Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:05:24 -0600, Louis Ohland
wrote:

Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

Do you really need 4340? I think the major difference between 4340 and
4140 is hardenability. If you need maximum strength all the way thru a
large section 4340 is indicated, if not, short pieces of 4140 flat
will be easier find.

--
Ned Simmons

On 3/13/2010 12:52, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:05:24 -0600, Louis
wrote:

Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

Do you really need 4340? I think the major difference between 4340 and
4140 is hardenability. If you need maximum strength all the way thru a
large section 4340 is indicated, if not, short pieces of 4140 flat
will be easier find.


Looking to heat treat to Rockwell C 35, Tensile strength 160,000psi,
yield 138,000psi, or there abouts.

You are exactly right on 4140 being easier to find...

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:58:27 -0600, Louis Ohland
wrote:

On 3/13/2010 12:52, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:05:24 -0600, Louis
wrote:

Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

Do you really need 4340? I think the major difference between 4340 and
4140 is hardenability. If you need maximum strength all the way thru a
large section 4340 is indicated, if not, short pieces of 4140 flat
will be easier find.


Looking to heat treat to Rockwell C 35, Tensile strength 160,000psi,
yield 138,000psi, or there abouts.

You are exactly right on 4140 being easier to find...

It looks to me as though you might be able to get Rc35 all the way
thru a 1" thick 4140 piece, but 4340 would certainly be more reliable.

BTW, I'm looking in "Modern steels and their properties," the best
reference I've seen for this sort of data on alloy steels.
Unfortunately I can't find an online copy.
http://openlibrary.org/b/OL5528277M/...eir_properties

--
Ned Simmons

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:05:24 -0600, Louis Ohland wrote:

Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

I just go to my local steel stockholder (no help to you, in the UK)

http://www.niagaralasalle.co.uk/distribution/

AISI4340/EN24 is a standard product and should be available at least, in
hot-rolled rectangle form. Only issue is that a steelyard will want you to buy
a complete length. This is how you build up stock for future projects :-)

Mark Rand
RTFM

On Mar 14, 4:05*am, Louis Ohland wrote:
* *Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

On 3/14/2010 06:22, Andrew VK3BFA wrote:
On Mar 14, 4:05 am, Louis wrote:
Looking for 4340, annealed, in 1" x 2" size. Length is 4" minimum.

Speedy, Metal Express, and others do rounds, and I'm not ready to carve
a rectangle from a round.

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet

Wes wrote:
Louis Ohland wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet

What type of action?

Wes

Enquiring minds want to know !

--
Snag
"90 FLHTCU "Strider"
'39 WLDD "PopCycle"
BS 132/SENS/DOF

On 3/14/2010 09:55, Snag wrote:
Wes wrote:
Louis wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet

What type of action?

Wes

Enquiring minds want to know !


It's a bit odd. A cylindrical falling block design from Bill Holmes.
Roughly 1" wide, 2" tall, 4" long. The falling block, er, shaft, is
..750" diameter.

I was talking to my neighbor about it, and there may be some EDM and
heat treating shops in the ares. EDM would make a rectangular falling
block so much easier.

Louis Ohland wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet

What type of action?

Wes

"Louis Ohland" wrote in message
...
On 3/14/2010 09:55, Snag wrote:
Wes wrote:
Louis wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet

What type of action?

Wes

Enquiring minds want to know !


It's a bit odd. A cylindrical falling block design from Bill Holmes.
Roughly 1" wide, 2" tall, 4" long. The falling block, er, shaft, is .750"
diameter.

Frank DeHaas ("Mr. Single Shot") designed one like that many years ago, to
be made with a lathe, for people who didn't have a shaper to carve out the
rectangle in a conventional falling-block action. Supposedly, it worked very
well. I still have a falling-block action for .22 Hornet, a semi-replica of
a Farquharson, that I'm saving to finish when I retire. That may be after
I'm dead. g


I was talking to my neighbor about it, and there may be some EDM and heat
treating shops in the ares. EDM would make a rectangular falling block so
much easier.

Caution. I have investigated this at considerable length. I also was once
pretty knowledgeable about EDMed surfaces, although I'm somewhat behind.
EDMed surfaces under shock and tension in a rifle action are not a healthy
mix. If you want to know more, we can discuss it.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Louis Ohland" wrote in message
...
On 3/14/2010 09:55, Snag wrote:
Wes wrote:
Louis wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.
Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet
What type of action?

Wes
Enquiring minds want to know !

