Gunsmithing Badger M2008 and M2013

[JFComfort]

I have been kicking around the idea of selling my barreled action (Stiller action and Rock barrel) and switching to a Badger M2013 or Surgeon 591. I just want to wait until my 6.5 CM POF shows up so I have a rifle to shoot the local and regional matches with.

The portion I'm confused over is the inner collet that interfaces with the bolt nose/lugs on the M2013. I looked at the drawings for the M2008 and didn't see anything about it. I know I'm probably thinking its more complicated than it actually is but some clarification would be much appreciated.

 

[RADcustom]

It's not really a collet. It's a breaching ring that allows them to machine the inner locking lugs separate from the action

 

[Onemoretime]

I have an M2008 and pre-Ordered an M2013.

Here's what Marty had to say in a recent email to me.

-------------------------------
The M2013 is the same basic receiver, it will fit in the same inlet and use the same barrels as the M2008.

We changed the look of the action with some lightening cuts, and a 1 piece bolt stop.

The firing pin has been modified to improve bolt lift.

The M1913 Mil Standard (Picatinny) rail has been switched to Aluminum to same weight.

We have also changed the Round bolt knob to out Mini Tactical knob.

We are taking pre-orders starting 18 Feb with delivery starting in mid March.

 

[JFComfort]

It's not really a collet. It's a breaching ring that allows them to machine the inner locking lugs separate from the action

How is it secured inside the receiver?

 

[Blanman]

Hey man, here are some photos I just found, scroll down about a quarter of the page and you'll start seeing them.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_5/254260_badger_actions__M2008__are_available_now___.html

 

[Rhys]

It is sandwiched in the reciever by the barrel. Personaly I really like the setup. very consistent measurements from action to action.

 

[turbo54]

It is sandwiched in the reciever by the barrel. Personaly I really like the setup. very consistent measurements from action to action.

Plus, if it got buggered, say by running the rifle sandy or gritty, it can easily be removed and polished, or replaced.

 

[JFComfort]

The more I'm learning about the M2013 action the more I am liking it! Marc with Spartan rifles explained it to me last night. Looking forward to when yours comes in Boomer!

 

[jbell]

It is a very good design, that is how AI does it as well (althought the specifics are a little different but the idea is the same). I am getting intrested now that they say they have modified the firing pin to improve bolt lift as that was my only complaint with the M2008.

 

[Rprecision]

How is this differant from a AI ?

 

[Desert_Racer]

tag...........

 

[Turk]

It's not bonded to the chassis,no three pos safety, I guess you can bond it if you never cared about your trigger. Personally I like them! All of Marty's stuff is top shelf.

 

[Seventh_DOF]

It is a very good design, that is how AI does it as well (althought the specifics are a little different but the idea is the same). I am getting intrested now that they say they have modified the firing pin to improve bolt lift as that was my only complaint with the M2008.

When my M2008 was new, I could lift the rifle with the bolt knob. And, it's a 17 lb F/TR gun! Glad to heard Marty is addressing the bolt lift issue.

 

[turbo54]

When my M2008 was new, I could lift the rifle with the bolt knob. And, it's a 17 lb F/TR gun! Glad to heard Marty is addressing the bolt lift issue.

I have M2008 serial number 22, which is a gen1 unit; a Sniper'shide "Valkyrie".

It had a pretty stiff lift, plus, GAP cerakoted the action and bolt when the built it, resulting in a bolt/receiver fit that aerospace engineers would have been proud of. Was great in the man cave, but in the field it would bind up like your sphincter after eating nothing but meat and cheese for a week.

I was having some light strikes on primers...

Called Marty. He asked me to send the bolt in.

They worked it over with new firing pin, spring, cocking piece, ground the bolt OD ~.002", and reground the cocking cam - for free.

Fixed every issue, including heavy bolt lift. If the M2013 has better bolt lift than *improved* M2008s, they'll be sweet.

 

[Seventh_DOF]

JFComfort, you're aware that the Badger is a flat bottom action and that you'll have serious stock work to do, right?

 

[Wheres-Waldo]

Turbo,

Did you notice any difference in the cocking cam itself?

I hear about guys like GAP and Marty reworking this or that to improve the lift, but I cant get any details on how its done...

Maybe a picture or 3?

 

[Adam B]

I handled the 2013 at SHOT, it is was a nice improvement in regards of a lighter bolt lift and overall weight of the action. All of the updates/improvements were very well thought out.

 

[turbo54]

Turbo,

Did you notice any difference in the cocking cam itself?

I hear about guys like GAP and Marty reworking this or that to improve the lift, but I cant get any details on how its done...

Maybe a picture or 3?

I'll take some pictures and post up, but I didn't take any before sending the bolt off to BO, so maybe someone can take pics of their non-updated bolt.

 

[Onemoretime]

Well... I was the first on the list when they opened pre-order so I should be able to tell you all soon. They said I should have it the middle of next month.

 

[Jhnmdahl]

JFComfort, you're aware that the Badger is a flat bottom action and that you'll have serious stock work to do, right?

Seventh - I've wondered about this for a while. Badger's website says it can be installed in almost any Remington-compatible stock, including the AICS stocks. Does this mean it can be installed with a ton of work if you fabricate some sort of adapter plate, or can you really just bolt it in to stocks like an AICS? Thanks for the insight,

John

Edit - called Badger, and was told that most Remington stocks can be milled properly to accept the M2008/M2013, but will not fit it if they are inletted to fit a traditional round Remington action. Might be a good idea to talk with whatever stock manufacturer one has in mind before buying a stock for one of these.

 

[Seventh_DOF]

I've got my Badger in an AICS. The AICS comes with basically a V-block that a round action, like the Remington, sits in. To mount the Badger, the V is milled off and a second recoil lug slot is machined in, because the Badger has two, and the area around the bolt handle is relieved for clearance.

I've only ever used AICS stocks for my bolt action rifles. So, I'm sorry, I can't speak to what a conventional stock would require.

 

[Swift]

Is no one else concerned about the aluminum base? Pinned or not, I've had nothing but nightmares with aluminum bases and it's not the right place to save weight on an expensive "field ready" action, IMO. One good drop or bump on either side of the scope and steel rings will literally bend the lip of the 1913 12*. It's simple metallurgy and physics. Harder metal bearing on softer metal, introduce lateral impact and observe. Ask me how I know.

I hope it's not an issue because I plan on ordering one but that's a bit disappointing. This was never a featherweight action to begin with, so why try to be something you're not? Lightening cuts=great idea if it keeps strength. Downgrading optic mounts to save weight=bad choice in my book.

In most cases, I'm not big on the ball type handles but for 3 lug receivers I think it's a good fit. Tac knobs are nice to drive the bolt all 90* on 2 lugs but I'd have to feel it on a 3 lug before I made the switch.

The more I think about it...a worked over 2008 may be a better option. Just me, though, YMMV.

 

[Rhys]

As far as the aluminum base. neither here nor there. There are a lot of us running aluminum rings, and are of the opinion that if the rings and mounts are of good high grade aluminum you won't have an issue. Will the ultimate strength of them be less than an equivalent steel piece? of course, but it you do something that is severe enough to damage the aluminum part you likely have more serious problems than a damaged mount. I really doubt the optic you have attached to that mount is going to have some serious damage.

 

[turbo54]

As far as the aluminum base. neither here nor there. There are a lot of us running aluminum rings, and are of the opinion that if the rings and mounts are of good high grade aluminum you won't have an issue. Will the ultimate strength of them be less than an equivalent steel piece? of course, but it you do something that is severe enough to damage the aluminum part you likely have more serious problems than a damaged mount. I really doubt the optic you have attached to that mount is going to have some serious damage.

Agree, the aluminum base doesn't phase me at all. 7075-T6 aluminum is a great structural material, and stronger than most non heat-treated steels. Speaking of which, the most common steel alloy used for rings/bases in the industry is 12L14, with is really nice to machine, but very soft and (as far as steel goes), quite weak.

In fact, 7075-T6 is harder, and stronger in both yield strength and tensile strength than cold-rolled 12L14. Plus, 12L14 is non heat-treatable.

 

[Swift]

Agree, the aluminum base doesn't phase me at all. 7075-T6 aluminum is a great structural material, and stronger than most non heat-treated steels. Speaking of which, the most common steel alloy used for rings/bases in the industry is 12L14, with is really nice to machine, but very soft and (as far as steel goes), quite weak.

In fact, 7075-T6 is harder, and stronger in both yield strength and tensile strength than cold-rolled 12L14. Plus, 12L14 is non heat-treatable.

Your wisdom in metallurgy is enlightening. I'll backpedal and reserve judgment.

 

[71firebird400]

Your wisdom in metallurgy is enlightening. I'll backpedal and reserve judgment.

"Backpedal" and "reserve judgement"? That is not how we do things around here!

 

[Swift]

"Backpedal" and "reserve judgement"? That is not how we do things around here!

Yeah yeah, well ya gotta admit when you jumped the gun. I'd still prefer steel for peace of mind but 7075 is a tougher aluminum than I'm used to working with.

 

[Wheres-Waldo]

Swift, I had a 7071 Al. mount made for my M2008 and have had no problems with it at all for the few years I've had it on. The only downside I've seen is that it can't take certain surface treatments that you may want to do to your action.

I'm wondering why not flute the hell out of the bolt if you're trying to shave a bit of weight?

 

[turbo54]

Ordered my m2013 on Monday. Apparently, the ATF is dragging their feet on authorization of serial numbers (or something). He has actions as complete as he's allowed to by law.

Marty says BO thoroughly reworked the striker assembly and cocking cam.

Obviously, bolt lift has been *the* complaint of M2008s, so it's safe to assume BO addressed it.

Looking forward to mine. Just sold my beloved Valkyrie to fund it...

 

[Swift]

Swift, I had a 7071 Al. mount made for my M2008 and have had no problems with it at all for the few years I've had it on. The only downside I've seen is that it can't take certain surface treatments that you may want to do to your action.

I'm wondering why not flute the hell out of the bolt if you're trying to shave a bit of weight?

That was really the crux of my argument. If you wanna shed weight, there are better places to do it, IMO.

 

[JFComfort]

JFComfort, you're aware that the Badger is a flat bottom action and that you'll have serious stock work to do, right?

Yeah I thought about that. I would get a chassis from McRee cut for the Badger action. I wish I would have stopped by the Badger booth during SHOT show..