby Allen is the only gunsmith I know who has made a policy of CrMo vs SS. I wanted to lean toward crMo but most custom actions are only available in SS. Which is fine if they are able to get the heat treatment they specify.

In the nuclear industry, the end user is required to maintain the Certified Material Test Reports (CMTR) for the specific heat of material (analogous to a lot number) for safety related parts. The CMTR has test results for yield and ultimate strength for samples made from the same heat of steel. I'd like to see some CMTRs for the allow steels used in actions. I'm sure some action builders have them.

--Jerry

 

[B23]

I didn't think SS was really all that heat treatable?

 

[jbone405]

I was just looking at Bat actions last night. Lots of options for the big bores.

 

[rcparker1]

I am a registered professional engineer with a degree in physics from the University of Chicago. Hooke's law is for springs. I recently did a lot of work with hookes law to develop some rules for shortening firing pin springs. A search will find that thread.

I am resisting the urge to get techanical and point out errors in the 2 links provided above because I don't want this to turn into a remington 700 debate.

I've already said that I don't want to use the Remington because it isn't available single shot.

I haven't gotten any discussion of Stainless Steel vs CrMo. In a linked thread, Kirby Allen is the only gunsmith I know who has made a policy of CrMo vs SS. I wanted to lean toward crMo but most custom actions are only available in SS. Which is fine if they are able to get the heat treatment they specify.

In the nuclear industry, the end user is required to maintain the Certified Material Test Reports (CMTR) for the specific heat of material (analogous to a lot number) for safety related parts. The CMTR has test results for yield and ultimate strength for samples made from the same heat of steel. I'd like to see some CMTRs for the allow steels used in actions. I'm sure some action builders have them.

--Jerry

Thanks. As I said it's been years and was working on a project in the electrical side, that's my field, but had some interaction with the engineering on the safe rotation speed of a metal part before it became dangerous due to centrifugal force. Seems like there was another law used but I can't remember it. Not the my field.