View Poll Results: Which 3 lug action would you choose? please read 1st!

Voters
25. You may not vote on this poll
  • Weatherby Mark V (okay so it's technically got 9...)

    7 28.00%
  • Browning A Bolt

    5 20.00%
  • T/C Icon

    0 0%
  • Other

    13 52.00%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53

Thread: Which 3 lug action and why?

  1. #1
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default Which 3 lug action and why?

    I am interested in building a short-action rifle with a short bolt lift (Ie. lugs of three let them be).

    I want it to be stainless steel.

    I want it to be lightweight, but a few ounces here or there aren't going to be weighted(pi) above any other factors of note.

    My options as I see them come down to the Browning A-bolt, Weatherby Mark V, and the T/C Icon.

    Which action would you choose that fits the bill and why?
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  2. #2
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    As to other attributes, I prefer the Weatherby style safety to the Browning shotgun style. I see less chance of obstruction and find it easier to engage and disengage. The I con safety is not unlike the Weatherby with the addition of another piece that acts to lock the bolt.

    The Icon I understand is a tad bit heavier as it's pretty stout and has the weaver type outgrowths integrated into the receiver.

    The Weatherby has 9 lugs in3 banks of 3 which has advantages and disadvantages to three larger lugs. It needs less diameter to achieve the same engagement, but has more individual surfaces to align.

    I like the Browning flattened bolt knob better than the Icon options (as the bolt handle can be changed), and the Weatherby which is more common and less ergonomic when in my fingertips.

    I do not care for the skeletonizing cuts into the bolt shroud of the Icon nor the rather large obnoxious logo.

    I like Browning's detachable box magazine. I also like the option of utilizing the Badger Ordinance bottom metal and magazine on the Icon (which is utilyzed on the Icon Warlord).

    I am impressed with the 3 recoil lugs on the Icon. The Weatherby also has an itegral recoil lug. The Browning however has a washer style lug that I don't care for in principle.

    I do not know as far as the triggers go.

    The Weatherby seems more difficult to get in Stainless.

    Those are the trade-offs as I see them.

    Over-all I think I tend to favor the Weatherby Mark V.
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  3. #3
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Might also consider a Sakos 75. And if stainless was preference rather than requirement- the cooper is a three lug.
    I have not seen many Weatherby mark fives in shortactions.
    k

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Queen Charlotte Islands
    Posts
    30

    Default

    My first choice would have been sako. no expience with weatherby so i choose browning.

  5. #5

    Default

    X2 on the Sako. I have a FinnLite and it's a good rifle. The two things i'm not crazy about are the short barrel, it's 21" and the stock is made of rynite or something and has rubber inserts at the pistol grip and forend but it fits well.
    It doesn't matter what you miss them with.

  6. #6
    Member Diesel Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    354

    Default

    X3 on the Sako. Both my 75 and my 85 are butter smooth, the actions themselves are fairly light yet strong, and the triggers are nice right out of the box.

  7. #7
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    Which Sako do you prefer Diesel? The 75 or 85?
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  8. #8
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    I cannot imagine limiting myself to one of those three actions for a specfic lightweight project. None are in the game with Remington and several others for light...

    The three lugs are the answer to the question no one should have been asking. High power rifles have been built for well over 100 years with two lugs and they do just fine. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle addresses the issues of getting all three (or nine) lugs to mate evenly.

    None have the range of available options for a custom build found in Remington or even Winchester rifles.

    If the goal is light you need to modify parameters quite a bit.

    If the goal is just to build a rifle, my ranking would put Browning last. You will find few smiths interested in doing the work and fewer options. I have also personally seen far more total failures with A-Bolts than all other brands combined. Orders of magnitude less time with them and far more failures is a bad trend.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hap View Post
    I cannot imagine limiting myself to one of those three actions for a specfic lightweight project. None are in the game with Remington and several others for light...

    The three lugs are the answer to the question no one should have been asking. High power rifles have been built for well over 100 years with two lugs and they do just fine. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle addresses the issues of getting all three (or nine) lugs to mate evenly.

    None have the range of available options for a custom build found in Remington or even Winchester rifles.

    If the goal is light you need to modify parameters quite a bit.

    If the goal is just to build a rifle, my ranking would put Browning last. You will find few smiths interested in doing the work and fewer options. I have also personally seen far more total failures with A-Bolts than all other brands combined. Orders of magnitude less time with them and far more failures is a bad trend.

    Really? What are the weights of the Sako, Browning, Weatherby and Icon actions?

    What game is Remington in and why can't the others play?

    Three lugs is not exactly new, it's been around 30 years or so in modern rifles that I know of and it seems they have it worked out pretty well.

    Lug mating is more of a quality issue than a design issue. Well built rifles will have mating lugs. It's not often that a Ruchestering and less than semi-custom rifles will have good contact without help.

    RainGull stated his first requirement was for three lugs, weight was secondary. If I understand him correctly this is to be a hunting rifle not a 7lb match rifle.
    It doesn't matter what you miss them with.

  10. #10
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    All things may be taken to extremes. I'm not after a two lug bolt Remcheuser. Nor am I after a new Ultralight arms rifle. Sorry, I prefer certain functionality and handling characteristics that suit me. Just about anything can work and put bullets consistently in an inch or so downrange at 100yrds. these days, even a 710! If two lugs are 33% more likely to shave that down to 1/2 moa, I'm not sure I really care (no offense at all intended). I'm not that great a shot anymore. If I had all of my criteria or none locked in I wouldn't bother posting it. But I'm still somewhere in the middle. The Sako nods helped a lot as I had not considered those actions and find much of what I desire in them. The bat action looks possible as well. I'm still looking into the Sakos to figure out the details (not sure I like the 85 mag requiring a shove upward, I guess it depends if I value speed or reliability more in terms of losing the magazine which I read is a common problem with the 75)(not sure whether I prefer the integral recoil lug on the 75 or the thick bolted lugs on the 85)(not sure whether I prefer the more robust lugs on the 75 or the controlled round feed'esque 85)(I know I prefer the 85's bolt shroud asthetically)...and I'm not sure that either is more suitable for my needs than the others yet...good food for thought and I guess that's point and purpose of this thread.

    Why 3 lugs? Personally, because I can.
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  11. #11
    Member Diesel Nut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RainGull View Post
    Which Sako do you prefer Diesel? The 75 or 85?
    I personally prefer the 75, but not by a big amount. The stock fits me better, and they don't even try to pretend it's CRF. I also like that they came factory with a 26" bbl in the magnum cartridges, whereas the new 85 only comes with a 25" if you specifically ask for it. The 85 magazine won't fall out from incidental contact with brush or your elbow like the 75 can (never had it happen personally) but that's about the only thing I can find on the 85 that's "better". That and the 85 is readily available where the 75 is getting hard to find in certain calibers. If I was just using the action, either one would do just fine; the differences between the two are rather slight.

  12. #12
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RainGull View Post
    I am interested in building a short-action rifle with a short bolt lift (Ie. lugs of three let them be).

    I want it to be stainless steel.

    I want it to be lightweight, but a few ounces here or there aren't going to be weighted(pi) above any other factors of note.

    My options as I see them come down to the Browning A-bolt, Weatherby Mark V, and the T/C Icon.

    Which action would you choose that fits the bill and why?
    I'd choose the Browning action because the way they have the floor plate/ removable box magazine set up. Of course....the extractor isn't as burly as a sako......but most short action cartridges really don't care. You never mentioned what cartridge you wanted this rifle chambered for, have you had some ideas yet?

  13. #13
    New member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    7

    Default

    I also think the cartridge selection might effect the recommendation. But you also say "build" which can mean a whole spectrum of rifle loonyness.
    If you are looking for an action that fits your criteria, you might look at the sako a7. 3 lug, stainless, drilled for weaver style rings-rather than optilocks, lightweight, easily adjustable trigger. It is lighter than the weatherby and icon, I think the browning comes in Ti.
    Negatives are the stock and composite magazine. If your okay with the magazine system then I am sure McMillan would be glade to inlet a stock for a few $. And if you wanted a blind magazine then a customed magazine box might be possible.
    Only limit is your imagination and your wallet.
    K

  14. #14
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    The chambering is a whole nuther debate. I'm somewhere in the .243 through 6.5-284 range. I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I like the ratios of these rounds in terms of being short and fat but not too short and fat, and having a nice shoulder, and mild recoil. A middle bore that will handle a decently high SD expanding bullet and speed it up somewhere around 2900-3100fps.

    I may have length issues in a 6.5-284 on a short action in terms of bullet seating with the long bullets, or I would just call it and settle right now. The 6.5 WSM is too hot, too much capacity, but is shorter. The Swede and 260 are a little on the anemic side (just a little) for what I want. Maybe if I looked more at quarter-bore wildcats?
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Veneta, OR
    Posts
    1,156

    Default 3 lug rifle action for a custom

    I have used the ABolts extensively and they are usually factory accurate, they feed and extract well and the magazine system is pretty darn user friendly - BUT ... after the third time I had an action freeze up while elk hunting (3 different rifles on 3 different hunts) I have gone to a Kimber Montana (or OF COURSE, my model 70) Aside from the detachable (drop out style) magazine the Tikka T-3 is an AWESOME gun, especially for the money asked

  16. #16
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RainGull View Post
    The chambering is a whole nuther debate. I'm somewhere in the .243 through 6.5-284 range. I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I like the ratios of these rounds in terms of being short and fat but not too short and fat, and having a nice shoulder, and mild recoil. A middle bore that will handle a decently high SD expanding bullet and speed it up somewhere around 2900-3100fps.

    I may have length issues in a 6.5-284 on a short action in terms of bullet seating with the long bullets, or I would just call it and settle right now. The 6.5 WSM is too hot, too much capacity, but is shorter. The Swede and 260 are a little on the anemic side (just a little) for what I want. Maybe if I looked more at quarter-bore wildcats?

    There really is no practicle difference between the 6.5-284 and the 260 remington. It isnt even up for debate. They will be within an inch of each other in regards to trajectory all the way out to a practical range for an ethical kill. Either one.....same thing yah know? Very simple.....They do the same thing. Ive owned both, and I like both. The 260 remington is a little cheaper to shoot. You seem to be overthinking this a bit, but the 6.5's will be a darned good choice with hunting bullets in the 120-160gr. If you are worried about case capacity with the heavy bullets.......then your mind is in the wrong place anyways. The 160 grainer will penetrate like a spear no matter how much it infringed on the case capacity.

  17. #17
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    You're correct. I have always liked the 260 and the Swede. I guess I hadn't got around to really putting the numbers into perspective. It's too easy to ask: "what's possible?" and effectively say:"okay, well that's what I want!" Obviously my goals for the project aren't on the top end of .264 performance (we're certainly not talking about barrel burners), though for short action .264 performance they clearly are. I guess until you look at the 6.5 WSM.
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  18. #18

    Default

    The Weatherby Mark V or one of my favorites also is the Sako 85
    A GUN WRITER NEEDS:
    THE MIND OF A SCHOLAR
    THE HEART OF A CHILD
    THE HIDE OF A RHINOCEROS

  19. #19
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    Does Weatherby even make a stainless Mark V action anymore? I don't know why they don't and why they don't produce more short actions. Is it a niche or a rut they're stuck in? Their custom build doesn't even have a stainless option anymore.
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  20. #20
    hap
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mainer_in_ak View Post
    There really is no practicle difference between the 6.5-284 and the 260 remington. It isnt even up for debate. They will be within an inch of each other in regards to trajectory all the way out to a practical range for an ethical kill. Either one.....same thing yah know? Very simple.....They do the same thing. Ive owned both, and I like both. The 260 remington is a little cheaper to shoot. You seem to be overthinking this a bit, but the 6.5's will be a darned good choice with hunting bullets in the 120-160gr. If you are worried about case capacity with the heavy bullets.......then your mind is in the wrong place anyways. The 160 grainer will penetrate like a spear no matter how much it infringed on the case capacity.
    Sorry, but I cannot agree on that. Practical is a funny word and can make any argument moot, there is more than 10% difference in case capacity between the two. Matching appropriate powders and bullet weights can make the larger case do more than the smaller. Simple physics.

    The 6.5-284 is longer, larger in diameter, tapers less, and has a steeper shoulder angle. Throating obviously plays a role, but there is a meaningful difference.

    It seems everything built on the 284 case gets a bad rap about feeding and performance starting from the early lever action use. I believe it is the nosler book that really downloads all 284 based cartridges, even the ones never used for levers.

    And I am a huge fan of smaller, more efficient stuff, but cannot deny the difference speed makes...
    art

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •