Bonding action to chassis

[brianf]

Consensus is bedding a chassis can only help, if it’s a quality job.

So if bedding a action is “better” then binding must be a +1.

If you don’t plan on removing the barreled action anytime soon or ever has anyone bonded the action?

I know some series do not allow bonded actions and some serious BR rigs are bonded so there is a benefit to be had.

Just kicking the tires on opinions.

Thanks.

 

[Bender]

But why?

 

[Stevo86]

@THEIS can you answer the man’s questions???

 

[cornhusker86]

 

[brianf]

@THEIS can you answer the man’s questions???

Can’t answer 2+2 never mind a firearm question.

 

[brianf]

But why?

View attachment 8228023

Why not?

If it has a beneficial effect above and beyond regular bedding, it might be worth it in certain situations

 

[Bender]

Why not?

If it has a beneficial effect above and beyond regular bedding, it might be worth it in certain situations

Just seems unproductive

 

[roostercogburn98]

dem ai guys is just about to turn this thread into a party.

 

[brianf]

dem ai guys is just about to turn this thread into a party.

They originally bonded because their in house specs were garbage.

Then it became their “thing”

But some serious builders still do it

I prob can’t shoot the difference if there is one but never hurts to get constructive opinions

So I’m just kicking the tires

 

[StaveyIL]

As mcameron said . I agree. A quality bedding job should be all that’s needed. You will want to be able to remove the action to rebarrel . To avoid stressing and potentially damaging the bedding. This is what Woody at MPA told me when we were talking about chassis bedding .

 

[Varminterror]

I don't know that anyone is still doing so, but folks used to "glue" BR and F-class actions into their stocks. I remember folks using trigger hangers which were accessible from the bottom of the stock, just pull the trigger guard and the hanger... Barrel changes were relatively easy also - rear entry wrench + barrel vise, same speed as doing it with the stock removed, just a little more cumbersome to work around the stock and a little less time since they didn't remove the stock. Some guys milled wrench flats on the barrel before or after install to avoid the need for the vise, some guys milled hex flats around the muzzle.

I wouldn't do ANY of that today, and wouldn't do ANY of that for any application I shoot. But I remember ogling those rifles when I was in my teens and early 20's as BR guys described gluing them into the stock.

 

[brianf]

I don't know that anyone is still doing so, but folks used to "glue" BR and F-class actions into their stocks. I remember folks using trigger hangers which were accessible from the bottom of the stock, just pull the trigger guard and the hanger... Barrel changes were relatively easy also - rear entry wrench + barrel vise, same speed as doing it with the stock removed, just a little more cumbersome to work around the stock and a little less time since they didn't remove the stock. Some guys milled wrench flats on the barrel before or after install to avoid the need for the vise, some guys milled hex flats around the muzzle.

I wouldn't do ANY of that today, and wouldn't do ANY of that for any application I shoot. But I remember ogling those rifles when I was in my teens and early 20's as BR guys described gluing them into the stock.

Same here…wondering if it went out of style or components “caught up” and equaled the playing field

 

[carbonbased]

I can see it now…stay safe out there @brianf lol

 

[carbonbased]

And oh yeah, the fellows over at https://forum.accurateshooter.com will probably have more info on this. But perhaps you have already asked over there.

I’d be curious to know the answer myself.

 

[brianf]

Didn’t ask over there yet.

Getting generic info first

Then I’ll look at epoxy materials (because this industry is stuck in the 1950’s sometimes), for specific properties

Then comes round 2 of research.

 

[carbonbased]

Didn’t ask over there yet.

Getting generic info first

Then I’ll look at epoxy materials (because this industry is stuck in the 1950’s sometimes), for specific properties

Then comes round 2 of research.

Or…wait…if you have a chassis, just tig weld that sumbitch straight down to it. Lol.

On that note I’m sort of surprised there isn’t an action manufacturer that makes a solid machined part that comprises the entire middle of a typical bolt action rifle. The user would then bolt on the forend and buttstock.

Probably totally stupid. Just occurred to me, however. Hmmmm…

 

[brianf]

Or…wait…if you have a chassis, just tig weld that sumbitch straight down to it. Lol.