It's a bit odd. A cylindrical falling block design from Bill Holmes.
Roughly 1" wide, 2" tall, 4" long. The falling block, er, shaft, is .750"
diameter.

Frank DeHaas ("Mr. Single Shot") designed one like that many years ago, to
be made with a lathe, for people who didn't have a shaper to carve out the
rectangle in a conventional falling-block action. Supposedly, it worked very
well. I still have a falling-block action for .22 Hornet, a semi-replica of
a Farquharson, that I'm saving to finish when I retire. That may be after
I'm dead. g

I was talking to my neighbor about it, and there may be some EDM and heat
treating shops in the ares. EDM would make a rectangular falling block so
much easier.

Caution. I have investigated this at considerable length. I also was once
pretty knowledgeable about EDMed surfaces, although I'm somewhat behind.
EDMed surfaces under shock and tension in a rifle action are not a healthy
mix. If you want to know more, we can discuss it.

Can you fix that with shot peening or other treatments?

--
Tim Wescott
Control system and signal processing consulting
www.wescottdesign.com

"Tim Wescott" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Louis Ohland" wrote in message
...
On 3/14/2010 09:55, Snag wrote:
Wes wrote:
Louis wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.
Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet
What type of action?

Wes
Enquiring minds want to know !

It's a bit odd. A cylindrical falling block design from Bill Holmes.
Roughly 1" wide, 2" tall, 4" long. The falling block, er, shaft, is
.750" diameter.

Frank DeHaas ("Mr. Single Shot") designed one like that many years ago,
to be made with a lathe, for people who didn't have a shaper to carve out
the rectangle in a conventional falling-block action. Supposedly, it
worked very well. I still have a falling-block action for .22 Hornet, a
semi-replica of a Farquharson, that I'm saving to finish when I retire.
That may be after I'm dead. g

I was talking to my neighbor about it, and there may be some EDM and
heat treating shops in the ares. EDM would make a rectangular falling
block so much easier.

Caution. I have investigated this at considerable length. I also was once
pretty knowledgeable about EDMed surfaces, although I'm somewhat behind.
EDMed surfaces under shock and tension in a rifle action are not a
healthy mix. If you want to know more, we can discuss it.

Can you fix that with shot peening or other treatments?

No, not completely. The essential problem is that EDMing causes microcracks.
Peening just covers them up.

There's a lot more to it. The best equipment and the best techique can, for
all important purposes, get rid of microcracks. But the surface is still
remelted steel (the recast layer), and I would lap it off even using the
best EDM techique.

You may see photomicrographs of EDMed surfaces that show complete removal of
the recast layer, and no microcracks. But read carefully about how those
surfaces were accomplished. Generally they're the result of using the most
sophisticated techniques, in the hands of experts.

So the answer is, it can be done. But the typical toolmaker using typical
equipment may not do it, even if he thinks he is, because his molds and dies
never crack. The receiver of a falling-block rifle, which has to withstand
50,000 cup, is not a lunchbox mold.

I wouldn't shoot the gun, unless it has been proof tested multiple times. It
just isn't worth it. If you used good technique and left at least 0.002" for
mechanical finishing, it would be a different story. I've schemed up ways to
lap the surface but I've never tried it.

Before building a single-shot rifle, anyone should read deHaas's books. He's
the expert. His son has one or more books out, too. I haven't read them but
his dad knows his stuff, so they're probably good. DeHaas also is an
experienced critic of the common single-shot actions, and a designer of
several well-regarded ones himself. I'd stick to one of his designs or make
a straight replica of a Winchester Hi-Wall.

--
Ed Huntress

Before building a single-shot rifle, anyone should read deHaas's books. He's
the expert. His son has one or more books out, too. I haven't read them but
his dad knows his stuff, so they're probably good. DeHaas also is an
experienced critic of the common single-shot actions, and a designer of
several well-regarded ones himself. I'd stick to one of his designs or make
a straight replica of a Winchester Hi-Wall.


I have at least three of DeHaas' books. My dad got wired up on this Bill
Holmes design.

The significant question is how do you machine the passage for the block
so it's got somewhat square corners? Or is a slight radius OK? I see the
square broaches, but isn't an acutely square corner a good place for a
crack to start?

One approach would be to drill four holes at the corners of the block
passage, broach them square, then use a hole saw for gross metal
removal, followed by a 1/2" mill to square up the sides. Is there a less
manly-man way of doing it?

Before someone mentions casting, that is not an option.

