No go gauge alternative

[Dusty Stevens]

The Davison and Viper will if you tighten them down well…it looks the same design. If Dusty says it won’t, then it won’t and price wise that’s likely your best option.

if you use a piece of barrel muzzle you just cut off and tap the tape right on the edge of the go gauge, it will almost peel off and leave the tape.

I aint saying it wont for some folks. You wrap a target around the barrel and it wont unless it slips. Thatll do for a disclaimer.

 

[Dusty Stevens]

All this on changing a Savage barrel ? I change barrels a lot and I have a once fired case that I set aside for head space for each chambering . And never have any trouble when I change barrels with the brass that has been shot with out Full length sizing when I go back to a different barrel . Am I suppose to have a problem ?

No. Its that simple

 

[Dgd6mm]

Some say tomato, some say tomatoe.

 

[INTJ]

All of this is true. I once wondered if the barrel nut was welded on with a factory barrel removal.
And yes, a barrel nut pulls a barrel away from the boltface, to fully engage and spread forces evenly across all tenon/action threads.
A shouldered tenon pulls the barrel toward the boltface, with early tenon threads fully loaded and those closest to shoulder relatively swinging in the wind.
Stud connection -vs- bolt.

Interesting. I have always thought about it this way:

While the barrel nut threads may be evenly loaded, the system is relying on those barrel nut threads to support the barrel. I'll bet the shoulder of the barrel nut tries to deform as well. Since the receiver shoulder probably doesn't yield. unequal stress is created with the nut against the shoulder. The barrel nut is the weak link in the system.

With a shouldered barrel, the shoulder makes firm and true contact against the receiver face. As the barrel is torqued the barrel threads stretch. Since there is a barrel shoulder mating to a receiver shoulder, everything stays true and has much less stress.

Now obviously barrel nut rifles usually shoot very well. We don't see very many top shooters in accuracy competitions using barrel nuts, and if a barrel nut were superior we'd all be running them.

Regardless, I think a shouldered barrel does generate less stress than a barrel nut. In other words broad shoulders are better than going nuts......

 

[mikecr]

With a nut, the action ring is 'holding' the barrel (all directions, including shear).
A shoulder function is not actually needed here, provided you employ good and fine threading.
That is, you could key a barrel to the action ring, with no shoulder, and no nut (just keyed to prevent turning), and fire it just fine.
But it's an important function of the nut to set all threading in tension, which also prevents turning.

The direction of this tension is important to thread loading during firing (according to Harold Vaughn).
A nut pre-establishes connected threading in a static bias away from the bolt face, as it is during firing.
With this, the backside of all threading is engaged.
It is opposite of a shouldered connection, which actually unloads a bit during firing, because the first few threads pull later threads into little, no, or front side engagements(static). On firing those front side thread engagements then pull away from engagement.
Again, it's stud -vs- bolt.

Now obviously barrel nut rifles usually shoot very well. We don't see very many top shooters in accuracy competitions using barrel nuts, and if a barrel nut were superior we'd all be running them.

This reminds me that in my 60yrs, I have not seen bolt action firearms advance one bit.
There was always a follow the leader basis for this & that,, and it never led anywhere.
Doesn't it seem odd, given better machining, better test equipment, computers?
We are truly stuck.

 

[tobnpr]

This reminds me that in my 60yrs, I have not seen bolt action firearms advance one bit.
There was always a follow the leader basis for this & that,, and it never led anywhere.
Doesn't it seem odd, given better machining, better test equipment, computers?
We are truly stuck.

Granted, bolt guns have probably seen the least amount of innovation over the past decades compared to other firearm platforms.
There have been numerous "advances" in bolt guns as relates to the attachment of barrel to receiver, as well as improvements in bolt designs. Quick-change barrel systems, including those that use barrel extensions.

The Fix by Q is probably the best example of this, that I can think of. Savage has the Impulse, Remington the Alpha 1 (if we ever get to see these latest/greatest offerings). The innovation is there, but it can't just be "innovation" for the sake of itself, at additional cost- with no measurable benefit at the target because it won't sell.

 

[shortgrass]

3 pages. Shouldered, nutted, but no mention of the Mauser collar........ I'll use a dab of grease to hold steel shim to the butt of a GO gage. It squishes out of the way, without even having to lean on it.

 

[urbanrifleman]

With a nut, the action ring is 'holding' the barrel (all directions, including shear).
A shoulder function is not actually needed here, provided you employ good and fine threading.
That is, you could key a barrel to the action ring, with no shoulder, and no nut (just keyed to prevent turning), and fire it just fine.
But it's an important function of the nut to set all threading in tension, which also prevents turning.

The direction of this tension is important to thread loading during firing (according to Harold Vaughn).
A nut pre-establishes connected threading in a static bias away from the bolt face, as it is during firing.
With this, the backside of all threading is engaged.
It is opposite of a shouldered connection, which actually unloads a bit during firing, because the first few threads pull later threads into little, no, or front side engagements(static). On firing those front side thread engagements then pull away from engagement.
Again, it's stud -vs- bolt.
View attachment 1386998

This reminds me that in my 60yrs, I have not seen bolt action firearms advance one bit.
There was always a follow the leader basis for this & that,, and it never led anywhere.
Doesn't it seem odd, given better machining, better test equipment, computers?
We are truly stuck.

