Savage Floating Bolt Heads

[Someoldguy]

I'm still having trouble picturing how a bolt head secured to the bolt body with a single retaining pin and with a spring loaded firing pin running thru the middle of it is going to 'float' much at all, and if so, mostly in one axis only.
I've not the math skills to estimate how much pressure can be exerted on the bolt lugs and bolt head when the bolt assembly is closed. Perhaps it is more than I anticipate. Still . . . . (?)

 

[savagedasher]

The fireing pin is only guided by the hole it-All the pressure is being had behind the bolt head. As far as pressure on the bolt head should be much because most load with plus head space as far as one axis You still can move the head in all sideway motion . And the lugs will still be in contact . Larry

 

[Someoldguy]

The fireing pin is only guided by the hole it-All the pressure is being had behind the bolt head. As far as pressure on the bolt head should be much because most load with plus head space as far as one axis You still can move the head in all sideway motion . And the lugs will still be in contact . Larry

I don't have any unbarreled actions right now, but I did pull all 3 bolts and it appears that the assembly is, in fact, loose enough to allow easily detectable movement of the bolt head with the naked eye in 3 axis of movement. Which tells me the movement is likely well over .010" in any given direction. I'll have to think about how a chambered cartridge and the bolt head engaged in the receiver lugs will affect the ability of the bolt head to move.

And I will have to set about determining if I find this a benefit or a detriment.

Thanks to all for the responses. I have found the discussion quite interesting.

 

[Will Henry]

Have you removed the barrel?
If you have check from the chamber ID to the threads Many very .005 in distance the floating head adjust for the difference so you don't have pressure on one side of the case .
Larry

I thought we were speaking about bolt head float in relation to the bolt body as well as the receiver. There is plenty of slop between the bolt and receiver in most commercial actions. I have never seen a Savage with .005" movement of the bolt head in relation to the body.
One feature the Savage design does have is that contact between the sear and cocking piece does not affect the attitude of the bolt to the extent it does on a Remington, for instance. The Remington design (the Model 70 Winchester as well) lifts the rear of the bolt up when the sear contacts the cocking piece. The Savage system doesn't do this. WH

 

[Concha]

The "Floating Bolt Head" being part of the accuracy equation is a pipe dream. The Savage design is for cheap manufacturing. 1 bolt body all calibers.

The PTG is a superior unit regardless of what some of the echo zombies say. Along side of the previous posted benefit, It comes with no radius on the rear of the lug so you can relocate the wave washer to between the front baffle and the bolt head facilitating lube retention on the rear of the lug.

 

[mauser284]

The "Floating Bolt Head" being part of the accuracy equation is a pipe dream. The Savage design is for cheap manufacturing. 1 bolt body all calibers.

The PTG is a superior unit regardless of what some of the echo zombies say. Along side of the previous posted benefit, It comes with no radius on the rear of the lug so you can relocate the wave washer to between the front baffle and the bolt head facilitating lube retention on the rear of the lug.

Yes every part of the Savage 110 is to cheapen the price to produce it. Likewise the Remington 700 was also a cheaper design to reduce the cost compared to Mauser, Springfield 1903, Krag, Winchester Model 70 etc....... Savage's engineer just did a better job taking the money out of the action while still managing to make an accurate and durable bolt action even if it was ugly as could be. Given the limits of machining in mass production in the time these designs came out the Savage design does has the ability to absorb a bit more tolerance stacking with out losing as much accuracy when looking at identical levels of tolerance stacking and clearances. We do not know if this is a true assumption to make and I doubt it is.

Even 20+ years ago anyone that had eye's to see with could tell that Savages had terrible bores on their rifle barrels. Savage always marketed heavy on the quality of their button rifled straightened barrels and that it was the source of their better than average accuracy. Anyone with any sense in their head knew that was nonsense. Remington had terrible looking bores and used substandard steel in their barrels that would routinely be attacked by very mild bore cleaners compared to 28% ammonia used by Hatcher. The ammonia attacks impurities in the steel. I seem to recall products with 8% ammonia pitting Remington barrels in my youth. So you can not believe marketing hype and just because someone says something often and loudly with passion does not make it true! A modern Rolls Royce or Bentley is nothing like the old ones and are rattle traps and money pits shortly out of warranty. You have to be able to decide what is empirical measurable fact that can be nailed down with specifications and can be measured and what is marketing double speak!

