Bill DeShivs
New member
Rubbing alcohol (the stronger, the better) will effectively dissolve and remove uncured epoxy.
Broken Rifle, Cannot remove from bedding material.
- Thread starter Lavid2002
- Start date
Here's a good article on rifle bedding using Devcon 10110 and Kiwi shoe polish as the release agent.
www.6mmbr.com/pillarbedding.html
www.6mmbr.com/pillarbedding.html
Ill slap it in the fiberforce stock I have, shoot a group at 50 yards, then slap it in the stock ive been working on and shoot a group. The BBL is now floated, I think it will help.
As far as asthetics go, Ive been sanding and cutting and drilling and painting this stock and this rifle is really starting to some allong. Ill post a picture in a day or so. There wont be a trigger group but youll get the general Idea
Not always...
Granted, that's a good rule of thumb for centerfire rifles and rifles with steel receivers and threaded-in barrels.
Depending on how this particular 10/22 is configured, however, you may want to support more than the typical 1" of barrel chamber end that is normally bedded.
Why?
Because with a 10/22, the receiver is aluminum, and the barrel shank is held into the receiver's front end by nothing more than a wedge and two allen bolts. It's an interference fit, not threaded, and susceptible to a lot of flexing and subsequent slop.
Hanging the weight of a free-floated barrel from a 10/22's bedded aluminum receiver is not conducive to accuracy or longevity. You're looking for an extra measure of stability when glass-bedding a rifle, and the 10/22 requires a bit of extra vigilance.
When the practice of hanging heavy, large diameter target barrels on Ruger 10/22s began in earnest several years ago, this became a topic of concern. There were several solutions, some of which are adding a second barrel bedding point in the forend, bedding the entire barrel, etc.
I went with the latter on all my 10/22 conversions. I settled on free-floating the receiver, bedding the trigger group, and bedding the barrel the entire length of the stock's barrel channel. The idea behind this approach is that the flexible aluminum receiver is simply a raceway for the blowback bolt to ride back and forth in, and not particularly structural in the general 10/22 scheme of things. True, it's attached to the barrel, but doesn't add as much to the accuracy equation as does the barrel itself, which I consider the backbone of the popular Ruger rimfire.
Bedding the barrel full-length has its own problems, particularly if it's not attached to a synthetic or laminated stock, which are less prone to warpage or expansion/contraction with changing temperature and humidity. My preference is heavy laminated stocks, so I'm not worried about lack of stability. I use Devcon Marine Epoxy, with either powdered aluminum or stainless steel added. Brownell's Acraglas is also a fine product for the job.
It's not a bad idea to peruse the www.rimfirecentral.com forum, and see what works and what doesn't. Chances are that folks there have tried darned near everything.
Granted, that's a good rule of thumb for centerfire rifles and rifles with steel receivers and threaded-in barrels.
Depending on how this particular 10/22 is configured, however, you may want to support more than the typical 1" of barrel chamber end that is normally bedded.
Why?
Because with a 10/22, the receiver is aluminum, and the barrel shank is held into the receiver's front end by nothing more than a wedge and two allen bolts. It's an interference fit, not threaded, and susceptible to a lot of flexing and subsequent slop.
Hanging the weight of a free-floated barrel from a 10/22's bedded aluminum receiver is not conducive to accuracy or longevity. You're looking for an extra measure of stability when glass-bedding a rifle, and the 10/22 requires a bit of extra vigilance.
When the practice of hanging heavy, large diameter target barrels on Ruger 10/22s began in earnest several years ago, this became a topic of concern. There were several solutions, some of which are adding a second barrel bedding point in the forend, bedding the entire barrel, etc.
I went with the latter on all my 10/22 conversions. I settled on free-floating the receiver, bedding the trigger group, and bedding the barrel the entire length of the stock's barrel channel. The idea behind this approach is that the flexible aluminum receiver is simply a raceway for the blowback bolt to ride back and forth in, and not particularly structural in the general 10/22 scheme of things. True, it's attached to the barrel, but doesn't add as much to the accuracy equation as does the barrel itself, which I consider the backbone of the popular Ruger rimfire.