The only advance in bolt gun tech I've seen is the Tubb ATR. It is a totally different class of tech.

He uses a barrel extension btw. And it is tapered.

 

[Dgd6mm]

DLT, I have a set of oak blocks that teele1 and I made about 20 years ago. I use them all the time. They are 3/4" oak laminated together with good wood glue. I have used them on my Urbanrifleman barrels up to Bradley's straight contour. They work like a champ.

 

[wbm]

Have used the Scotch Brand clear tape for years with Savage rifles. I take a resized case and put TWO piece of tape on the case head. If I primarily hand load for that cartridge this is the head space I use. I have like never ever had a problem using that method.

 

[INTJ]

With a nut, the action ring is 'holding' the barrel (all directions, including shear).
A shoulder function is not actually needed here, provided you employ good and fine threading.
That is, you could key a barrel to the action ring, with no shoulder, and no nut (just keyed to prevent turning), and fire it just fine.
But it's an important function of the nut to set all threading in tension, which also prevents turning.

The direction of this tension is important to thread loading during firing (according to Harold Vaughn).
A nut pre-establishes connected threading in a static bias away from the bolt face, as it is during firing.
With this, the backside of all threading is engaged.
It is opposite of a shouldered connection, which actually unloads a bit during firing, because the first few threads pull later threads into little, no, or front side engagements(static). On firing those front side thread engagements then pull away from engagement.
Again, it's stud -vs- bolt.
View attachment 1386998

This reminds me that in my 60yrs, I have not seen bolt action firearms advance one bit.
There was always a follow the leader basis for this & that,, and it never led anywhere.
Doesn't it seem odd, given better machining, better test equipment, computers?
We are truly stuck.

I am not so sure about no advancements. It's doesn't even raise eyebrows anymore when someone shoots 10-shot groups in the 4s or 5-shot groups in the 2s at 1000 yds. While those are good groups, they are not record setting by any means. Compared to 20 years ago, our actions are better, our barrels are better, our bullets are better, our stocks are better, our shooting technique is better, our loads are more precise, and our tuning is better.

I can promise you with 100% certainty that if a barrel nut led to smaller groups we would have adopted it in BR a long time ago. Especially in LRBR, we are always trying new things. We keep what works and discard what doesn't. What I do next season will be different that one I did last season. Even what I did last match.

Theory is one thing, but actual results trump all else. In theory, a horizontal bolt lockup is superior to a vertical, but the results don't always show that.

I still think the theory of how a shouldered system supports the barrel is superior to a barrel nut for the reasons I mentioned earlier, but I freely admit I know a lot more about what works than why it works.

All my bragging aside about how LRBR is on the cutting edge, I still prefer my 20+ year old design Nightforce BR scope to anything else out there right now, and for a big game rifle I still prefer a real CRF design over anything else. And while I have had Harold Vaughan's book since it came out, a lot of what he says is very outdated.

I guess that means my six decades are showing as well........

 

[LVLAaron]

^^^ The advancements in what the regular guy can hold and see are probably pretty small.



But how well things are made sure is different. I have my dads Rifles that are older than me (I'm 40) built by Fred Sinclair - who I believe at the time made the best of the best, and I have .1 agg targets from these rifles.

Compared to a modern BAT/Borden/etc action, the difference is, well, decades ahead. Machining and material science has changed dramatically. The types of metals used, hardening methods, tolerance holding, EDM machining.... it's a brave new world.

Some designs don't need major change. The only thing an action needs to do is lock up straight and the same way every time. But how we get to that design, has changed.

 

[DLT]

After many bad words, i got the barrel nut torqued down 45lbs. I used 1 piece of scotch tape on the back of my go gauge. Go gauge bolt will close. Rigged up no go with 1 piece of .002 thick scotch tape on the head and bolt will not close. I could prob make it close but it would tear the tape off. I call that good correct ? It doesn’t need more than .002 does it ? And yes I did check, brand new brass will chamber

 

[Dusty Stevens]

Yes thats perfect

 

[DLT]

Did one test fire, gun went bang and didn’t blow up so that’s a relief.
Factory round : 1.499
Fired and deprimed 1.551
I know that’s just measuring off one firing but I think I did pretty good . Thanks everyone for ideas , tips, tricks

 

[6MMsteve]

Just set it to feel the go. You dont need a no-go but yes you can check it with tape on the back

Exactly I do not own a nogo gauge a little feel on the go and your good

 

[LVLAaron]

Did one test fire, gun went bang and didn’t blow up so that’s a relief.
Factory round : 1.499
Fired and deprimed 1.551
I know that’s just measuring off one firing but I think I did pretty good . Thanks everyone for ideas , tips, tricks

Perfect.