Results 1 to 17 of 17
12-12-2009, 01:13 PM #1
sako extractor in the rem 700 bolt
I'm looking into installing a sako extractor in a rem 700 bolt, I've been reading all the pro's and con's about it, Some say it isn't worth it and others swear by it. I have three rem 700's - two are 308's and one is a 6BR with a sako extractor. I was told that extraction works better with the sako extractor with short cases like the 6BR. I've had no problems with the 6BR,
But then I 've had no problems with the 308's either. Also I've read that the factory extractor cut should be eliminated and others say to leave it. Or the safety of the bolt is compromised when you mill out the slot. What are your ideas or experience with this subject ? Are there any other options ?
12-12-2009, 02:09 PM #2
well sounds like you have herd most everything people will tell you about them. i say cut it out and then bush back to size. the only reason we do it that way is cause it looks alot cleaner.
12-12-2009, 05:10 PM #3
I have both, but for safety reasons will not have anymore Sakos. If you see what happens when one blows down the raceways, you'll never have a Sako again.Butch
12-12-2009, 08:25 PM #4
Right on Butch, I have seen one blow also, this one was a 6.5X284.
Trouble is as I see it is the folks wanting a Sako extractor are prone to hot rodding the reloads and run high pressures. A blown case or primer is the last thing I want with a Sako type extractor in a M700!!!!
There was a well discussed incident a few years back when a Sako Extractor let go on a right hand M700. Problem is the shooter was a lefty and got the extractor in his eye.
I have done a couple, but never again.
Just think, you are violating the three rings of steel (Remington's Hot advertisment a long time ago about the M700) when you make that milling slot in the bolt. I would not do it, the liablity lawyers would have a field day if a shooter blew a case and was injured. I can here it now: "You did what to a safe action, causing it to blow out hot gauses and injure my client?"
My experience with extraction problems in a M700 is all it needs is a new extractor, the one designed for the M700. Cheap and quick fix. Buy them from Brownells, I think I have 10 or so in my spares for my rifles.
12-13-2009, 12:50 AM #5
Hello, after reading the posts and having shot many brands of guns, I did a google search on this. First of all I like sakos. Go to Benchrest Central and there is a thread on this. It appears nobody recomends a 700 conversion with a sako extractor. The moderator (Dennis Sorensen) claims a sako action is safe being its design of the bolt guide and extractor used together. I am just repeating what I have read. I would like to know , Butch L imput on this. I owned and reloaded for many 700s in the past with few problems. My final vote would be no on the extractor on the 700. Cheers, Alan
12-13-2009, 10:28 AM #6
I agree with Dennis in regards to the Sako extractor in the Sako. Pat Byrne, Benchrest Hall of Fame member, sent me photos of one of his Remingtons that had a Sako and it blew down the RH raceway. He was cut and burned around the face. The extractor penetrated the metal frame around the door behind him. Pat thought of his girlfriend, who is a hell of a shooter, and got rid of all his bolts with Sako extractors. Vicki is left handed. The extractor would have gone through her left eye and into her brain. It just ain't worth it.Butch
12-13-2009, 12:32 PM #7
I've seen a few cases blown out on rifles before, Two were a gas guns, One was a bolt action. I've seen a M1A blow up and send a part of a extractor right into the forehead of the shooter, minor injury - there was a military doctor there to apply first aid. Then I seen a AR15 blow out, that one just blew out the mag and jammed up the action - no injuries, and the last one was a win 70 pre 64 action that ruptured a case head and blasted hot gas and brass right into the face of the shooter, he was wearing safety glasses, that was the only thing that saved him. The first two blow outs were just plain being stupid and shooting someone else's reloads and the last one was a good shooter that was very careful about his reloads and just had a new case blow out, Maybe that one was excessive head space ? I've been shooting for at least ten years in competition and I admit I run my loads near the top and have been very careful in my reloading practices but sooner or later - I 'll see a blow out. I think I'll try this one with the factory extactor and see how it works, My other rifle with the sako extractor is almost due for a rebarrel and at that time I can change it.
12-13-2009, 03:42 PM #8
I have one on a .300 Whisper. The reason is sometimes I use .223 brass and sometimes I use reformed .221 Fireball Brass (when I can find it)
The host rifle was a .223, so using NATO brass or commercial .223 is no problem whatsoever.
