Lightening a Savage action....

[Handsome Rob]

This pertains more to the Axis than the 110, but I suppose a receiver is a receiver...

I'm trying to build an ultralight mountain rifle & I'm down to trying to grasp that final ounce or two.

Can any of you think of a reason that I couldn't or shouldn't machine some relief cutouts into an Axis action, basically to match the style & pattern of the new Lightweight Hunter?
I'd be leaving the bridge over the bolt, but I'm seriously thinking of milling out the left side of the bolt way, through to the bolt (along the angled flat) plus some relief cuts at the very back of the receiver. Not through cuts, just troughs maybe up to 3/16 deep.

I can't see that these cuts will affect the strength by much, but I'm kinda loathe to start milling until I hear from someone who knows far more than I!

[Hozzie]

I am not sure I would go down that road personally, but I also don't have the machining skills to pull it off.  Even if I did, I would always be second guessing myself if it was safe and would probably never be real comfortable with the gun.   I would probably look for a used Tikka T3 Lite.  Accuracy is superb and compared to the Axis, it weighs over 8oz less in a 308.  Not sure what caliber you are using, but instead of potentially ruining a gun, it is an option.  

Edited June 8, 2015 by Hozzie

[Handsome Rob]

Well, I'm already invested in this Axis.
A Tikka wasn't within my initial budget constraints (under $500, minus scope).
I've already replaced the stock & lightened the replacement to within an inch of it's life (I'm already 1lb 3.2oz under factory weight) & I've custom ordered an ultralight profile 6.5x55 barrel that should shed another 8 or 9oz

[Dolomite_supafly]

What stock do you have? There are plenty of ultra lightweight stocks but they cost.

As long as you did not affect the bolt lugs or the receiver lugs it might work. I would not do it but I also believe that it would not be unsafe.

I would have tried to use a low pressure, big bore, caliber so you can take more off the barrel.

[Handsome Rob]

I used a Boyd's & hollowed out the butt. I also reprofiled & thinned the forearm. I left the receiver area/recoil lug area alone, but everything else has been hollowed, thinned, narrowed & lightened.
I'm having the barrel finished at 20" which I know is 6" shorter than optimal for any 6.5/.264 bullet, but within the limits of what kind can accept in performance loss, whilst still being very light recoilling.
My shots will be limited to an absolute maximum of 400yds with the shorter tube & it's mainly going to be a backcountry/high country antelope, sheep & deer rifle.


As much as anything, if I'm being 100% honest, it gives me an opportunity to create something & be a metal worker again, as opposed to a poodle polisher!
I've always liked the principle of building rather than buying, be it motorcycles, cars, fishing tackle... I don't think I own many things that I haven't modified or tailored in some way! Edited June 8, 2015 by robtattoo

[Handsome Rob]

My actual goal here, is to end up with a finished rifle that I have no more than $500 in & weighs under 7lb, loaded with a scope.
A tall order, no doubt, most guns in this field are either small-run or full custom & cost well north of $2-grand. There are a few factory offerings that meet my criteria, but that removes all the fun of thinking, planning & building, plus the pride of ownership that comes with making something your own.

[Clod Stomper]

According to legend, the Lee Enfield "Jungle Carbine" had poor accuracy or a wandering point of impact due to the lightening cuts that were made to the receiver. I haven't done an accuracy test between a full size SMLE and a carbine, so I can't attest with personal experience.

So while it may be safe, it may also affect your accuracy.

[TNWNGR]

With reference to milling metal off of the receiver...I wouldn't do that. If your of a mind to mill something look at the barrel and whether it has enough of a diameter to benefit from lighting grooves. Otherwise replace said barrel with less diameter. Scope rings/base and scope should be scrutinized for lighter weight options. 

 

Recognizing your desire to keep costs down are you sure another stock wouldn't be a better option? is it possible to trade with someone else for a synthetic stock?

 

BTW I inherited a No. 5 Enfield JC from my father and will confirm the comment regarding a lot of metal having been removed from the sides of its receiver. The increased recoil in this rifle is worsened by its age hardened rubber recoil pad. It'll really rattle your eye teeth.   

[Handsome Rob]

I'm waiting for my barrel to come in right now. I'm having it custom machined to be add light as possible (I specified 2lb max. Most sporter barrels come in between 2lb 8oz & 3lb)
I can't find anyone that manufactures a stock that's lighter than the Boyd's as I have it now, without going to a carbon stock & that is a couple of grand beyond me!
Right now, I've got the stock down to under 2lb & there's really not much more I can remove whilst keeping it rigid. I've left the wrist/grip as it came, because this is the one area I know would be most prone to failure if I mess it up.
I'm looking at scope rings right now, trying to work out what is lightest & I can do a bit of drilling/slotting etc there if needed.
I'm not going for a super accurate gun. Anything under a 2"/100yd grouping will be perfectly adequate.
This really isn't a rifle I'll shoot much. Enough to work up a load & zero & after that maybe 10 rounds a year, if I'm lucky.

[Caster]

Too bad this is so dang expensive.  This is what you need.  4lbs 13 oz!!!

 

http://www.kimberamerica.com/rifles/model-84m/mountain-ascent-1

[Handsome Rob]

Yeah....

*lust*

[Dolomite_supafly]

Stockade and McMillian both make stocks lighter than ANY Boyd offering. But you will blow your $500 budget on the stock alone.

[Handsome Rob]

It was looking at the McMillan SL that made me think 'you know, I could do that...'