Bedding the barrel full-length has its own problems, particularly if it's not attached to a synthetic or laminated stock, which are less prone to warpage or expansion/contraction with changing temperature and humidity. My preference is heavy laminated stocks, so I'm not worried about lack of stability. I use Devcon Marine Epoxy, with either powdered aluminum or stainless steel added. Brownell's Acraglas is also a fine product for the job.
It's not a bad idea to peruse the www.rimfirecentral.com forum, and see what works and what doesn't. Chances are that folks there have tried darned near everything.
Here stock is painted and finished. All she needs is a layer of clear coat. Also, I ordered a clear anodized trigger guard once it gets in ill install it and SHOOT IT! Im stoked heres a slideshow of my 10/22 from the start to the finish! Im posting it in THIS THREAD.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3376696#post3376696
stock is painted and finished. All she needs is a layer of clear coat. Also, I ordered a clear anodized trigger guard once it gets in ill install it and SHOOT IT! Im stoked heres a slideshow of my 10/22 from the start to the finish! Im posting it in THIS THREAD. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3376696#post3376696
10/22
am I missing something ????you buy a rifle and then have to spend more to make it work.I have a Marlin 60 it hits where I want it to.I did put a scope on it a NcStar 4x cost $15 new.if I want target grade rifle I have 3 mossberg bolt target guns mod 44/144.cost $20 apiece back when.
am I missing something ????you buy a rifle and then have to spend more to make it work.I have a Marlin 60 it hits where I want it to.I did put a scope on it a NcStar 4x cost $15 new.if I want target grade rifle I have 3 mossberg bolt target guns mod 44/144.cost $20 apiece back when.
Never heard of MEK as an epoxy solvent. Methylene Chloride is what is usually sold for the purpose. It is also the main ingredient in many paint strippers. Most lapidary supply outfits sell it to jewelers for getting stones out of settings they've been epoxied to. I've used it to dissolve cast epoxy cases of semi-conductors. Takes awhile, but does work.
I've also gotten used to using Johnson's Paste Wax as a release. It seems to work better for me than the commercial releases. As to what you drive an action out of a stock with, that is what slide hammers were born to do.
I've also gotten used to using Johnson's Paste Wax as a release. It seems to work better for me than the commercial releases. As to what you drive an action out of a stock with, that is what slide hammers were born to do.
Inspector3711
New member
Before we go freaking anyone out here.. I've worked with this material for over 20 years.. Cabosil and Aerosil are two brand names for a product which is actually amorphous fumigated silica. For all intents and purposes it is very fine powdered glass. It contains no asbestos. We use it extensively in the aerospace industry to thicken epoxies when permissible.
Years ago it was found that some of the mines this stuff came from did have some asbestos in them and some of the product tested was contaminated. Those mines were closed long ago. OSHA lists amorphous fumigated silica as a nuisance dust. You should wear a dust mask when using the product to avoid risk of silicosis.
As far as MEK and MC (methelyne chloride) go, they are both bad news. The company I work for no longer uses MC and has strict restrictions on MEK. MC is a carcinogen and tumorigen, and mutagen, as well as reproductive effector. It also has been linked to spontanious miscarriages. Using MC on the job where I work can get you fired. MEK has been show to cause genetic mutations and tooth loss over long periods of occupational exposure. Both cause lung and liver damage. Wear heavy rubber gloves as surgical gloves are almost instantly penetrated by both solvents. Use in a well ventilated area.
To clear up one other subject, the MSDS for paint thinner shows very little in the way of long term health risks. I would have to say thet MEK and MC are both far more toxic than paint thinner. I hold a state and federal hasmat license.
For what it's worth, studies of Nutrasweet have shown that massive doses cause lab rats to gnaw off their own genitals. If you see me huddled in the corner facing away from you, you'll know I drink too much diet pop!
Last edited: