Investment cast recievers ?


PDA






schromf
December 12, 2004, 09:01 PM
I was doing some research reading this weekend and ran across a statement I was unaware of at min and critical of for lack of proof, but it may be entirely valid. The statement was basically:

The post 1964 model 70 Winchesters were investment cast......and that the barrels had been broached before, but were changed to hammer forged in 1964.

So my first question is anybody know the real scoop on this? Fact or fiction?

My next question is does anybody make a non investment cast rifle anymore? I know Ruger is, assuming the above statement is correct Winchester is, I thought Remington was still using billet, what about CZ, Browning, Savage, the new Sako's I think are cast, I know Kimbers are, Dakota?

Are there any non investment cast revievers made anymore if so who makes them?

If you enjoyed reading about "Investment cast recievers ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JNewell
December 12, 2004, 09:35 PM
I could be mistaken, but I thought that the cast M70 receivers went all the way back to the 1964 changes.

schromf
December 12, 2004, 09:45 PM
Jnewell,

My bust thats a typo on my part, post 1964 is correct, I edit and change the original post.

Note: I type like a 6 thumbed Chimp.

Jim K
December 13, 2004, 04:06 PM
That story is not true. The post-64 Winchester Model 70 receiver is forged, for the first time; the pre-64 receiver was machined from stock. The story about the post-64 receivers being cast came from the fact that the forgings were left unfinished on the bottom and appeared to some folks to be cast. The Model 94 receiver is cast, and I assume the variations (9410, 9422) also are.

Ruger casts all their rifle receivers. Remington 700 receivers are drilled and machined from round bar stock. AFAIK, Savage receivers are machined from stock. Going by the appearance of the receivers in recent blow-up photos, SAKO receivers are cast, or at least those were. The receiver material had nothing to do with the blowups; they were apparently due to cutting too deep flutes in the barrels.

Jim

Master Blaster
December 13, 2004, 04:17 PM
Here is something interesting, Remington is at the forefront of MIM technology.
Some folks call this scintered pot metal which it is not of course.

Look at the remington website and read all about it.

The bottom line is that those remington 700 rifles have a considerable number of MIM parts on them. Bolt handle, bolt, sights, trigger parts, who knows what???

So what parts are MIM on a remington 700???????

Read about it here

http://www.remingtonpmpd.com/

DT Guy
December 13, 2004, 06:16 PM
MIM is not sintering.

And while MIM remains controversial among a sector of the public, it's used in a wide variety of gun parts. It's also used in many, many things in almost every industry you could name that uses small, machined and complex parts.

MIM, done well, can be the BEST method for making many non-stressed parts, like bolt heads.

Sintering is an older technology that forms metal powders to shape using heat and pressure.


Larry

Onmilo
December 13, 2004, 11:41 PM
Sintered pot metal,,,,LOL
Ruger perfected the investment casting techniques being used in gun production today.
MiM may not refinish well and will not generally agree to heavy handed "polishing" but it is definately not sintered pot metal.
Look at Chip McCormick .45 parts and then look at the frame from a Jennings or Raven pistol to see the differences.

If you enjoyed reading about "Investment cast recievers ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!