What I find it absolutely shameful is that Savage felt the need to go even cheaper and created the Axis. As if they had left too much money on the table with the 110/10 and like actions! LOL Plenty of companies did similar things but still managed to keep the rifle looking sleek and sexy in site of pulling a Savage. Late 1990's early 2000s I had 2 Browning A-Bolts. They had bolts built up from many sub assemblies. The rifles looked great, had fantastic surface finish, beautiful wood smooth cycling and where fantastically accurate. They had borrowed heavily from Savage 110 and Remington 700 with out turning out a cheap looking or feeling rifle. If you compared it to a Winchester M70 it felt cheap and looked a bit cheap but so long as you did not A-B it next to something like a Pre-64 M70 it felt top flight and performed great.

How you execute a design or design philosophy can make all the difference in the world as to how it is perceived. Sadly the 110 tossed any hope of pleasing lines out the window in pursuit of pure profit margin. Most of the modern"Economy"offering have done the same because they have seen how many decades latter it has not stopped people from buying Savages or paying top dollar for them. There is a right way and a wrong way to take money out of a design. Knowing when and were to stop is the trick. Likewise knowing how to do it with out turning out something that is a cross between cheap Gladware disposable food storage container and cheap Chinese made socket set. Sadly most of them today feel like cheap plastic food storage container and look as sleek as a cheap Chinese made flea market socket set. I think Browning has demonstrated in the past that you can do a cheaper design and have it look nice to the eye and feel nice to the touch. If you ignore most of the stocks Howa has also demonstrated that you can have a nice looking rifle that is structurally sound and well made and still bring it to market at a good price point. Before distributors got greedy and started gouging on CZ's they too demonstrated that you could have an expensive design that was still affordable since the Mauser design is the most expensive high volume mass produced rifle. It cost more to build a Mauser clone than it does to build a Remington 700, Savage 110, Browning A-Bolt,X-Bolt and most other bolt action rifles. That is the thing 99% of consumers do not understand is that price to build an item has nothing to do with the price it sells for! If price to produce had anything to do with retail price then Howa's and CZ's would be the most expensive mass produced rifles in stores.LOL

Well I am done offending peoples sense of realty for the night! LOL

 

[boltfluter]

Just a cheap manufacturing method, as is the rest of the rifle. It really is that simple. To actually buy into a floating design is just a pipe dream. Nothing more.

Paul

 

[centershot]

Mauser, you forgot Remington 788. Plane Jane but shot lights out. BTW, have you seen the value of the plain Jane lately?!

 

[Riesel]

Beauty is in the eye of the Beholder with the wallet.

I think that was something Confusion said.
Regards,
Riesel

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Why all the old threads to rehash?

 

[Boyd L.]

Why all the old threads to rehash?

Some topics just stir the passion.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Seems theres a lot of old random topics coming up lately

 

[Dgd6mm]

I like my Savage's and just got a Bighorn Origin. All floating boltheads. I've owned custom, have one left that is a very good shooter. I haven't pulled the trigger on that rifle in at least 5-6 years.

 

[Ggmac]

I don't know what you guys are using but everyone of the savage bolt heads I have just sink to the bottom of the pool . I can't see the advantage of having one so light that it floats anyway . Oh well , it's a good hot day to test the theory one last time . Maybe I'll document it , no , bad idea me in a bathing suit !

 

[Will Henry]

Have you removed the barrel?
If you have check from the chamber ID to the threads Many very .005 in distance the floating head adjust for the difference so you don't have pressure on one side of the case .
Larry

It doesn't really matter how eccentric the chamber may be because the bolt head does not float. That is to say, there is no movement of the bolt head in the bolt body. On the one rifle, I re-cut the threads and locking lug seats just as I would on a Remington. The other is unaltered and it's head doesn't float either. It may or may not have eccentric threads. WH

 

[Concha]

I like my Savage's and just got a Bighorn Origin. All floating boltheads. I've owned custom, have one left that is a very good shooter. I haven't pulled the trigger on that rifle in at least 5-6 years.

There is a difference between floating bolt head and interchangeable bolt head.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

There is a difference between floating bolt head and interchangeable bolt head.

Or a bolt head that is made seperately because its cheaper. I bet the look on their faces were priceless when it became internet fact that it was done for accuracy purposes

 

[ebb]

The person that told the story that is was for accuracy purposes was probably the same person that has written all the press for the 6.5 creedmoor.

 

[Dgd6mm]

There is a difference between floating bolt head and interchangeable bolt head.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[RWO]

The savage bolt design was originally developed to allow making its parts on screw machines and single operation tools which were prevalent at Savage back in 60's and 70's. Being modular, different head sizes and handle styles can be used on any bolt body. Also, proper material selection and heat treatment for each part was no problem. This simplifies inventory and reduces production costs.

RWO