The problem comes in when I use Fireball brass. It seems the head is slightly different .... maybe it is the diameter of the rim, maybe it is the thickness of the rim, or the angles involved, but my bolt knew the difference between the Fireball brass and the .223 brass.
It would extract the .223 brass every time .... not so much with the Fireball brass.
The Whisper doesn't generate the chamber pressures of the .223 or other centerfire rifle calibers. So, despite ruining the integrity of the 'ring' boltface, I see no problems with using a Sako style extractor on a Remington action that is being used as a host for a 300 Whisper. Hell - I use an all aluminum suppressor for my Whisper and the pressure at the muzzle does no damage at all.
But I wouldn't use the Sako style extractor on a full-house centerfire rifle.
12-13-2009, 06:39 PM #9
This is coming from theory, not practical experience, so please correct me If I'm completely wrong!
The 700 breach design alows more head to protude out of the chamber than most other actions, meaning that if you get a weak case head or a stoooopid load, then the case head is not as well supported as it is in some other actions,
it mitigates that by having the full bolt rim.
Otteson comments that the gas handling at the rear of a 700 action could be better, but as the action is very good at stopping gas escaping from the breach, that short coming was relatively un-important.
Properly made the sako style extractor needs less case head protrusion than a stock 700 action has, so it would be wise to lower the bolt face rim to correspond with the minimum head protrusion needed by the different extractor and re barrel and chamber to acheive the 3 thou clearence from the top of the lowered bolt face rim to the front end of the counterbore in the barrel.
That still leaves you with relatively poor gas handling at the back end of the race ways and around the bolt sleeve.
12-14-2009, 09:39 AM #10
Ok - I did some checking, The rem 700 bolt nose is a .150 counterbore to case head support ( bolt face ), the barrel is counterbored to .155, the case head web is about .200, you have at least .040 to .050 of the case head supported by the chamber. This seems to be the norm for rifle chambers, My Win 70 post 64 is the same as are my AR 15's and my LR 308. The Rem 700 just has the bolt nose inside a counterbore instead of a flat breach face that is common with other rifles. The Rem also moves the locking lugs back from the bolt face to clear the counterbore. So unless I'm missing something, it sounds like good case support to me.
12-17-2009, 01:18 AM #11
No comment on the safety aspect, you guys have pretty much said it all, but as far as being a better extraction system..... one of my customers who likes overly hot wildcats and has lots of sticky cases tried an experiment. He took one factory Remington bolt and one with a Sako extractor, turned a piece of brass on his lathe with an extractor groove on each end, and hooked both bolts onto the brass. Then he proceeded to use his hydraulic press to pull them apart, and THE SAKO ALWAYS LET GO FIRST!!!!! Talk about a head to head comparison! I haven't installed a Sako extractor since. I think it is just clever marketing and fixing something that ain't broke. The only exception I can see is that 6ppc brass formed from .220 russian cases have a thin case head web, and the Sako extractor allows for a shallower counterbore if you face off the bolt. Other than the PPC, I agree it is just beggin for a lawsuit.
12-19-2009, 06:12 PM #12
The bit I cant understand here, and Ive been checking this out for a long time now is, why dont we see this problem occuring in the Sako rifle itself. Making this change in the Remington 700 is basically doing what Sako have always been doing, the cutout is the same with the slot in the bolt and yet Sako never seem to have cases blow out. I just dont get this at all, am I missing something here.
12-20-2009, 06:11 PM #13
I never seen a Sako action - But - I bet the action is designed around the extractor and they must direct the gases differently or cover the bolt raceway somehow. I can look right down the bolt raceway and see the Sako extractor on my Rem 700 and it is right in line with my face. I can see big problems if the rifle ever had a blow out.
01-02-2010, 12:49 PM #14
OK, finaly got to my copies of Otteson vol 1 & 2 lastnight, and lost the first copy of this post this morning.
The following are Otteson’s figures for how much a case head protrudes out of the breech end of the barrel with the bolt locked.
Ottesson reckoned on typical mass production clearances between the top of a bolt rim and the breech face of a barrel being around 10 thou, and diametrical clearence between the bolt nose and barrel counterbore of a Rem 700 being around 10 thou. And a simillar 10 thou diametrical clearence between the walls of the bolt head counterbore and the case rim and head. Because of difficulty achieving concentricity in the investment cast Ruger 77, it has a 30 thou diametrical clearance between case head and bolt face rim.