For those up on DeHaas, look at the Chicopee RF. Problems: 3/16 CRS
plates welded or silver soldered to barrel area. I like the swinging
block, but I'm not sure it would do well with the 5mm. Look at the
Chicopee CF action, and the bolt locking arrangement goes from a milled
shaft (RF) to sort of a rolling block design (CF).

http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/gunsmithing/any-plans-building-falling-block-rifle-148783/

The newer EDM controllers may have addressed the issues. Maybe.

Louis Ohland wrote:

The significant question is how do you machine the passage for the block
so it's got somewhat square corners? Or is a slight radius OK? I see the
square broaches, but isn't an acutely square corner a good place for a
crack to start?

One approach would be to drill four holes at the corners of the block
passage, broach them square, then use a hole saw for gross metal
removal, followed by a 1/2" mill to square up the sides. Is there a less
manly-man way of doing it?

The drill the four corners, milling, some filing, and then figuring a way to lock the
spindle of your vertical mill so you can mount a sharpened piece of HSS to use your mill
as an ArmStrong vertical slotter comes to mind.

Wire EDM has issues. Ed Huntress has posted on this at various times. The jist of it is
if they go slow, maybe not so bad but if they rip through it, you are likely going to have
micro cracks. Now that I think of it, John, who runs a shop with big machines had some
splines cut and the subject going too fast came up iirc in RCM.

I'm curious as in a question to the group, would the slotting device Bridgeport made to
mount to the rear of the turret have the stroke to slot his receiver or more interesting
to me, a Winchester/Browning 1885 High Wall receiver?

I'm still kicking myself for not getting to North Carolina with my uncle in time to pick
up his free standing slotter he left in his basement when he divorced and moved away. Oh
well his son got 1100 bucks for it on Ebay and the money financed his securities license.
Son didn't think dad wanted it and after it turned out as it did, Dad felt good about his
son getting benefit out of it. Sure would have been nice though to have it in my shop. Oh
well, sometimes you win, sometimes you loose. Hard to feel bad on how that one turned
out.

Wes

Wes

"Louis Ohland" wrote in message
...

Before building a single-shot rifle, anyone should read deHaas's books.
He's
the expert. His son has one or more books out, too. I haven't read them
but
his dad knows his stuff, so they're probably good. DeHaas also is an
experienced critic of the common single-shot actions, and a designer of
several well-regarded ones himself. I'd stick to one of his designs or
make
a straight replica of a Winchester Hi-Wall.


I have at least three of DeHaas' books. My dad got wired up on this Bill
Holmes design.

The significant question is how do you machine the passage for the block
so it's got somewhat square corners? Or is a slight radius OK? I see the
square broaches, but isn't an acutely square corner a good place for a
crack to start?

FWIW, my 1885 Browning (ne. Winchester Hi-Wall), which I no longer own, had
radii of around 1/32" or maybe slightly more in the corners. My Farquharsen
replica is about the same.

I don't have Frank's books anymore (I loaned them out and never got them
back), but didn't he address that issue somewhere?


One approach would be to drill four holes at the corners of the block
passage, broach them square, then use a hole saw for gross metal removal,
followed by a 1/2" mill to square up the sides. Is there a less manly-man
way of doing it?

Before someone mentions casting, that is not an option.

Bandsawing is one way it's done. There was a woman on the Outdoors Forum of
CompuServe a couple of decades ago, an aerospace engineer, who made
falling-block actions by drilling a start hole, bandawing the rectangle, and
then finishing with a shaper. She made her actions out of 17-4
precipitation-hardening stainless.

Another guy I know bought my desktop shaper from me specifically for making
single-shot actions. I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.

--
Ed Huntress


For those up on DeHaas, look at the Chicopee RF. Problems: 3/16 CRS plates
welded or silver soldered to barrel area. I like the swinging block, but
I'm not sure it would do well with the 5mm. Look at the Chicopee CF
action, and the bolt locking arrangement goes from a milled shaft (RF) to
sort of a rolling block design (CF).

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:11:52 -0500, Wes wrote:

Louis Ohland wrote:

The significant question is how do you machine the passage for the block
so it's got somewhat square corners? Or is a slight radius OK? I see the
square broaches, but isn't an acutely square corner a good place for a
crack to start?

One approach would be to drill four holes at the corners of the block
passage, broach them square, then use a hole saw for gross metal
removal, followed by a 1/2" mill to square up the sides. Is there a less
manly-man way of doing it?

