I've always been into light rifles because I'm lazy and weak. So here's a tikka I recently has my way with.
I like it, but forgot to weigh it before....Attachment 249332
Attachment 249333
Printable View
I've always been into light rifles because I'm lazy and weak. So here's a tikka I recently has my way with.
I like it, but forgot to weigh it before....Attachment 249332
Attachment 249333
Yip taking the barrel off definitely will make it lighter��
New caliber, .338LM! :thumbsup:
Very cool!! Should still be very functional. What's happening in the barrel department?
Get a Kimber ,spend more time hunting.
Barrel will still be factory. At some point a carbon stock.
That's Gold!Quote:
Originally Posted by nevereadyfreddy
as much as I love my tikkas you have a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by nevereadyfreddy
The fact that they are essentially all long actions does not help when ultra light weight is desired...
What the hell is heavy about a Tikka? Crikey stock standard are light as. Try using a BSA CF2 270. That will sort your ideas out about weight.Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
Oh wow impressive! You are capable of carrying a heavy rifle!Quote:
Originally Posted by TeRei
you must be such a hardy fella! congratulations!
If that is what you have to brag about in a forum thread about light-weighting, I suggest you change some things in your life...
Attachment 249381
Attachment 249382
Similarly slabbed a Howa Mini and skeletonised, also gave the bolt shroud a serious trim and slooted bolt handle. Have modeled a Tikka and a few other actions for the CNC but haven't actually got one hahaha
looks awesome, who did the cnc work? i just fitted a 3d printed titanium bolt knob, saved 60 grams and looks cool.
I would be very hesitant to shoot one with the forward part of the action that has been milled over the threaded portion of the barrel tenon.
The Howa looks neat
Have had a few Tikkas and like them a lot.
Looks like you are having fun with your project
My shallow quip about going Kimber was because it is only 6 lb all up with scope, sling and ammo.
Quite hard/time consuming to modify most other rifles down to that weight.
Am a Ruger fan but even put on a diet they are still a lb heavier than that, even ultralight model.
Cheers NRF
I did mate.��Attachment 249390Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamfga
Attachment 249391
Only 0.5mm deep there. But I hear your concern. Very easy to remove those cuts from the program. Ill do yours like that :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Friwi
Nice Chassis mate!! :) Ill be doing that soon and fluting the bolts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stocky
Beautiful work RobertQuote:
Originally Posted by robhughes-games
Looks great, I have modelled similar cuts for a few different actions. Trouble is my mill is manual. How much weight does it save? My tikka T3 action was 476g before I took to it with a mill. I only managed to get rid of 60g.
I can carbon wrap factory barrels if your interested. Last one reduced an 18" 7mm barrel by 200g with no reduction in stiffness.
Took 80grams off. With a replacement bolt handle and bolt fluting it will take off lots more.Quote:
Originally Posted by SixtyTen
Have you tried shooting it without a stock? Very light :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by robhughes-games
Love it. I've seen an outfit in Murica start doing a similar job on tikka actions, been wondering about trying to have it done on mine... Looking forward to seeing the rest!
Just send me a pm mate and can be sorted!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jt89
Could you mill the top rail into Picatinny? Than you save 50-80grams on a pic base as well as shaving off material.
Possibly, but not over the thread/tenon area. So makes it a little pointless I'd think.Quote:
Originally Posted by SPEARONZ
I've modeled up some direct ring mounts and they are somewhere in the line of projects.
What would be good, is if you could install half rings that you make, of talleys fix on a tikka receiver, and just touch them enough with your mill so that you put a certain degree of slant angle in them. Like 20 moa for exemple.
Not a lot of risk there, the material is in tension with bolt thrust onto the receiver lug surfaces and the barrel is taking the outwards pressure component (if there was any risk the barrel would let go before the receiver - remember the failed Sako/Tikka barrel batch that happened a few years ago due to out-of-spec steel?). Having said that it would reduce the safety factor for big magnums/fat cases (this being the reason Tikka's are not recommended for the seriously overbore magnums as the tenon is quite slim) but a standard caliber would not show undue stretch I would expect. There are plenty of receivers with less holding them together - and remember the bloody great slab of steel on top for the scope base and the surface under the action to accept the lug. That was the point of my comment up above though, chamber the bugger in .338LM and see what happens haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Friwi
Way ahead of you mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Friwi
Been designing them already. Getting them to look "nice" is a bit tricky, but will get there. Then heaps of variables like scope widths heights ect. About to tackle those soon
Attachment 249553
I wouldn't. Doing an analysis on hoop stress shows most rifles have a factor of safety well into 5x. A contender barrel is only 20.5mm and has 2 tig welds and 2 scope mount holes right over the chamber areas. Even looking at ar15 or ar10 barrel extensions gives an idea how much "extra" is in most actions. With careful consideration it can be done. Even with huge overpressure loads failures usually occur via barrel splitting vs actions failure. I usually use a kimber as a safe minimum dimensions and they are significantly smaller than a tikka.Quote:
Originally Posted by Friwi
Yeah some of those barrels on early AR10's (Sudanese contract) are a bit eye opening to see what you can get away with -with the added stress of full auto operation.
The one thing we haven’t got in NZ , is a proof house to actually properly test some of those experiments. I had my experience with contenders, notably a 45/70 in a pistol with high pressure loads , where the barrel would break in during the shot and expell the hot shell into your forehead. Yes, the system did not fail but showed its limit on how fare it could go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stocky
There is a reason why you won’t see one chambered in anything past a low pressure 45/70 or 444 marlin .
As soon as you go down to 223 type cases, you reduce the pressure area and the gun can handle more , no doubt about it.
Another thing to take into account, is the material, it seems that chrome moly is better at handling high pressure than stainless ( with the two properly heat treated of course), so maybe more chances for a stainless tikka receiver to fail where a chrome moly one would have made it ( specially in sub zero temperature where the stainless get more brittle . How do I know? I used to personally know the barrel maker for accuracy international. He explained to me why he expressly recommended not to use stainless barrel for Arctic warfare weapons. When two of his barrels fails in those conditions there was a quick change of direction. )
But hey, if the gunsmith and the user are confident in the product , and nothing wrong happens…. Then all is good. Maybe I am worrying too much.
yeh worrying to much the contender opening issue is well known and occurs its the locking lug section and has more to do with the locking mechanism than the material strength. Id be more worried about welds on chromoly done in a factory than I would stainless being weaker (depends on the stainless as 17-4 for example is often stronger at the common heat treats used for rifle actions. No issue being cautious but there's enough in terms of actions in smaller diameters than would suggest theres not going to be issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Friwi
Weakening of load bearing parts/section should not be done without proper assessment of a competent person.
End of story.
Would not lament the lack of a proof house, the UK one might as well be an employment scheme for old farts who do sweet f-all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Friwi
Makes a rebarrel job more expensive as the barrel choppers and threaders (I refuse to use the term 'gunsmith' unless they can make one from scratch) insist on sending a rifle for proof when its not required for a re-barrel, only sale of new arms.
I've bought two rifles 'in proof' which failed headspace, one too tight, another too loose... :psychotic:
Would be better off without it
PM me about how much weight you got off there mate. I'm about to model up my mini and model in some cuts. Will flute the bolt too. Have already threaded the bolt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stocky
Agreed. They are there purely for a look to carry on the 'lines'. They offer no measurable weight reduction. I'll likley scrap them, purely because of controversy. Easy to delete of a cnc program.Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
Interms of weakening the action, sure it's removed material, 0.5mm to be precise. Is the action now unsafe, No
The German proof house stopped accepting for proof Mauser actions with the transverse dovetail cut (for a scope base) through the receiver ring. Nothing to do with Tikkas but an example of a long "accepted" practise ultimately being found not to be a good idea. It's not known if this decision resulted from testing or from the gathering of information on failures, both functions of a proof house.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stocky
There are many variables in the engineering of rifles but given you have a potential grenade right in front of your face pushing the limits isn't usually a good idea. I for one am always deeply mistrusting of "engineering assumptions", incorrect assumptions lie at the root of most cock-ups.
That's not to say anything about Robs project, it's likey fine and dandy.
It's not uncommon for engineering assumptions to generate a lot of work for testing labs. Helps to keep me employed. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentman
Less keen on assumptions to contain an explosion in front of my face though.
What determines a competent person? The people responsible for many more important things can become "competent" by barely skimming by or being around for a long time never furthering there learning. Technology and analytical technology has greatly increased but many refuse to learn. Absolutely an assessment should be made but if we refused to go past what the current practice we stop learning.Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
Agreed that it is unlikely to weaken the receiver enough to cause any issues, especially if it is a "lighter" calibre, since all tikka actions are essentially the same, which means they must have designed it to withstand the worst case. I would personally would still want to calculate the stresses in there. Then again since the 0.5 mm there save hardly any weight why bother, totally agreed!Quote:
Originally Posted by robhughes-games
In this particular instance I would say someone with a qualification in mechanical engineering and who is competent in the assessment of the strength of a machined metal part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stocky
