Which is the best suited action for F-class?

[DenisA]

This is a hypothetical. I'm not looking to build another rifle. It's just for curiosity, so price tag is no issue.

What considerations need to be made to identify the best action?
In F-class seeing as barrels are getting long and weights being added to the muzzle end, I guess tennon thread length in the action might be important.
Which actions have a long thread?

What are some best and why?

I'm very interested in the gunsmiths opinions too.

Cheers.

[BATattack]

I like the BAT M round. Big solid action with a tennon of large diameter and length. 3 action screws. 2 lug bolt for easy primary extraction and cocking.

BAT recommend not using barrels of LESS than 1.25" diameter because of the large tennon diameter there needs to be enough barrel diameter left to form a mating shoulder. Barrels of 1.5" by 34" can be used.

I bought 2 actions about 5 years apart and all barrels and bolts are interchangeable and head space was within .000125". Could have been a fluke but I was pretty impressed!

I recon there is a lot of good actions out there and we are probably a bit spoilt. I like the BAT but I don't think there is anything wrong with a Barnard just that everyone has one!

[Tim N]

I have a stiller viper stainless action RBLP which I think is great, the only issue is wait time to get one.
Recently I decided to build a magnum caliber and the best option would be to get a mag bolt for my stiller but was told ...maybe... a year wait.
So I ordered a Barnard with 8 week lead time.

[RAVEN]

I originally wanted a Stiller Viper was told 2-3 years some time ago so I purchased a Stolle F-Class
more than happy with it.
What I consider the key features are intergated recoil lug
intergrated rail
long tennon thread
fast lock time
and must be able to fit a top shelf trigger
on my stolle I run a Kelbly trigger these are great
very simple to adjust weight of pull just by moving a small pin into one of 4 different holes
I don't have an oppinion on 2 screw 3 screw hold down what ever works
V blocks work well for round actions
all my actions are flat and devcon or armagrot bedded
I avoid glue ins

RB

[Tim N]

RB,
Just curious as to why you avoid glue ins?
My stiller is a glue in, interesting to note when discussing reasons a rifle's accuracy drops off that bedding comes up and when I said it's a glue in the response is it's not the bedding then..

[RAVEN]

I like to remove my metal work so I can inspect the bedding and clean if necessary
If you air travel it's best to break the rifle down or it may be done for you by the baggage handlers
I also like to re-tension the takedown screws every time I compete
Once glued in you will only know when somethings wrong when you’re in the middle of a comp then it’s too late and if you have spent thousands to get to the event v block or tradition pillar bedding job looks more attractive to me

[Brad Y]

If bruce were here, he would be arguing for sure that it depends on the number of lugs....

The best action is the one your happy with. If its a barnard then find, if its an omark, then fine... Hardest part of being in Aus is trying to get what you want. In my case it was going to be 2 years for BAT to make me a LBRP multiflat 2 lug. John Pierce said it would be 6 months for him to do something the same.... guess who got my money...

[Cameron Mc]

I glue my actions in. I feel this is a personal thing and I have weighed up the pro's and cons.
My saviour is pillar bedding in conjuction with gluing in. I have the take down screws just finger tight.
If the glue lets go I can just tighten up the screws. I have been using the glue in method for about 20 years and have not had one let go.
I respect Richards opinion on this and have no issues with other bedding methods....... as long as it is done correctly.

I feel many custom actions are over rated now. Sadly as demand has increased quality control has dropped off with some of the brands.
I love my BAT actions but would not hesitate in using a Barnard.

Cheers
Cam

[DenisA]

Lots of great points in all of that. Richard you've really highlighted some features to look for that make a quality action, cheers. The trigger availability is such a simple one that I hadn't thought of. Integral rail seems like a great advantage in the extra strength and guarantee that the rail never shifts.

Why does a 2 lug bolt allow easy primary extraction and locking over something else?

As far as materials are concerned what's being used for BAT, Barnard and other quality actions.

I suspect that Barnard's and the likes are blued (because they're black). Are they subject to rust if the bluing wears or gets scratched?

Is there an advantage to a flat bottomed action?

Lots of good info on the BAT website: http://www.batmachine.com/actions/2-lug ... e-actions/

[RAVEN]

Why does a 2 lug bolt allow easy primary extraction and locking over something else?

Probably best to ask Bruce about that one
I think it’s something to do with the cam

As far as materials are concerned what's being used for BAT, Barnard and other quality actions.

3 types
Stainless (Bats /Stiller & Nesika Bay)
Chrome Moly (Barnard’s surgeon’s omark’s)
Aluminium composite (Stolle)
The ones I prefer are the Shiny type

Is there an advantage to a flat bottomed action?
Yes there is if it’s going to be pillar bedded
Round actions are best set up in V Blocks

Spot on about the rail Denis I have seen a few come loose over time one less thing to worry about
The integrated recoil lug allows easy change of barrels also adds strength

RB

[pjifl]

Yes, a Barnard can rust but it is more resistant to rust than most 'black' actions because of the alloy and the nitrided finish.

Anyone who lets that happen should be drawn and quartered.

Because of the incredibly hard wearing surface it is more suited to tight bedding on an Aluminium block than most other actions.
If rain penetrates down between the Al Vee block and the action you should dismantle at the end of the day and not put this off.

Any excess weight is always better in line with the bore rather than being added elsewhere so I don't consider the weight objectionable.

It is one of the stiffest actions around. In fact comparative figures are given in an article on BAT actions at

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com.au ... erman.html

Two lug actions allow more bolt rotation which gives a little more overall mechanical advantage during primary extraction than 3 lugs but anyone who needs this is overloading or needs lessons in loading. Perhaps the longer stroke of the 2 lug action makes for smoother loading and unloading and less disturbance on rests but the Barnard friction is reduced by the nitriding anyway and never seems to be a problem.

No one mentions that the longer bolt handle stroke of 2 lug actions usually necessitates a deeper cutout and weakening of the stock for the closed bolt handle.

I have always liked the idea of an integral scope rail but in practice it never seems a problem and the Barnard is so stiff an added Al rail seems to do no harm.


I have found that people who have never been exposed to heavy 3 lug full diameter bolts shy away from them. US shooters normally consider them unusual. Perhaps this is more related to the volume of hunting and rapid fire shooters in the US are exposed to where an exclusive 'Target Action' is unsuited.

Of course, all of the quality actions, well set up, will shoot tiny groups.

Peter Smith.

[AlanF]

I've only had an Omark and couple of Barnards, all obtained new. The Barnards are much more pleasant to use, and more forgiving if you have brass problems, and probably cause less brass problems. As far as comparisons with the US offerings, best to leave that to those who've had experience with a variety of them. But there is a couple of things on the Barnard that in my opinion could be improved upon. The screw cap on the end of the bolt is not an ideal arrangement. I would prefer to loosen it more often (to release tension on the spring), but don't because it has to be nipped up tight or it will loosen over the course of a shoot, and I suspect this has cost me points several times with inconsistent primer ignition. And more of a deficiency than a design fault is the relatively (to some US custom actions) short barrel tenon. Most experts agree that this is one of the limiting factors for the length and weight of barrel an action can handle. In F-Open, barrels can be up to about 5Kg and 34 inches. Its the main reason I've gone to a barrel clamp setup. That said, of all the major equipment selections I've made, choosing to go with Barnard from the outset in F-Open has been one of the best decisions.

[pjifl]

The firing mechanism retaining system of a screw cap on the bolt has advantages and disadvantages.
Ideally it could have a small ball detent that activated when fully screwed up but in my opinion the advantages outweigh the disadvantages because it allows fast painless disassembly to check loaded rounds safely and with full feel. It also allows assembly without over compressing the spring which happens with nearly all other actions.
I have also seen a carefully placed wrap of Plumber's Teflon tape around the bolt end thread used to inhibit unscrewing. Although Teflon is low friction, on the hardened surfaces it does seem to tighten up the thread contact. Care is needed to ensure any excess does not end up in the mechanism.
A habit of always checking the cap when inserting the bolt is useful.

Does the cap need to be released to ensure spring life ? I think we are influenced by experience with Omarks where the spring was designed much closer (or beyond) its elastic limit and replacement springs have been substandard. A new Omark spring shortens immediately on insertion - made worse by the fact that insertion necessitates extra compression. Most other actions also over compresses the spring on assembly. In contrast, the Barnard screw on cap never does this. All I know is that my measurements after assembly and after a few years of not decompressing the spring seem to indicate that it is quite unnecessary to decompress it.

The barrel tenon should be quite adequate. It is about the same as most good actions and far more than a Mauser. Extremely long tenons have the disadvantage that when a barrel is cut down you lose a lot more length. The limiting factor is really the barrel flange attachment width. Unfortunately, all standard barrels have a width of just under 1.25 inch and wait times and supply and cost would kill off changing this with special order barrels. And that also brings up another advantage of the Barnard over most exotic US actions. Availability of spare parts !

By the way, most stainless actions are far more prone to galling than harder nitrided surfaces. It can be guarded against but is almost a non issue with a Barnard.

I never set out to talk people into a Barnard, but the more one looks at and compares with other dedicated target actions, the more it stands out.

Then, again, a well set up Omark will also win matches. But parts are becoming difficult and it is not suited to a magnum cartridge with its smaller barrel thread.

Peter Smith.

[Tim L]

And more of a deficiency than a design fault is the relatively (to some US custom actions) short barrel tenon. Most experts agree that this is one of the limiting factors for the length and weight of barrel an action can handle.

I'm quite surprised at that. What's the reasoning that it's the tennon length?

There are a great many factors that go into thread selection and bearing surface area, simply extending the tennon is likely be a redundant act. There is limit to what the whole design concept can handle.

[KHGS]

Yes, a Barnard can rust but it is more resistant to rust than most 'black' actions because of the alloy and the nitrided finish.

Anyone who lets that happen should be drawn and quartered.

Because of the incredibly hard wearing surface it is more suited to tight bedding on an Aluminium block than most other actions.
If rain penetrates down between the Al Vee block and the action you should dismantle at the end of the day and not put this off.

Any excess weight is always better in line with the bore rather than being added elsewhere so I don't consider the weight objectionable.

It is one of the stiffest actions around. In fact comparative figures are given in an article on BAT actions at

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com.au ... erman.html

Two lug actions allow more bolt rotation which gives a little more overall mechanical advantage during primary extraction than 3 lugs but anyone who needs this is overloading or needs lessons in loading. Perhaps the longer stroke of the 2 lug action makes for smoother loading and unloading and less disturbance on rests but the Barnard friction is reduced by the nitriding anyway and never seems to be a problem.

No one mentions that the longer bolt handle stroke of 2 lug actions usually necessitates a deeper cutout and weakening of the stock for the closed bolt handle.

I have always liked the idea of an integral scope rail but in practice it never seems a problem and the Barnard is so stiff an added Al rail seems to do no harm.


I have found that people who have never been exposed to heavy 3 lug full diameter bolts shy away from them. US shooters normally consider them unusual. Perhaps this is more related to the volume of hunting and rapid fire shooters in the US are exposed to where an exclusive 'Target Action' is unsuited.

Of course, all of the quality actions, well set up, will shoot tiny groups.

Peter Smith.

Peter has covered these points perfectly!!!
However I will say this, there has to be reasons why there are so many Barnard actioned rifles around!
Flat actions offer no advantage whatsoever other than for glue ins. If your man doing the pillars for pillar bedding knows his stuff, round actions offer no disadvantage.
Regards to materials Omark & Barnard cannot be compared! Barnards are the most accurately machined action I have ever worked with & I have worked most of them.
If you intend to own multiple rifles the Barnard/v-block system stands alone. I have 3 "P" actioned rifles & 3 "S" actioned rifles & 2 stocks, the "S's" & "P's" are completely interchangeable within their respective stocks.
Keith H.