The drill the four corners, milling, some filing, and then figuring a way to lock the
spindle of your vertical mill so you can mount a sharpened piece of HSS to use your mill
as an ArmStrong vertical slotter comes to mind.

Wire EDM has issues. Ed Huntress has posted on this at various times. The jist of it is
if they go slow, maybe not so bad but if they rip through it, you are likely going to have
micro cracks. Now that I think of it, John, who runs a shop with big machines had some
splines cut and the subject going too fast came up iirc in RCM.

I'm curious as in a question to the group, would the slotting device Bridgeport made to
mount to the rear of the turret have the stroke to slot his receiver or more interesting
to me, a Winchester/Browning 1885 High Wall receiver?

I'm still kicking myself for not getting to North Carolina with my uncle in time to pick
up his free standing slotter he left in his basement when he divorced and moved away. Oh
well his son got 1100 bucks for it on Ebay and the money financed his securities license.
Son didn't think dad wanted it and after it turned out as it did, Dad felt good about his
son getting benefit out of it. Sure would have been nice though to have it in my shop. Oh
well, sometimes you win, sometimes you loose. Hard to feel bad on how that one turned
out.

Wes

Wes
=========
From the more modern work [after most single shot actions were
designed] on stress distribution, the corners contribute very
little to the strength. Therefore it would appear that within
reason a radius would be better as this avoids a stress riser
[inside corner] as well as being easier to machine.
see
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.c...=156717&page=1
http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webc...3_lesson-2.pdf
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=29690
http://www.mscsoftware.com/Solutions...px?storyid=131
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25185918/Lecture-19



for pictures see
https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/...26_i02_008.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7827348/US...nery-Repairman

Sounds like a fun project. Let the group know what you decide.



Unka George (George McDuffee)
...............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

"Louis Ohland" wrote in message
...
http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/gunsmithing/any-plans-building-falling-block-rifle-148783/

The newer EDM controllers may have addressed the issues. Maybe.

Oh, the latest and best have. They've been able to produce a near-perfect
surface for at least ten years. But it still takes some expertise with the
particular material. And for a rifle receiver, I'd want to see a test coupon
and photomicrographs.

Or plenty of proof loads run through it. Microcracks are insidious.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

FYI
http://www.moglice.com/
http://www.neme-s.org/nemes%20gazette_files/G054.PDF
http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb...endors-148557/
http://www.professionalplastics.com/...istantPlastics

some hits for moglice OR turcite "firearms
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/ar.../t-136620.html

Anyone seen a teflon coated rifle bolt?



Unka George (George McDuffee)
...............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high. If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

..22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet can.

--
Ed Huntress


FYI
http://www.moglice.com/
http://www.neme-s.org/nemes%20gazette_files/G054.PDF
http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb...endors-148557/
http://www.professionalplastics.com/...istantPlastics

some hits for moglice OR turcite "firearms
http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/ar.../t-136620.html

Anyone seen a teflon coated rifle bolt?



Unka George (George McDuffee)
..............................
The past is a foreign country;
they do things differently there.
L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author.
The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high. If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

John B.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:32:58 +0700, John
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high. If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.


errr.. the bolt stayed close


I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

John B.


errrr... The bolt staid close"

John B.

On Mar 16, 11:33*am, John wrote:
...
errrr... The bolt staid close"

John B

Remained nearby?

jsw

"John" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high. If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to
handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop
more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet
can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

I don't remember Ackley's writings. It was too long ago for me. I do
remember the .218 Improved Bee and the .17 Ackley Hornet. They were two of
the crazy wildcats that I was nuts about when I was a kid.

--
Ed Huntress

Let the Record show that John on or about
Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:33:09 +0700 did write/type or cause to appear in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.


errr.. the bolt stayed close

That's good to know. But I'm sure it was "the bold" who "stood
close" while that was tested ... B-)

pyotr

-
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:15:26 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high. If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to
handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop
more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet
can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

I don't remember Ackley's writings. It was too long ago for me. I do
remember the .218 Improved Bee and the .17 Ackley Hornet. They were two of
the crazy wildcats that I was nuts about when I was a kid.


Yes, a long time ago, which is why I "seemed to remember".

One of the reasons I liked Ackley's writing was that he was, perhaps,
the ultimate pragmatist. When some writer took him to task, saying
that the only way his "improved" cartridges obtained their higher
velocity was by using higher pressures. Ackley replied saying that the
average gun owner cared only that they (1) got higher velocities, and
(2) the bolt stayed in the rifle. Which I suspect is nearly a
universal truth.

John B.

"John" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:15:26 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high.
If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that
to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to
handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop
more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet
can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

I don't remember Ackley's writings. It was too long ago for me. I do
remember the .218 Improved Bee and the .17 Ackley Hornet. They were two of
the crazy wildcats that I was nuts about when I was a kid.


Yes, a long time ago, which is why I "seemed to remember".

One of the reasons I liked Ackley's writing was that he was, perhaps,
the ultimate pragmatist. When some writer took him to task, saying
that the only way his "improved" cartridges obtained their higher
velocity was by using higher pressures. Ackley replied saying that the
average gun owner cared only that they (1) got higher velocities, and
(2) the bolt stayed in the rifle. Which I suspect is nearly a
universal truth.

John B.

Did you ever read _Twenty-Two Caliber Varmint Rifles_, by Landis? I had an
early edition and practically memorized it. That was another book I loaned
out and never got back. Sheesh.

--
Ed Huntress

On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:24:52 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Let the Record show that John on or about
Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:33:09 +0700 did write/type or cause to appear in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.


errr.. the bolt stayed close

That's good to know. But I'm sure it was "the bold" who "stood
close" while that was tested ... B-)

pyotr

-
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!


I've increased the size font in the newsgroup reader. Now I can see
what I'm typing ;-0

John B.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:01:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:15:26 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
om...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high.
If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that
to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to
handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop
more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet
can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

I don't remember Ackley's writings. It was too long ago for me. I do
remember the .218 Improved Bee and the .17 Ackley Hornet. They were two of
the crazy wildcats that I was nuts about when I was a kid.


Yes, a long time ago, which is why I "seemed to remember".

One of the reasons I liked Ackley's writing was that he was, perhaps,
the ultimate pragmatist. When some writer took him to task, saying
that the only way his "improved" cartridges obtained their higher
velocity was by using higher pressures. Ackley replied saying that the
average gun owner cared only that they (1) got higher velocities, and
(2) the bolt stayed in the rifle. Which I suspect is nearly a
universal truth.

John B.

Did you ever read _Twenty-Two Caliber Varmint Rifles_, by Landis? I had an
early edition and practically memorized it. That was another book I loaned
out and never got back. Sheesh.

No, but when I got interested in varmint rifles a friend had a 22-Krag
which was a full length 30-40 case, blown out to a less taper and
sharper shoulder necked down to 22 cal. It was a hi-wall with the
first Unertl scope I had seen and really pretty wood. Lord I lusted
after that gun.

After I shot with him for a while I realized that the 22-krag really
wasn't that accurate a gun although it must have gotten some bodacious
velocity as with his hotter loads the bullets would disintegrate in
flight, so I built a single shot mauser with a heavy Douglas barrel.
22-250 and after tinkering with loads it would shoot clover-leaf size
5 shot groups at 100 yds. and better then 1 MOA at 200.

John B.

"John" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:01:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:15:26 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
m...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in
message
news:ksotp5pn3s0hjqkbjslsk2ale6el0tak06@4ax. com...
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high.
If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that
to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the
receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over
time.

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to
handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically
develop
more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet
can.


Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

I don't remember Ackley's writings. It was too long ago for me. I do
remember the .218 Improved Bee and the .17 Ackley Hornet. They were two
of
the crazy wildcats that I was nuts about when I was a kid.


Yes, a long time ago, which is why I "seemed to remember".

One of the reasons I liked Ackley's writing was that he was, perhaps,
the ultimate pragmatist. When some writer took him to task, saying
that the only way his "improved" cartridges obtained their higher
velocity was by using higher pressures. Ackley replied saying that the
average gun owner cared only that they (1) got higher velocities, and
(2) the bolt stayed in the rifle. Which I suspect is nearly a
universal truth.

John B.

Did you ever read _Twenty-Two Caliber Varmint Rifles_, by Landis? I had an
early edition and practically memorized it. That was another book I loaned
out and never got back. Sheesh.

No, but when I got interested in varmint rifles a friend had a 22-Krag
which was a full length 30-40 case, blown out to a less taper and
sharper shoulder necked down to 22 cal. It was a hi-wall with the
first Unertl scope I had seen....

That's what I had on my Browning 1885 (which is actually a Winchester
Hi-Wall). It was beautiful, in .223 caliber. I killed a javelina with it,
and a few woodchucks, but there are hardly any places to shoot it in NJ
sob. So I let it go -- for a very nice price, however.

