Bolt sleeving

[LVLAaron]

I was on a flight a couple days ago (Got to see Carters precession from the air!) and was thinking I really need to get into whatever I need to get into to remove/attach bolt handles.

 

[tobnpr]

For me, easier to ream the raceway, order a custom bolt body for desired clearance, blue it up and send to Accu-Tig.

No way could I ever TIG to match his quality, plus I won't screw up the new bolt

 

[jackieschmidt]

I tend to agree.

With the advent of CAD/CAM machining, there are quite a few people making bolts as replacements for Factory offerings at very reasonable prices.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Its been my experience that theres not much to be had in the way of accuracy by reducing bolt body clearance. I know that theres some that would disagree, but I just have not seen it. I used to sleeve bolts and put a lot of work into my own actions. Id like to hear from you guys what improvements you have seen that you can trace directly to reducing the bolt body to receiver clearance.

 

[LVLAaron]

I can believe that. My dads old 722 bolt probably had 15 thou clearance in the back, it was badly worn. The whole bolt body was shaped like someone made it out of playdough. It shot pretty good 5 shot groups for a shot out 22-250 (half inch at an indoor 100 yard range, no real load dev).


I'm a fan of squishing some JB Weld through the rear scope base screw hole. Fast cheap and easy.

 

[Jonnyofalltrades]

Its been my experience that theres not much to be had in the way of accuracy by reducing bolt body clearance. I know that theres some that would disagree, but I just have not seen it. I used to sleeve bolts and put a lot of work into my own actions. Id like to hear from you guys what improvements you have seen that you can trace directly to reducing the bolt body to receiver clearance.

I've never done any clearance reduction as a stand-alone. Always as part of other work, so I have no personal data.
I have heard both Jim Borden and Gordy Gritters refer to instances where the sole work done to the rifle was a sleeve or "bumps" on the bolt under the bridge, and the rifle immediately went from dog to darling.
FWIW.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I've never done any clearance reduction as a stand-alone. Always as part of other work, so I have no personal data.
I have heard both Jim Borden and Gordy Gritters refer to instances where the sole work done to the rifle was a sleeve or "bumps" on the bolt under the bridge, and the rifle immediately went from dog to darling.
FWIW.

I have also heard that.

 

[STS]

I've never done any clearance reduction as a stand-alone. Always as part of other work, so I have no personal data.
I have heard both Jim Borden and Gordy Gritters refer to instances where the sole work done to the rifle was a sleeve or "bumps" on the bolt under the bridge, and the rifle immediately went from dog to darling.
FWIW.

I have experienced some pretty convincing results controlling the bolt fit. I'm sure that we all have seen that rifle that has .010 bolt clearance that shoots dots. There are always outliers. However, over many years of trying to tame unfriendly rifles, I discovered that sleeving the rear of the bolt would usually settle things down and eliminate the maddening flyers. But there were a few that the rear sleeve only technique didn't get the job done. A gunsmith friend has a 6.5 x 47 that had a rear sleeve that continued to shoot flyers until we put a sleeve on the front. It was clear from the first target that it had a profound improvement on that rifle. I had a 6BR that exhibited the same behavior. It had a rear sleeve, but continued to shoot flyers until the front of the bolt got one too.
The way I see it is that if I'm going to go to the trouble of putting together a good rifle, then II'm going to remove any reason that it won't shoot if I can. It makes absolutely zero sense to me to take the time to dial in the bolt, and not put both sleeves on it while it's in the lathe. The tedious work is done, so I just go ahead and stick another sleeve on the other end of the bolt. I guess I learned about 20 years ago just to take the shortest line from A to B and just do the work that had proven to me to be effective. As they say, your milage may vary.

 

[Fast14riot]

Its been my experience that theres not much to be had in the way of accuracy by reducing bolt body clearance. I know that theres some that would disagree, but I just have not seen it. I used to sleeve bolts and put a lot of work into my own actions. Id like to hear from you guys what improvements you have seen that you can trace directly to reducing the bolt body to receiver clearance.

Anecdotal evidence, my best shooting 700 (HM Long range) has the sloppiest bolt fit. I can remove the bolt while it is in a 40x stock. My other 700s have the same other work, trued action face, parallel lug, bushed FP, same triggers, but this one with a very loose bolt fit just flat shoots. Now I'm well aware correlation is not causation, but it was enough for me not to worry about bumps or sleeving.

 

[X Count]

This guy has some different methods of achieving tight tolerances. His method of micro welding could be applied and ground back to be blended in.

 

[AlNyhus]

Over the years, I've seen a fair number of rifles improve with reduced bolt-to-raceway clearance...real deal Benchrest rifles shot in registered NBRSA and IBS tournaments. The improvements have always been in the form of reduced vertical that was not load related.

Good shootin' -Al

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Al, do you think it matters more when it gets extreme? Pandas have twice the clearence of a Bat or Borden and I would not say its hurting them.

 

[AlNyhus]

Al, do you think it matters more when it gets extreme? Pandas have twice the clearence of a Bat or Borden and I would not say its hurting them.

Hi Alex.
I think (dangerous territory ) aluminum bodied actions may tolerate extra clearance due to the reduced vibration signal (as compared to a steel reciever). It's very possible and probable that shroud fit plays into this as well....aluminum or steel reciever.
Your thunks on it??? -Al

 

[WSnyder]

aluminum or steel reciever.
Your thunks on it??? -Al

@Alex How’s the agg results going with the steel Nuevo vs aluminum Nuevo? Enough data yet to see anything?

 

[LVLAaron]

I feel a test coming up.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

Hi Alex.
I think (dangerous territory ) aluminum bodied actions may tolerate extra clearance due to the reduced vibration signal (as compared to a steel reciever). It's very possible and probable that shroud fit plays into this as well....aluminum or steel reciever.
Your thunks on it??? -Al

Id agree. Bolt body slap caused from lugs that are not square is something thays concerned me. Aluminum is going to be a much better material. I think truely square lugs, not just contact prevents that slap.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

@Alex How’s the agg results going with the steel Nuevo vs aluminum Nuevo? Enough data yet to see anything?

If I go back to pandas and vipers and look at that data I have opinions but it will be a while before I have opinions on the Nuevo.

 

[Will Henry]

The deflection of the rear of the bolt by the cocking piece/sear contact is the main issue. Especially with the usual angled contact. WH

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I dont worry so much about that. I know thats the common complaint. But at the end of the day if theres any clearance around the bolt then your not in control of its location. The pressure of the case seats the lugs. When that happens the back of the bolt snaps into place. I dont think it matters if it was originally at the top of the action because of the trigger or at the bottom of the action because of gravity. Really really square lug surfaces will prevent bolt body slap.

 

[rwj]

I dont worry so much about that. I know thats the common complaint. But at the end of the day if theres any clearance around the bolt then your not in control of its location. The pressure of the case seats the lugs. When that happens the back of the bolt snaps into place. I dont think it matters if it was originally at the top of the action because of the trigger or at the bottom of the action because of gravity. Really really square lug surfaces will prevent bolt body slap.

A bit of “reading between the lines” on my part… but your post seems to imply that a tight fitting case that results in a thrust force being applied to the bolt that seats the lugs against the receiver is desirable. Makes sense in that this condition essentially forms the case, bolt, receiver, and sear into a single piece… minimizing relative movement during ignition.