He cautions that a re barrelling a rem 700 to a closer fit makes the rifle much more sensitive to dirt, like unburned powder grains or stray cleaning brush bristles.
Case Head Protrusions after Otteson
03 Springfld_______ __0.147 to 0.148
700 Rem____________0.160 plus any chamber mouth radius
Sako 461 (Vixen) _____0.107 annular ring around breech face of bbl for extr nose clearence
Win mod 70 (post 64)__0.125
Weatherby Mk V_______0.13”
Savage 110__________Pre ’66 (rem type extr) 0.144”--- Post 66 win mod 70 type extr 0.128”
Ruger 77_____________0.132” (push feed – controlled feed may be less – I really don’t know)
(Dovetail shaped lugs)___0.120
Browning BBR_________0.160 (0.13 counterbore, +0.015 clearence + chamfer)
US Patent numbers:
Sako type extr 431,670 (Paul Mauser)
Win mod 70 / savage 110 type extr 431,669 (Paul mauser)
Rem 700 breech 2,585,195 M H Walker Apparently with v good description of tests.
The Mauser 98 sets the standard, as the thin extractor allows very deep seating, however this is achieved at the cost of cutting down the bolt rim for most of its circumference, and leaving a great gaping hole in the receiver inner collar for the extractor to go through.
The Sako which Otteson measured had very small case head protrusion, however at that time, the protrusion was not matched by the bolt face rim, so there was considerable potential for gas leakage into the action if a case head failed, and no measures at the rear of the action to deflect it away from the firer’s face. this may have changed since then.
As I posted previously, Remmington’s engineers achieved excellent shrouding with the unbroken bolt rim and the barrel counterbore, however the unbroken rim required a deeper bolt head counterbore to provide a lip to hold the little extractor in there. They also neglected gas deflecting measures at the rear of the action, to keep gas and debris leaking down the race ways out of the firer’s eyes, as they had such good gas sealing up front.
Using figures for the Sako Vixen head protrusion, if you can achieve that with a “Sako type” extractor on a Rem 700, then there is another 57 thou of the case that could be inside the chamber if the bolt face rim is reduced to allow the barrel to be set further back.
What importance is minimal case head protrusion?
So long as the cases are good and no one has been stupid enough to barrel the rifle to expose anything other than the solid case head webb, then all the actions listed have proved to be ok
For high pressure loadings, or with cases which have thin heads or dodgy metallurgy, or long history of re-loading or dodgy storage (eg corrosive or damp conditions, heat etc) things might be more dubious...
Bear in mind that the commercial actions covered were all developed in the 25 to 30 years after WWII, when western manufacture had the margins to support v good quality production.
Mauser’s military turnbolt design work was done when metallurgy and quality control were poorer, and case head failures were not so uncommon, and it was a military advantage not to loose to many eyes and faces from your troops due to case head failures.
With western manufacture having to cut costs to compete with Chinese workers paid less than $1 /day or manufacture being outsourced to such places, I think we are probably due a few more dodgy case heads.
In the Custom bench rest actions that Otteson covered, almost all used the win mod 70 type sliding extractor and had lugs continuing up to the bolt nose to support this, but in bolts that were otherwise copied from the Remmington 700. This is due to thin heads in some batches of .220 Russian brass, and also due to the high pressure loadings, tight throats and bullets seated to touch or just clear of the lands. Having bench rest loading and ejection ports on the left side also gives incentive to avoid case head blow outs.
The advantages of the mod 70 type extractor for allowing deep seating can be seen with the Savage 110, which started with a rem type extractor (mounted outside the bolt counterbore to get around Remmington’s patent) and went to a Win Mod 70 type extractor. Bolt face counterbore reduced from 0.134” to 0.118”.
Last edited by Alpacca Fortyfive; 01-02-2010 at 03:19 PM. Reason: poor grammar
01-03-2010, 08:03 AM #15
Funny thing here, wonder why the custom action guys who are making the Remington clones are almost all utilizing the sako extractor?
01-03-2010, 11:58 AM #16
Thanks for the information, I'll have to get a copy of Otteson books. I'm still building my library of gunsmithing books, trying to pick up every book I can. I still think I will go with the rem extractor.
01-03-2010, 07:17 PM #17
i personally don't like the angle the sako extractor has to extract the spent case at in a remington style action. it is frustrating when a case bounces back into your action because it hit the windage knob on the scope.