Is this guy doing it right? Action truing

[338 Mollett]

To answer the OP question ,no I don't like the guy's set up . As far as the debate of truing an action especially a Rem 700 how true is true ? And to what tolerance also what is acceptable ? Truing a Rem 700 is a rabbit hole .

 

[urbanrifleman]

Difficult to make 10# (Hunter Class) weight with a sleeved action. You are thinking group or VFS rifles which can go to 13.5 #.
Whole other thing? How? You are contending that truing can cause more problems than it fixes. This is not my experience. You are basing your conclusions on a limited number of anecdotal evidence. There are heaps of records of thousands of Registered Benchrest match results that can verify what I have seen and gleaned from talking with the pioneers (old timers) in BR comp through my 20 years of competition. I am talking true aggregate accuracy -25 record shots fired in a single day of competition through variable conditions- A huge data base.

So many other factors in play here other than action work. Like hundreds of factors.

And I still say there is lot more to these being a "modification" than the average "trueing" being offered by most smiths.

 

[LHSmith]

So many other factors in play here other than action work. Like hundreds of factors.

And I still say there is lot more to these being a "modification" than the average "trueing" being offered by most smiths.

I can agree with this. A 700 action that has been trued will not benefit - and probably make matters worse without other accurizing steps like as you said a tighter fitting bolt. Along with trigger work, firing pin mods, bolt timing, etc. all mimicking standard details found on custom actions.

 

[Ironworker]

I have a Bergara Premier ridgeback in 6.5 PRC with a medium palma contour bbl. It shot under 3/4 MOA. I decided I wanted a heavier bbl so I had a great smith install a 28" Bartlein Heavy Varmint. I asked gunsmith if he trued up the action ,he said "Not needed" First time out in NV desert field conditions with my handloads 3/8ths groups right out the gate .

 

[Idaho-Lefty]

A few Months ago, I bought a New SS, Rem 700, RR series, Short action, "Lefty" and since they have been CNC Machined for, the last MANY Years,.. I just, carefully, "Lapped", the Lugs and Installed, a RemAge Criterion Heavy Sporter Barrel, with a good Fit on, a New Norma Case and TIGHT, barely starting to close, on the "Go" Gage in 6 XC
With Bergers and Sierra's, the 9.5 lb. Rifle, shoots in, the .2's, 3's and sometimes, the 4's on, a BAD, Day !
And I haven't even, did much, load "Tuning" ,. yet !
YES,.. Rem HAS made, some Sloppy Actions over, the Years that, could use, "Truing" !
But like urban rifleman says,. NOT,. lately !
With, Modern CNC Machining, IF One is "Good" they are "usually",.. ALL,.. good !

 

[urbanrifleman]

I can agree with this. A 700 action that has been trued will not benefit - and probably make matters worse without other accurizing steps like as you said a tighter fitting bolt. Along with trigger work, firing pin mods, bolt timing, etc. all mimicking standard details found on custom actions.

Thank you!!! Exactly what I meant (you said it much better).

 

[mike mccormick]

That clown will never touch anything of mine.

 

[JFrank]

I wouldn't call that blueprinting an action.

 

[AckleymanII]

If you want to see some DRAMATIC improvements on a non trued Rem 700, put on one of Gunsandgunsmithing Tuners.... Almost as good as discovering GIRLS! Almost....

I have 700's and 40-X's that have been trued by some of the best in the industry. Now compare the same actions in the same McMillen stocks, all with top grade barrels in match chambers, with high quality scopes.
It is going to take an underground tunnel to tell the difference in the Accuracy of these Short Range rifles...tiny, tiny groups abound, trued and non trued.

Knowing how to "tune" a load is a major issue, and this is a life long learning curve.

If I were shooting competition, I would get the best and not even enter into this whole discussion on truing up a rem or not...that discussion would be FUBAR to me.

 

[INTJ]

While I am no fan of Rem 700s, I have messed around quite a bit with Winchester CRF M-70s. They have similar issues with build quality depending on their year of manufacture, just like Remmys.

I have had no issue getting big game hunting level accuracy, .5 to .6 MOA, out of any of them. Most were rebarreled by others, some by me. A couple were heavy barreled long range rigs that shot well under .5 MOA.

The biggest key to accuracy is the barrel. A quality barrel with a straight throat. Next is a stress free bedding job. The action is the least important.

When it comes to a BR rifle, then every little thing matters. But like @Alex Wheeler says, don't use a factory action for a BR rifle.

 

[BoydAllen]

I challenge anyone to show that a "trued" Rem 700 receiver (unless it is a TOTAL basket case) actually shoots better. Maybe lap the lugs if they are horrible. If not, leave it.

I think trueing can cause more problems than it fixes.

Of course, there are always the obligatory responses that it must shoot better. No one has ever done a comparison or before and after test and published it. Of course, that "would be a waste of time" right? Trueing is a waste of time from my experience. I talk customers out of it all the time. No one has ever came back and said it didnt shoot and I trued it and now its fixed. Not one.

With all due respect, your experience must be somewhat limited. Let me give you a specific example. A friend put a couple of best grade barrels from excellent manufacturers on a a short action Remington, and it would not shoot to the standard of his other rifles. The bedding was correct, and his load workup procedure had given excellent results for other rifles. Finally after setting the barrel back and trying another they checked the action by turning a false tenon and shoulder with a close fit, and with that in the lathe, screwed the action on. Even though he had squared the front of the action on a tight mandrel, the threads were so cocked that when the action touched the shoulder of the false tenon on one side, light was showing on the other. The threads had to be opened .025 to get them to clean up. Originally he had taken advice such as yours. After the work was done, and the barrel set back, because of the increase in thread diameter, the rifle shot just as it should have in the first place. The truing was done by setting the action up in a fixture using a tight fitting mandrel. The threads were single pointed, lug seats cleaned up, bolt face touched up along with the backs and fronts of the lugs and the bolt nose. The work made all the difference in the world in how well and how consistently the rifle shot. So there you have it, a published account of a legitimate before and after test using the same barrel.

 

[luckyshot52]

Done properly, including the threads a 700 action can be improved. What is shown in the video does not cover all that is needed. I’ve done several that shot way better than original, including one where factory barrel was rechambered to see if the work paid off.
Getting into the wisdom and values are a whole different argument

 

[AckleymanII]

While much is spoken about on Truing the action, the firing control on the rem can be improved on greatly.

 

[Alex Wheeler]

I agree with the above statements. A 700 can be improved greatly and I used to do a lot of work with them. But theres plenty of reasons not to start with one. If your already into one that has issues, fixing it likely is worth while. The reason there is not a bunch of published data on action blueprinting and ignition work is the same reason Gordy does not publish how to chamber a barrel or McMillan doesnt publish how they make a stock mold or Borden how to fixture an action, ext.

 

[butchlambert]

Difficult to make 10# (Hunter Class) weight with a sleeved action. You are thinking group or VFS rifles which can go to 13.5 #.
Whole other thing? How? You are contending that truing can cause more problems than it fixes. This is not my experience. You are basing your conclusions on a limited number of anecdotal evidence. There are heaps of records of thousands of Registered Benchrest match results that can verify what I have seen and gleaned from talking with the pioneers (old timers) in BR comp through my 20 years of competition. I am talking true aggregate accuracy -25 record shots fired in a single day of competition through variable conditions- A huge data base.

Would you let us know where the info is located?

 

[LHSmith]

Would you let us know where the info is located?

InternationalBenchrestShooters.com-Results- Currently only goes back to 2012, long after custom actions were allowed in Hunter and Varmint Hunter ( ~1999). The venues that contain Hunter Class results will be found in Maine, Pa., Md. and several clubs in the South.
For earlier years when Hunter and VH dominated the line over VFS you will find results in PS magazines of that era. Until not too long ago, the match results listed on the website went back to the heyday of Hunter Score shooting and the amount of info was much greater.
NBRSA.com- Match results can be found in their magazine Precision Rifleman.

 

[jackieschmidt]

First, I have not read any of the other comments, because I do not want to be influenced by what others said.

This is obviously not an extreme accuracy build, so I would not critique it as such.

He did the recoil lug, but I never saw him actually mic it to see if the surface grinder did the trick.

I am not a fan of re machining things that fit nothing but air, so the nose of the bolt is of little consequence. When he indicated the bolt, he had the center in te firing pinhole. Since it never showed him actually moving the indicator to that end, (he indicated the chuck end), I guess he assumed that the firing pin hole is dead center.

On the action body, he corrected the face but did nothing to the threads. On this build,that might be fine. But I think that the threads and action face should run truly Straight with each other. My assumptionis he has no setup for truing the threads to the boltway.

If I do a factory action, I lap the lugs a tad to see the contact. If both are hitting, why mess with them. Removing metal there can cause problems with primary extraction and bolt timing.

As for the chambering, I have no idea how he set the ID up true with it chucked in that 4 jaw like that. All you can do is indicate one point. It would be nice for him to show his procedure for indicating the ID.

Rough drilling with a twist drill and then reaming is just wrong. There is no way to control induced runout. keep in mind, once runout is induced, ,the ONLY way to remove it is single point boring. Hard attaching a reamer in a chuck in the tail stock to ream is a sure fie way to produce an oversized chamber, which looked exactly what happened the way that headspace gage was flopping around in there. It’s a hard pilot reamer, so I doubt he is interested in keeping things perfect Anyway.

I guess he has no way of actually measuring to ascertain proper chamber Depth. He just creeped up on it untill the bolt closed on the headspace gage.

As far as the crown goes, he did not show how he indicated the ID. It was pretty.

This is not extreme accuracy chamber work. But it did go bang, and it shot around an inch at 100 meters, so I guess that is what he is looking for.

As a machinist, (I am not a gunsmith), I feel he violated quite a few rules involving sound machine shop practice. But if the results are to his liking, who am I to say.

 

[riflewoman]

When you attempt to “true” an action, you first have to determine what surfaces you’ll use to “true” the action to (the datums your going to be measuring from). In order to do that you have to first determine the true form of these datums and few if any gunsmiths have the tools, and fewer have the skills to establish these datums. If they did, they could make a lot more money as metrology techs or toolmakers. And this is the biggest problem I have with “truing”. It may be better but most likely is isn’t. And if you start cutting surfaces on a heat-treated and prestressed steel, there’s as much likelihood that the part will warp after you cut it “true” anyway. So what’s the point?

 

[MFG_BOP]

thanks for the answers, guys. now I know who I should not send my rifles to here in NZ independent if a trued rem 700 shoots better or not.
interesting that when he inserted the go gauge into the chamber, it was wobbly in there.
at 11:06, when he machines the abutments, he doesn't even take a peek to see what he's doing. he also chambers a barrel only using a 4 jaw chuck.. weird...

 

[BoydAllen]

When you attempt to “true” an action, you first have to determine what surfaces you’ll use to “true” the action to (the datums your going to be measuring from). In order to do that you have to first determine the true form of these datums and few if any gunsmiths have the tools, and fewer have the skills to establish these datums. If they did, they could make a lot more money as metrology techs or toolmakers. And this is the biggest problem I have with “truing”. It may be better but most likely is isn’t. And if you start cutting surfaces on a heat-treated and prestressed steel, there’s as much likelihood that the part will warp after you cut it “true” anyway. So what’s the point?

The point is to make the rifle shoot better, and I have seen that outcome.
There is an expression, "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good." If you read my previous post, you will have an example of an action much improved by truing. I might also add, don't take your conjecture more seriously than actual results. This often happens on the internet. There have been times when I have reminded a poster that mine was based on experience, whereas his was based on a guess.