On that note I’m sort of surprised there isn’t an action manufacturer that makes a solid machined part that comprises the entire middle of a typical bolt action rifle. The user would then bolt on the forend and buttstock.

Probably totally stupid. Just occurred to me, however. Hmmmm…

There are items like that.

Integral lugs on the barrel so everything else just for ergonomics/mags etc

Everything is aluminum on those but the barrel and bolt, because that’s where the strength needs to be

I e been playing with barrel clamps but they are just a little to finicky. Between the pressure on the barrel and materials it not user friendly lol

 

[FredHammer]

Or…wait…if you have a chassis, just tig weld that sumbitch straight down to it. Lol.

On that note I’m sort of surprised there isn’t an action manufacturer that makes a solid machined part that comprises the entire middle of a typical bolt action rifle. The user would then bolt on the forend and buttstock.

Probably totally stupid. Just occurred to me, however. Hmmmm…

That shit would be solid AF, Bro! I'm in!

Leave it up to the Brits to do some Harry Potter, "Our guns are magic" epoxy bullshit. How utterly stupid.

 

[Im2bent]

Doesn't AI bond the actions ?

 

[parshal]

Just bed the action to the chassis using marine-tex with release agent and don't remove it until you need to get to the trigger. If you've ever bedded an action you'll know how tough it is to remove the first time especially if you don't tape the recoil lug front/sides/bottom.

 

[roostercogburn98]

Doesn't AI bond the actions ?

The wheel needs a new design apparently

 

[brianf]

Doesn't AI bond the actions ?

Not any more

The latest AI’s are not bonded.

 

[Bender]

Its an answer looking for a problem

 

[brianf]

Its an answer looking for a problem

Eliseo /tube guns are bonded…go tell them its a answer looking for a problem as they are bringing home trophy’s.

 

[roostercogburn98]

Eliseo /tube guns are bonded…go tell them its a answer looking for a problem as they are bringing home trophy’s.

Different rifle design as well. The recoil lug setup is different and changes recoil according to designer. Maybe apples to oranges when comparing to a normal lug style. Among other things that may be giving a tube gun any advantage

 

[brianf]

Different rifle design as well. The recoil lug setup is different and changes recoil according to designer. Maybe apples to oranges when comparing to a normal lug style. Among other things that may be giving a tube gun any advantage

100%…I think so as well

There must be more to it that glue

That’s exactly why I’m starting to research the topic.

 

[powdahound76]

Can’t answer 2+2 never mind a firearm question.

Seems he was able to add a well practiced scammer couple to a big lie and got himself a pile o money.

If he cant add 2 + 2, whats that say about the guy he scammed?


Not sticking up for Louis. A dirty thief who deserves to swing.

 

[carbonbased]

If he cant add 2 + 2, whats that say about the guy he scammed?

Was this necessary? Kicking a man who got snookered?

The fellow hoodwinked 90% of the hide, including Terry Cross, I believe. Not sure if he fooled Frank too.

 

[Supersubes]

They originally bonded because their in house specs were garbage.

Then it became their “thing”

But some serious builders still do it

I prob can’t shoot the difference if there is one but never hurts to get constructive opinions

So I’m just kicking the tires

I dont think it’s “some”serious guys do in BR. Unless things have changed, very nearly everyone does it in short range BR. They use trigger hangers which allow the trigger to drop straight down when unscrewed.

Find out what the Br smiths use for the epoxy. They were always able to free the action with heat. Then machine out the material and start again if needed.

My .02 is thats its totally unnecessary.

 

[brianf]

Seems he was able to add a well practiced scammer couple to a big lie and got himself a pile o money.

If he cant add 2 + 2, whats that say about the guy he scammed?


Not sticking up for Louis. A dirty thief who deserves to swing.

You just can’t let it go huh.

If you want to start again I’m more than happy to put you in your place again.

Or we can keep this about bonding a chassis as it’s not the bear pit.

 

[brianf]

I dont think it’s “some”serious guys do in BR. Unless things have changed, very nearly everyone does it in short range BR. They use trigger hangers which allow the trigger to drop straight down when unscrewed.

Find out what the Br smiths use for the epoxy. They were always able to free the action with heat. Then machine out the material and start again if needed.

My .02 is thats its totally unnecessary.

Agreed, I try not to post absolutes because hide members will spend all day trying to prove “you” wrong rather than post something useful.

 

[brianf]

Was this necessary? Kicking a man who got snookered?

The fellow hoodwinked 90% of the hide, including Terry Cross, I believe. Not sure if he fooled Frank too.

Actually he fooled the entire hide 2x with 2 different user names in the last 10 years.

But this isn’t about him..that’s why I didn’t post his name …some other people just can’t let it go.

I actually want to learn about personal experiences with bonding…imagine that

 

[noremorse92]

Or…wait…if you have a chassis, just tig weld that sumbitch straight down to it. Lol.

On that note I’m sort of surprised there isn’t an action manufacturer that makes a solid machined part that comprises the entire middle of a typical bolt action rifle. The user would then bolt on the forend and buttstock.

Probably totally stupid. Just occurred to me, however. Hmmmm…

You couldn't weld it the way you're thinking, aluminum and steel can't be welded together traditionally as they are dissimilar metals. You would have to braze it with silicon bronze rods. In which case you could use a tig welder. More commonly the correct oxyfuel torch tip would be used.

If you understand the mechanics of brazing then it actually would be a more complete bond as the liquid metal flows into the gaps between the 2 pieces and adds support past where a weld would.

 

[carbonbased]

You couldn't weld it the way you're thinking, aluminum and steel can't be welded together traditionally as they are dissimilar metals. You would have to braze it with silicon bronze rods. In which case you could use a tig welder. More commonly the correct oxyfuel torch tip would be used.

If you understand the mechanics of brazing then it actually would be a more complete bond as the liquid metal flows into the gaps between the 2 pieces and adds support past where a weld would.

I was just kidding. Hyperbole.

Or heck, now that I think about it, a stainless chassis! Shit that’d weigh a ton. But that’s what the PRS fellows want…but TIG would probably warp the action a bit, right? I’m no expert and a hack welder. Realize that whole idea was a joke.

 

[Huskydriver]

They originally bonded because their in house specs were garbage.

Then it became their “thing”

But some serious builders still do it

I prob can’t shoot the difference if there is one but never hurts to get constructive opinions

So I’m just kicking the tires

 

[brianf]

You couldn't weld it the way you're thinking, aluminum and steel can't be welded together traditionally as they are dissimilar metals. You would have to braze it with silicon bronze rods. In which case you could use a tig welder. More commonly the correct oxyfuel torch tip would be used.

If you understand the mechanics of brazing then it actually would be a more complete bond as the liquid metal flows into the gaps between the 2 pieces and adds support past where a weld would.

A while ago I was having some computer sims run of the different materials of chassis, scope base (not integral), action and how they move when temps change.

Some basic info /trends I began to see made me start thinking about barrel blocks and or bonding.

Doen the rabbit hole i went

 

[Huskydriver]

Personally I like a bonded action.... why not

 

[brianf]

View attachment 8228304

View attachment 8228305

Believe me I have a few and won’t be selling them.

But the truth is their external dimensions were supposedly crappy a long time ago so bonding was a easy way out before they upgraded equipment.

We all know the story of why it’s “square” that’s the block of metal they had in the shop…so it was square.

 

[noremorse92]

I was just kidding. Hyperbole.

Or heck, now that I think about it, a stainless chassis! Shit that’d weigh a ton. But that’s what the PRS fellows want…but TIG would probably warp the action a bit, right? I’m no expert and a hack welder. Realize that whole idea was a joke.

I was just kidding. Hyperbole.

Or heck, now that I think about it, a stainless chassis! Shit that’d weigh a ton. But that’s what the PRS fellows want…but TIG would probably warp the action a bit, right? I’m no expert and a hack welder. Realize that whole idea was a joke.

No I get it
I think the best bet would be the torch

 

[brianf]

Look at it from the other side of the coin as well.

If bedding can deteriorate, and action screws can come loose, they are a variable.

If bonding removes a variable that’s one less possible issue down the road..

Now guys will say just check screws etc often…why consistently check torque if there is a solution that doesn’t require torque. Just how I’m wired.

Part of my day job is monitoring for constant improvement.

Even if it doesn’t increase efficiency or production by the stop watch but reduces variability…it’s a smart move

As for never changing a chassis, my original post was suggesting that changing a chassis is not in the cards for a while.

And as we’ve seen with debonding AI’s or the accuracy obsession chassis, it’s a few minutes in the oven.

 

[Mike Casselton]

2 important questions to ask when doing any design changes....

1) what problem are you trying to solve/ what are you trying to improve?

2) is the juice worth the squeeze?


Rather than looking at a solution, and asking if it will solve any problems

You need to start with problems, and ask if there are any solutions.


This whole thread is like asking "should put a spoiler and front splitter on my Honda civic?"

What problem are you trying to solve?


Now I can extrapolate you want to go faster, and your lack of traction is limiting that.......

Ok, have you tried new tires, suspensions, weight loss before and that's still not working?

And is the benefit of the splitter on your car going to be tangible to justify the cost and hassle?......am I willing to pay for the cost to shave 0.05 sec off my lap time?.....





Going back to the rifle......what problem are you trying to solve?

Presumably more accuracy?

Is there justification to think bonding the chassis will increase accuracy?

Bench rest guys do it....sure.....but that really doesn't mean shit.....you know damn well if someone wins a match with an arisaka, the next match everyone is going to be raiding their grandparents closets for arisakas and be extolling the virtues of their accuracy.

Is there any studies between bonded and non bonded actions showing a definite improvement?

Lest assume there is.......is it worth it?

If I shave .1 MOA off my group size.....am I willing to exchange that for the downsides of never being able to change chassis? Have additional trouble rebarreling? ECT?

In actual Benchrest competition, then absolutely, fuck yes. That .1 MOA is the difference between first place and probably 15th or 20th in a regional match.
In PRS it isn't worth paying attention to because the average shooter can't repeatedly shoot a .1 MOA difference from day to day, week to week.

Completely different game with completely different needs.

Now, if the glue in helps with repeatable PoA/PoI between barrel changes for our one way range guys, then it makes a difference.
I do know the Barrett seems to be very repeatable with barrel changes. It was designed for that specific purpose.

 

[Mike Casselton]

My experience as a former short range (100-300yds) BR shooter, is that glue in has been shown to remove any chance of residual stress in a BR rifle.

With that said, it still has to be done correctly. it can still be glued in and have stress to the action. If the barreled action doesn't sit perfectly parallel to the stock centerline, vertically and horizontally, then it's no better than bolting it in.

In SR, BR, the rifle must ride and track correctly in the bags or those pesky .1 moa fliers will take you out of contention.

In SR, BR, a proper pillar bedding job will shoot just as well as a glue in, as long as it's completely stress free and properly torqued into the stock/pillars. People just don't like "the chance" that the screws could come loose.


Do glue in bedding jobs come loose? If course they can. It has happened a lot to shooters over the decades. It's also harder to diagnose than a pair of loose 1/4×28 bolts.

Loose bolts are fixable in seconds. Loose glue in bedding is out until it's repaired by a re-glue/re-bed.

 

[Mike Casselton]

Exactly, the point I was trying to make was does that .1 MOA matter if you aren't also running 1.2" diameter barrels, have a 30lb rifles, 50x scopes, lathe turned projectiles, ECT.


And also, is that permanent bonding actually contributing to accuracy?.....or is it something that is done because it MIGHT help accuracy.....and is not hurting accuracy so why not do it.

To actually answer your question, the glue-in gives people peace of mind.

 

[brianf]

Theoretically if bedding can deteriorate....so can permanent bonding....epoxies aging or being attacked by solvents will still be an issue with bonding.

So with bonding, you have the same benefit as bedding, a non stressed action.....but just with permanent adhesion.

So if you are not running action screws....you'd have a truly 0 stress action..no action screws to worry about(1 less variable)...but if you have an issue with adhesion, which we just discussed is a possibility, that is now a problem that is not field fixable...and for the most part, not even user fixable.


So if we have permanent adhesion and action screws...if that permanent adhesion breaks, you still have action screws, so you just have a bedded chassis at that point....its still field usable...but you still have the problem of action screws losing torque...

Although never seen properly torques screw just all of a sudden becomes untorqued.

So what benefit is the permanent bonding serving in this case?




Like I mentioned above, I've never seen torqued screws come untorqued on to their own...as that's kind of the purpose of torquing them.....

I've never randomly checked my action screws torque....just the same as I don't randomly check the torque of my cars lug nuts.



Have we determined definitively that it's reducing variability though?



Yeah but how many people are going to be breaking an epoxy bond to change chassis?

And if not many people are willing to do that, how many chassis makers are going to build new chassis for it?

And if people don't like the chassis the gun comes with, and they don't have an option to replace it, you are limiting your customer base.

There's what, 1 aftermarket chassis for the AI rifles?

I’m not great at separating long posts so I’ll try and not mix it up to bad.

Never heard of a AI bond come “loose”

I’ve been hunting in some extreme temperature variations within a few days several times. And when going to extreme cold ..-20f and lower. Action screwes needed to be retorqued on several rifles in the group.

You may not check your lugs nuts but you should. When I used to race (before kids took all my time lol), you’d be surprised what comes loose when pushed hard.

This isn’t for a marketable item, this post was a fact finding mission etc, possible for personal use.

People want to play Barbie with bolt Gins like they do with AR’s. If it is a marketable it it has to be the most Modular possible.

As for gaining the .1, I’ll take any gain possible. Not for competitive reasons but to wring the most out of the weapon as I can.

 

[DangerRanger]

I have considered bonding my tikka to my krg, don’t see why I couldn’t just clamp my barrel 14” away from the action for barrel changes, or have flats added to my next barrels and do it the rifles only way

Biggest thing for me is the idea of reducing any possibility I can to have a poi shift from abuse/drops etc. I’m already gonna permanently glue my rail on after my match this weekend.

 

[samb300]

In my experience with AIs, the bonded action/chassis interface is superior. I tested my chassis unbonded, and it actually shot awesome. But when I whacked the shit out of the barrel with a mallet the zero shifted and the groups opened up.

The bonded action did not have this issue, and in actual use it proved to be consistent as well. Dropped the scoped rifle a couple feet off a prop, picked it up and had no loss of zero. Example 1 of 1 though.

I don't know if AI re-designed the interface on the AXSR, but it's got 5 action screws. The ATX is the same action that's been around for years and is no longer bonded. The chassis inlet looks to be the same to me but I've never had one in hand. If someone is willing to beat on the barrel and see if the zero shifts I'd be interested in the results.

 

[samb300]

In my experience with AIs, the bonded action/chassis interface is superior. I tested my chassis unbonded, and it actually shot awesome. But when I whacked the shit out of the barrel with a mallet the zero shifted and the groups opened up.

The bonded action did not have this issue, and in actual use it proved to be consistent as well. Dropped the scoped rifle a couple feet off a prop, picked it up and had no loss of zero. Example 1 of 1 though.

I don't know if AI re-designed the interface on the AXSR, but it's got 5 action screws. The ATX is the same action that's been around for years and is no longer bonded. The chassis inlet looks to be the same to me but I've never had one in hand. If someone is willing to beat on the barrel and see if the zero shifts I'd be interested in the results.

I also think flat-bottom actions like the AI benefit more from being bonded than a round action in a v-block chassis. Flat on flat has no way to resist lateral movement other than the tension from the action screws.

 

[Stevo86]

To be fair, Ive never heard of bedding suddenly failing either.

Could it have happened, I'm sure, but then you need to compare the sample size of AI rifles to generally bedded rifles.

I'm sure it's possible, but are we sure they were properly torques from the start?

Again, they couldve been.....but would loctite also not be a better solution to fix that?

Also let's put a pin in this because I'm going to come back to it in a second.



Sure, but how statistically likely is that?

Given the millions of cars on the road, and the 99.9999% of drivers not regularly checking torque, how often are wheels coming off?



So presumably this is going to be an off the shelf option you are gluing in?

As in, an action designed with being able to be user serviceable.

Presumably extreme weather is a potential concern? What are your plans for addressing the trigger pack, or even cleaning moisture that seeps between non bonded portions of the action/chassis?


.....which is fine.....but by and large permanent action bonding is kind of an aggressive step with some potentially large downsides.


But if those downsides aren't a concern, then rock out.

Only action I’ve seen bedding fail on is an m1a