Author Topic: How is the quality of the steel on the low end bolt center-fire rifles? (Read 2324 times)

His lordship. · « **on:** October 10, 2011, 06:57:26 AM »

It is nice to see a good variety of very affordable bolt action center-fire rifles being available to the gun buyer these days. It is obvious from looking at several at my local dealer that I can see why they got the cost down, matte sprayed on finish, trigger guards molded in, plastic other parts, etc.

How is the steel quality on these, will they hold up to bench use as well as the higher end rifles? I mostly do bench shooting, and occasional hunting so I can tell after awhile if a gun is going to last many years.

I have not historically kept most of my center-fire rifles all that long, traded, sold them. I have been very happy with the CZ line, except for the 550 series. My CZ 527 is still excellent after 10 years of use, and my CZ 452 is rock solid as well.

Been looking at the budget American ones as an option, Remington, Marlin, Savage, Mossberg, TC, etc. Some of these makers have gone through major buyouts and plant closings, so that has me nervous as morale can be affected. I used to work for some American manufacturers where there was outright sabotage or indifference in the product.

Anyone heard of the makers using cheaper steel to make the low-end guns?

Thanks.

strut64 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 10, 2011, 11:38:32 AM »

My knowledge on this subject is dated since I retired from engineering several years ago. However, it is my understanding that there are 2 alloys in Common use for barrels and receivers. Chrome moly - 4140 for regular steel and for stainless - 416. I don't think there has been any change. These are the elements that must stand up to the highpressures and shock of shooting. Any manufacturer who would deviate from this practice would be putting themselves in a bad postion should there be failure and injury. I think you can buy any rifle with some confidence in their use of safe alloys in high pressure parts. When you get to exotic custom firearms all bets are off and for imports well they would have to ssrvive i the same environment as domestic stuff. the alloy designations may be quite different.

MZ5 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 10, 2011, 01:31:43 PM »

You'll see 410 stainless as well, but possibly mainly from the Japanese? It's a better steel than 416, but it's not used universally by the Japanese. Ruger was using 410, as I understand it, on some of their stainless parts in the past, but not all. I have no idea what they're casting with today.

I would personally expect that, if a manufacturer could make the same item out of something less expensive, they'd do it so long as it resulted in a product of similar quality. The exception would be if they're 'repositioning' a particular product line or brand name. Then I would expect them to consider a wider array of alternatives.

parkergunshop · « **Reply #3 on:** October 10, 2011, 02:57:52 PM »

In addition to 4140 Chrome/Moly Steel and 416 Stainless Steel, some manufacturers use 4350 a Nickel/Chrome/Moly alloy.
4140 and 4350 are generally a little harder on the Rockwell C. Scale than 416 Stainless Steel. Stainless steel barrels are more easily damaged from the miss use of cleaning rods and cleaning attachments.
Winchester/Remington and Savage all use 4140 or 416 Steel.
Weatherby and many of the custom benchrest action makers use 4340 or 4350 steel with the receivers being heat treated to between rockwell 40-45C and the bolts between rockwell 50-55C. These are the more premium steels used.
Remingtons are generally 4140 steel between rockwell 35-40C for the receivers with the bolts being a little over Rockwell 40C.
The design and heat treatment have about as much impact or more on action strength as the material used
The one of the strongest actions ever made the Jap 6.5 of World War II used a high carbon steel equivalent to 1075-1085 at about a Rockwell 40C. for the receiver and Rockwell 48C for the bolt. Military Mausers are generally made of 1035 steel and basically case hardened on the exterior like a breakopen shotgun and left softer on the interior. P14 and 1917 Enfields and the later series of 1903 Springfields used 2340 Nickel Steel. I just drilled a gas port hole in a P14 Enfield bolt today and wore out two carbide bits due to the extra hard heat treatment over Rockwell 50C.
CZ does an excellent job of heat treatment the VZ24 CZ Mausers are some of the most desirable military Mauser actions their heat treatment is never in question unlike some of the other manufacturers.

Brithunter · « **Reply #4 on:** October 11, 2011, 12:21:16 AM »

A question .............................

When did Weatherby start making their own receivers?

As far as I was aware they have always used others or had them made and never actually made anything them selves.

I would have to agree that CZ did a backwards step with the 550. They claim the re-design and re-style was to suit the American market and Magnum Research had a lot of input. I much prefer the ZKK 600 series

.

mechanic · « **Reply #5 on:** October 11, 2011, 02:06:08 AM »

If I remember rightly, and it's been a long time, mild cold roll steel will rockwell about 30c. Gun metal is typically about 40c. A knife should be in the range of 44-60c. A hammer is typically 50+.