Tony Mandile, then editor of _Arizona Hunter_, shot a photo of me and the
peeg I killed, with the Browning, that he was going to run on the cover of
his magazine. But another guy in our party killed one with his Desert Eagle
..44 Mag, and the handgun made a more dramatic photo, so he used that. My
photo may have run inside; if so, I had a Lyman scope on it at the time, and
it didn't look right to me. So I bought a Unertl 12X Varminter and had it
mounted on there. It looked perfect, and it was great for shooting 'chucks.

and really pretty wood. Lord I lusted
after that gun.

Well, the Krags, and the .22/'06s, and the other wildcat Roman candles were
interesting, but kind of over the top.


After I shot with him for a while I realized that the 22-krag really
wasn't that accurate a gun although it must have gotten some bodacious
velocity as with his hotter loads the bullets would disintegrate in
flight, so I built a single shot mauser with a heavy Douglas barrel.
22-250 and after tinkering with loads it would shoot clover-leaf size
5 shot groups at 100 yds. and better then 1 MOA at 200.

That's a lot more interesting. When I was 11 - 13 years old, the father of
my closest friend, a surgeon with plenty of money, had a fairly large
collection of custom wildcat rifles. (I lived in NE Penna. then, not in NJ).
I fell in love with those guns. I just live in the wrong place to shoot them
now.

See if you can find Landis's book. I think it's been reprinted. It's a
classic, from the golden age of varmint rifles.

--
Ed Huntress


John B.

On Mar 16, 2:15*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"John" wrote in message

...





On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:31:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
snip
I'd start with wirecut EDM, leaving about 0.005" on
each side, and finish with a shaper and lapping.
snip
How about making everything slightly undersize and the applying
Moglice or Turcite for the final fit-up. *Should be a very slick
action and if the Moglice is only a few thousandths thick the
compression should be tolerable. *Anyone know how Moglice/Turcite
is for impact loads? *If it works on ultrahigh speed million
dollar machine tools, it should work on an small bore rifle
action.

I really doubt if they'd handle that kind of pressure, George. Their
compression strength for those loaded plastics really isn't very high. If
you figure 40,000 psi over the cartridge head, and then translate that to
the specific load imposed by the back of the block against the receiver,
it's still quite high. It probably would pound the block back over time..

We tend to think of big cartridges as being harder for an action to
handle,
but the fact is that small, high-intensity cartridges typically develop
more
pressure. Then the size of the cartridge base enters into it. But for
specific loads (psi), small, hot ones can be a problem.

.22 Hornet typically doesn't develop a lot of pressure. But a K-Hornet
can.

Didn't P.O. Ackley do some tests of forces applied to the breechblock?
I seem to remember having read something in one of his books. Seems to
me that they took a Winchester lever action, 92? 94? and tested it. If
I remember the final test was to remove the locking blocks and fire.
The bold staid close.

I have the feeling that the test might have been in support of his
"improved" wildcats with much straighter case walls but it was
interesting.

Of I have alzimers :-)

I don't remember Ackley's writings. It was too long ago for me. I do
remember the .218 Improved Bee and the .17 Ackley Hornet. They were two of
the crazy wildcats that I was nuts about when I was a kid.

--
Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have the two-volume set, as well as a bunch of early '60s gun rags
where he was a regular writer. Most of his velocities were
"estimated" as well as pressures. Once the cheap chronos hit the
market, guys could see what they were actually getting for their
efforts and cash and a lot of the wildcats kind of faded. Then the
cheap surplus mail-order rifles faded off the scene in the late '60s
and the frenzy sort of died out. Wildcatters are still out there, but
the existing cartridges just about have all the ballistics holes
plugged for right now from mice to elephants. Benchresters are trying
to shave their one-hole group size by thousandths now, too. Most of
the improvements are in components now.

Stan

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 10:22:33 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:

On 3/14/2010 09:55, Snag wrote:
Wes wrote:
Louis wrote:

What are you making?
Andrew VK3BFA.

Small rifle action @ 22LR / 5mm / 22WMR / 22 K Hornet

What type of action?

Wes

Enquiring minds want to know !


It's a bit odd. A cylindrical falling block design from Bill Holmes.
Roughly 1" wide, 2" tall, 4" long. The falling block, er, shaft, is
.750" diameter.

I was talking to my neighbor about it, and there may be some EDM and
heat treating shops in the ares. EDM would make a rectangular falling
block so much easier.

Post lots of pictures as you progress. Id love to see its building.

Gunner


"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost