Is a "lightened" receiver just asking for trouble?

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rifleman1st

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2005
Messages
5
I'm looking at picking up a custom rifle. The one I have my eye on has had the receiver lighted by ports being cut thru it in several areas. Does this weaken it? I do alot of stomping in thick brush and my rifles see some mud during my hunts. Will crud and or water enter the receiver and cause grief? I have had a winchester CRF bolt freeze shut on me before :mad: These ports seem like they are begging to do just that.

Thanks for your input.
 
welcome to THR

what kind of receiver?

stamped sheet metal like an HK or AK? milled aluminum like an AR? heavy steel like a rem700/win70?
 
Generally speaking, all that metal is there for a reason.

They is no way I'd shoot a rifle that's had the receiver 'lightened' by some shade tree machinist.

BSW
 
This isn't a .22?

I'd run, not walk.

Modern firearms are designed the way they are for several reasons. Protecting the user from a split shell or overloaded cartridge are just some of the reasons that rifle was designed the way it was.

BSW
 
I think it depends on the reputation of the smith. It may be appropriate as a feature of a custom mountain rifle, where the hunter is carrying it all over the place basically to fire it once.
 
Just buy a Kimber. Cheaper, and they are designed to be lightweight from the beginning. They use an almost identical action as a Winchester.
 
Mostly I would agree, but seriously what "pressure" is there on the rear half (above the trigger, where the bolt slides out, opposite end from the chamber)? As long as you don't reduce the structural integrity, then I don't see that being a problem.
 
Mostly I would agree, but seriously what "pressure" is there on the rear half (above the trigger, where the bolt slides out, opposite end from the chamber)? As long as you don't reduce the structural integrity, then I don't see that being a problem.
Click to expand...

Because a lot of the rear of the receiver on a Mauser type action is there to handle gas from a ruptured cartridge, is where the 3rd safety lug is located, and is where the bolt unlocking cam is.

That's why.

BSW
 
Depending on what chambering is used, the gas-handling provisions may be something of a non-issue. I'd reserve any judgement until at least knowing that little tidbit.

It's also possible this gun was a demill that's been re-jiggered into functioning :confused:

TCB
 
What do you mean by "ports" and where are they? You need to post pics so the mods can be seen. I've seen material removed from surplus Mauser actions that won't hurt the action strength. M70 Winchester? Don't know where ports could be cut.
 
from what you say about brush hunting and getting crap in ths action. one big hole in the top allows for lots of crap to get in let alone other little cut outs....like said before, hard to judge without pics, but I cant justify cutting up the action to save weight. how much steel can be removed before it really starts adding up to anything significant. skinny barrels and lightweight synthetic stocks is where you save weight. tompsons new dimension rifle uses a barrwl extension for bolt lock up. this allows for the action to be made of aluminum. there a little bulky, but I think they are nice light rifles, though ive never held one myself... just some opinions......
 
Not all metal is there for structural integrity, there is a lot that can go. With that said; as my buddy says, "If you want to carry around two or three less pounds, take a **** before you leave." Toilet paper is a whole lot cheaper than custom rifle work.
 
http://www.mgarmsinc.com/MGA-UltraLight-Rifle.html

These guys have been making a lightened match rifle for years. Pretty expensive, but nice work. Looks like they use Rem 700 and Win 70 actions. I used to live near them and my son played baseball with the owners son. Seems like the also used Weatherby Vanguard actions also back in the day. They have a very good reputation.
 
Not all metal is there for structural integrity, there is a lot that can go.
Click to expand...

Agreed. A lot has to do with how it is machined and what looks good. If you did a finite element analysis of the stresses in a receiver when it is shot, I bet you could find several spots where material can be safely removed.

That said, it is pretty much impossible to say how holes would affect the strength of the receiver without seeing pics. Size, shape, and location of the holes all play a role in whether stress concentrations are created.

Also, it just sounds gimmicky. Like when Homer Simpson is buying a car with gunshot holes in the hood, and the car salesman tells him they are "speed holes." The entire receiver may only weight a couple pounds, how much can really be (safely) removed via these holes?
 
If you did a finite element analysis of the stresses in a receiver when it is shot, I bet you could find several spots where material can be safely removed.
Click to expand...

You think the guy who drilled holes and or slots in a Model 70 did a finite element analysis?

I doubt it.

BSW
 
You think the guy who drilled holes and or slots in a Model 70 did a finite element analysis?
Click to expand...

No but maybe the company that bshepherd linked has done it. Or maybe they've done some H-P testing of their own. It seems like they cut some slots in low-stress areas. Again, I can't imagine it saves much weight, but it looks cool, and I wouldn't be worried about shooting it. Again, without seeing the size/shape/location, neither of us can really say with any certainty. Mostly I just think the cost/benefit ratio is lacking.
 
Ultralight-action.jpg

Ooh, fancy! :D I'll bet that's just as effective as skeletonizing triggers for weight reduction :rolleyes:. Looks totally cool, though. Methinks a Ti receiver and barrel jacket would be stronger, lighter, and even cheaper, though...

"Can be built as light as 4 3/4 lbs"
If you're shooting anything above 308, though, just...ow :eek:

TCB
 
That kind of action has no real metal to give. Run, don't walk.
Click to expand...

I would agree with that. A M70 is fine as is, removing metal will just make it more flexible, and I would not want to be stuck with an expensive unknown.
 
Building rifles on actions with lightening holes since the Mountain Rifle craze back in the 80's & 90's. Those warning of dire consequences don't know what they don't know. Metal is removed from non-critical areas and the actions and rifles have held up fine. The process only removes a few ounces of weight, but it's only a part of the overall package, including slimmer barrel profiles, hollowed out bolt knobs, hollowed stocks and other tricks.

Yes, dirt & water can get in through the holes. If that's going to be a problem, don't get the lightening holes. You can build a fine light weight rifle without them
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
T53 has amazed me!
Replies
11
Views
710
Picknlittle
P
T
  • Locked
I hate to do this, but I gotta rant about my Nylon 66
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
JNewell
J
LoonWulf
  • Locked
New SKS project.
2 3
Replies
74
Views
4K
LoonWulf
LoonWulf
C
  • Locked
Thought's and Ideas on my new AK?
Replies
4
Views
563
DP03
D
S
  • Locked
600 yard shooting and trouble understanding how to use a mildot scope
Replies
16
Views
1K
BigG
B
Back
Top