Ben

MZ5 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 11, 2011, 05:25:14 PM »

Quote from: parkergunshop on October 10, 2011, 02:57:52 PM

Weatherby and many of the custom benchrest action makers use 4340 or 4350 steel with the receivers being heat treated to between rockwell 40-45C and the bolts between rockwell 50-55C. These are the more premium steels used.

That's interesting, as it's Weatherby's Vanguard (don't know about the Mark V) that I understand to use the 410 stainless. Apparently, Weatherby uses better materials even in their 'value' rifles.

Brithunter · « **Reply #7 on:** October 12, 2011, 12:00:13 AM »

Quote from: MZ5 on October 11, 2011, 05:25:14 PM

Quote from: parkergunshop on October 10, 2011, 02:57:52 PM
Weatherby and many of the custom benchrest action makers use 4340 or 4350 steel with the receivers being heat treated to between rockwell 40-45C and the bolts between rockwell 50-55C. These are the more premium steels used.

That's interesting, as it's Weatherby's Vanguard (don't know about the Mark V) that I understand to use the 410 stainless. Apparently, Weatherby uses better materials even in their 'value' rifles.

Ahhh it's interesting that people don't seem to want to know the truth.

You Vanguard is a re-badged Howa.. Weatherby DO NOT MAKE ANY OF THEIR OWN RIFLES!

parkergunshop · « **Reply #8 on:** October 12, 2011, 02:30:07 AM »

Brithunter,
Weatherby has never made their own actions, Roy Weatherby started out using 1917 Enfields and even FN Mausers before manufacturing started for the Mark V, the Mark V was initally made using 4350 Nickel/Crome/Moly Steel by Sauer In Germany I believe before production was moved to Japan.
I don't know the alloy for the non-stainless Vanguards or the Howas, but suspect that it is 4140.
Note: a few of the early Mark V's were made by the investment casting process in Southern California before the mass production moved to Sauer. The casting process was not perfect in that voids were sometimes left in the cast receivers. I believe that Ruger casts their receivers and other parts in a spinning mold to avoid the early Weatherby issue of voids.

mannyrock · « **Reply #9 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:44:57 AM »

Guys,

The major costs of making any new rifle are labor and equipment. The cost of the raw steel is very very small in comparison to the cost of making the rifle as a whole. So, I don't think you are going to have to worry about some major manufacturer switching to soft or non-spec steel, just to save $5.00. They can save more than that by just making the suppliers bid in different manners.

Moreover, all of their testing equipment, machining, computers and specs are geared to the good steel. They aren't going to redo all of that to save a few bucks.

Finally, as mentioned in a prior post, changing to cheaper steel would create huge liability for tiny savings. The company lawyers won't sign off on that.

Best Regard,

Mannyrock

MZ5 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 12, 2011, 05:24:42 PM »

Quote from: Brithunter on October 12, 2011, 12:00:13 AM

You Vanguard is a re-badged Howa.. Weatherby DO NOT MAKE ANY OF THEIR OWN RIFLES!

That is completely irrelevant. Weatherby can specify different steel for the Vanguards than what Howa uses for their own-branded receivers.

It's just like how NAPA-branded motor oil in the USA is made by Ashland oil, the manufacturer of Valvoline. Nevertheless, the formulations are different.

His lordship. · « **Reply #11 on:** October 21, 2011, 01:02:48 PM »

The reason I asked this is I have had guns that used soft steel in the past, the Italian black powder replicas, the Spanish made guns, and my cheap Raven made out of pot metal. It is disheartening to really take care of a gun with lots of lube and see it wear fast, or stretch. I tend to bench shoot my centerfire rifles, so they do see some honest use.

Thanks for the info, I will be able to concentrate on each rifle's features for a purchase, rather than thinking I might have another Pietta cap and ball gun!

Brithunter · « **Reply #12 on:** October 21, 2011, 11:43:08 PM »

Quote from: MZ5 on October 12, 2011, 05:24:42 PM

Quote from: Brithunter on October 12, 2011, 12:00:13 AM
You Vanguard is a re-badged Howa.. Weatherby DO NOT MAKE ANY OF THEIR OWN RIFLES!

That is completely irrelevant. Weatherby can specify different steel for the Vanguards than what Howa uses for their own-branded receivers.

It's just like how NAPA-branded motor oil in the USA is made by Ashland oil, the manufacturer of Valvoline. Nevertheless, the formulations are different.

I'll wager that if you test a Howa 1500 and a Weatherby Vanguard they will be exactly the same. The name Weatherby just means your paying more for the same product.

Now it's your money not mine so in reality I don't care if you pay more or not.

However there still seems to be a lot of folks that believe Weatherby are a manufacturer rather than a retailer. Sharp marketing and advertising has encouraged those beliefs and not only it is false but it's also underhand just another good reason to avoid their products in my view. If they are not open and up front about who makes their stuff what else are they hiding is my view. Of course this is a personal opinion and worth just as much as anyone else's

.

Edit:- Whoops I said retailer when in fact they're a wholesaler

selling to the trade rather than the general public.

MZ5 · « **Reply #13 on:** October 22, 2011, 01:37:19 PM »

I can understand your point, Brit. I would expect, then, that if you were in the USA, you'd avoid the purchase of Winchester, Browning, and RCBS equipment, then? I'm not too familiar with European firearms-related vendors. You avoid Zeiss and Swarovski, I expect, since they contract with far-eastern manufacturers to do their production work? Just curious.

Brithunter · « **Reply #14 on:** October 23, 2011, 02:03:46 PM »

Quote from: MZ5 on October 22, 2011, 01:37:19 PM

I can understand your point, Brit. I would expect, then, that if you were in the USA, you'd avoid the purchase of Winchester, Browning, and RCBS equipment, then? I'm not too familiar with European firearms-related vendors. You avoid Zeiss and Swarovski, I expect, since they contract with far-eastern manufacturers to do their production work? Just curious.

As new optics are beyond my pockets reach except on a very rare occasion I buy used so I get what I can find in my price bracket. I do try to buy the best I can so that's why I have makes such as Lisenfeld, Schmidt & Bender ( a rare new buy), Khales, Pecar, Meopta, Leupold, Bushnell (old 3x scope chief) I do have a couple of the Tasco Titans, the early 1st model has the same turret adjustments as the Schmidt & Bender by the look of them, the later 2nd mode is not so good IMHO.

I would avoid the purchase of a lot of the new model rifles as I feel they are poorly made when compared to those made 30+ years ago. The new Winchester plant looks good in their promo video and I have read good things about the rifles so it's possible I would look at them. Am not a fan of the A-Bolt they don't feel right to me nor does the Remington 700 and I intensely dislike the tubular construction they use on it.

As for RCBS I mislaid my neck chamfering tool so went to buy a new one but once I saw and handled one went home wihtout the new one and searched harder for my original and did find it again. The new ones are crappily made and even look really cheap. There is not way I was forking out over $30 US for such rubbish. Have not brought any dies RCBS or other wise new for a couple of years now butt he last new ones were RCBS ones for the .243 Win cartridge. The 25-06 ones are also RCBS but I got them used off the auction site.

Now a British shooting web based programme did a tour of the Zeiss factory and they make it all in house except the raw blocks of glass which are brought in then very carefully inspected for clarity and light transmission before being cut into lenses. The Conquest line is made in the US and was squarely aimed at the US market as I understand it. If you want one in the UK it seems to have to buy from abroard. Now if they use Asian or far eastern parts $:-\$ I don't know but their Klassic line does not. As far as I am aware Swaroski also make their stuff in house. They certainly did a few years ago when a buddy who works for a gunshop and sells lots of their optics did a tour of the plant.

I have never been a fan of badge engineering and due to this even if I could afford one would not consider buying a Mauser 03. Heck they are not even based in Obendorf now a some holding Co brought the name and they are now made at the same place that assemble the Blaser rifles. Note I said assemble as I don't know how much Blaser actually make them selves if anything. Sadly it seems to be the modern way and I think it stinks.

The world has got a far worse place despite what the politicos tell us. All in the name of the Great God excessive profit.

The only good thing I can say about Roy Weatherby is that he could sell snow to the eskimos.

MZ5 · « **Reply #15 on:** October 24, 2011, 07:33:25 AM »

Quote from: Brithunter on October 23, 2011, 02:03:46 PM

As for RCBS I mislaid my neck chamfering tool so went to buy a new one but once I saw and handled one went home wihtout the new one and searched harder for my original and did find it again. The new ones are crappily made and even look really cheap. There is not way I was forking out over $30 US for such rubbish.

I have had a very similar feeling/observation with many small hand tools in the last few years.

Quote from: Brithunter on October 23, 2011, 02:03:46 PM

I have never been a fan of badge engineering...

Nor have I, mate.

Quote from: Brithunter on October 23, 2011, 02:03:46 PM

The only good thing I can say about Roy Weatherby is that he could sell snow to the eskimos.

LOL! Yep, gotta give him that!

454Puma · « **Reply #16 on:** October 24, 2011, 11:45:14 AM »

Chris D
You need not to worry about the Quality of steel used with any of the Major Rifle manufactures !
Savage makes a quality Bolt gun- accurate right out of the box- bench gun! They can be pricey though for the Bench models. I've own only there hunters, had the 110F that I just traded in to get a new Series 11 hunter in .223 Rem. Another accurate right out the box no tweaking nessesary Savage!

Drilling Man · « **Reply #17 on:** October 25, 2011, 07:54:21 AM »

Quote from: Brithunter on October 23, 2011, 02:03:46 PM

Quote from: MZ5 on October 22, 2011, 01:37:19 PM
I can understand your point, Brit. I would expect, then, that if you were in the USA, you'd avoid the purchase of Winchester, Browning, and RCBS equipment, then? I'm not too familiar with European firearms-related vendors. You avoid Zeiss and Swarovski, I expect, since they contract with far-eastern manufacturers to do their production work? Just curious.

I have never been a fan of badge engineering and due to this even if I could afford one would not consider buying a Mauser 03. Heck they are not even based in Obendorf now a some holding Co brought the name and they are now made at the same place that assemble the Blaser rifles. Note I said assemble as I don't know how much Blaser actually make them selves if anything. Sadly it seems to be the modern way and I think it stinks.

This isn't a "modern" idea, nor an Weatherby idea...

Even your H&H was buying complete actions from other makers waaaaaay back when, just as many other gun makers were...

DM

gunnut69 · « **Reply #18 on:** October 27, 2011, 07:57:56 PM »

The MK V rifle is made in the US by a former defense contractor.. at least that was the last contract that I heard of. Weatherby doesn't hide the fact they don't make the rifles them selves, it was in a magazine sold in the US that the article was found. Disremember which but that doesn't matter. Most manufacturers use subcontractors to one degree or another and that's OK by me.. Ruger started out with all barrels being outsourced and when they switched the 77/22 hornets had a lot of problems..most were returned.. I understand they figured out how to make barrels but a barrel maker already knows how and the consumer pays for the learning curve. I've dealt with RCBS for many years but haven't for sometime. When I did have such an occasion their service was perfect. Perhaps even better than that. Certainly better than some other companies I've had the misfortune to deal with. Winchester was terrble at least until the customer service department was shifted to Browning workers.. Some companies have cut quality and that's a shame. Remington makes the 'express' line of shotguns. They even come pre-wornout... A local shop returned 4 of 5 in one shipment for not being able to sysle ammunition..but Reminton still makes the Wingmaster series..a fine shotgun, albeit a bit pricier.. Even such old timey outfits as LeFever, L.C.Smith and Parker used barrles made by several overseas makers...

Brithunter · « **Reply #19 on:** October 29, 2011, 03:13:43 AM »

Actually to put in context BSA was the only British manufacturer to make complete bolt action rifles. Parker-Hale brought in Mauser actions then later had the action for the Midland 2100 made for them. It seems they did make out of solid billet he ill fated M82 or M84 actions.

BSA made everything. Later they moved to using SILE of Italy wood. previously they made their own in the Stocking shop which incidently the home to BSA Guns Ltd who make the pre charged air rifles.

Firms like Hollands do make the actions for the SxS rifles. Not quite sure if the forge them of have the forgings made for them, way outta my pockets reach so it;s rather accademic to me. Back during WW2 the BSA barrel shop covered several acres. 5 Acres of it were destroyed in an air raid one night. One reason I am a fan of the BSA's is the way they were made not to mention the feel and smoothness of them in operation.

Weatherby did a video of the new MkV production and I watched it. As I recall the contractor was still doing defence work and had a special bit set aside for the Weatherby Line.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #20 on:** October 29, 2011, 04:32:25 AM »

Quote from: Brithunter on October 29, 2011, 03:13:43 AM

Firms like Hollands do make the actions for the SxS rifles. Not quite sure if the forge them of have the forgings made for them, way outta my pockets reach so it;s rather accademic to me.

Holland does NOT make all of their actions, it wasn't too long ago they were turning out single shots on reworked Ruger Number ones.

In the past they bought quite a few of their DR actions, so it's not uncommom at all.

DM

Brithunter · « **Reply #21 on:** November 01, 2011, 03:19:55 AM »

Forgive me but the Ruger No1 is not a SxS (Side by Side) is it

. Also as I pointed out I am not sure if they forge the actions, cast them or have them done for them.

Drilling Man · « **Reply #22 on:** November 01, 2011, 12:41:18 PM »

Well, forgive me.... Does that not point out that buying actions to sell with your name on them isn't a new or Wby. thing?? That was my poing all along.

DM

Brithunter · « **Reply #23 on:** November 03, 2011, 06:30:34 AM »

Ahhh the point is DM what actually does Weatherby make? as far as I am aware Nothing. It's all somebody elses work.