Fore-end Collar

[villiers]

I know that the omission of the fore-end collar has been extensively discussed, but I still cannot understand the general theory, as there only seem to be three alternative possibilities:

(1) Either the furniture is minutely thicker than the collar so that torquing the front trigger guard screw applies exactly the correct amount of pressure to seat the action body. This would require greater precision that could be expected.
Or:
(2) The furniture is thicker than the length of the collar. Torquing the front trigger guard screw would then apply the same torque to the action body. The collar would then be superfluous.
Or:
(3) The furniture is thinner than the length of the collar. Torque would then apply pressure directly to the action body against the collar and the action body would sit proud over the wood.

The second alternative would appear to be the most common.

I accept that clever people have prescribed the collar and I thus regard its use as mandatory, but I would like to understand the general theory.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Peter Laidler]

IT would seem as though this method was chosen so that every Armourer would have a method of finding out and applying the exact amount of nip at the main supporting point of the rifle. If there wasn't a method of doing this then you can be sure that without a collar, the constant recoil and flexing of the body in relation to the fore-end would constantly loosen the fore-end. So you nip up a bit more......, and then a bit more next time and..... And so on!

Additionally, if you tell a 6'4" beast of an Armourer, built by the people who built Stonehenge and with hands like sides of ham, to nip something up it'll be like telling him to 'gently swage', or 'peen over' something. Nope, it is simply to put the exact nip onto the fore-end and ensure that it stays that way

[CINDERS]

As a layman and having said before the weapons manufacturers have had the time, money and inclination to find the best methods that suit their product.
So they would have had the exciting times of actually developing things and failing no doubt but they did arrive at the end and what an end it is as I am sure the 2 characters who were instrumental in giving us the Lee Enfield line could not imagine that it would still be in use today albeit in hands of not so savoury people.
And given the sum of all things one might say the progression of fire arms development equates like the dinosaurs natural progression, I love my motley collection of SMLE & No.4's not huge nor pristine but like other venerable weapons battle proven, yes they may not have the 1000yd accuracy as the latest sniper weapons but heck they are like a vintage car sorta grow on ya.....

So in using PL's oft expression "If it aint br......" then I will add this "If it was designed that way then the people that designed it meant it that way." and they were clever people and did not have an IBM or Apple Mac to figure out what works and what doesn't
I shiver when I think of all the Gen Y's in a power failure, all I need is a candle and a good book to pass the time........

[villiers]

OK, so I can see that it at least keeps the front trigger guard screw straight and provides a limit to torque on the wood.

[RobD]

Other rifles use this principle too. For example, my Springfield 1903's have collars. Some rifles have the collar built into the trigger guard, like the Mauser K98. I don't know any rifle in which purely the springiness of the wood itself is relied on - anyone?

[Ridolpho]

RobD: Mosin-Nagants don't have collars, do they? Haven't pulled one apart for a few weeks but quick look at parts diagrams don't seem to show either front or rear collars. As to other actions, the P14/ M1917's, of course, have collars and, as ChuckinDenver points out repeateadly in that forum adjustment of the lengths of both front and rear collars are crucial for accuracy with those rifles.

Ridolpho

[CINDERS]

All the (303's) ones that have forgone the collar that I have seen, the intervening piece of wood on the mag well side has parted ways and gone bye bye leaving @55 degree split where the collar once was

[WarPig1976]

Mosin's do have "roll pins" for the collar/pillar whatever Ivan called it or at least should.

[Ridolpho]

WarPig: I'm not sure what you're referring to. I checked a couple of mine and, as my failing brain recollected, no collar at front or rear triggerguard screws. I guess with Mosin's the idea must be to limit the torque applied to avoid crushing the wood (unless arctic birch is incredibly strong). Of course, accurizing with Mosin's (including by factories and armourers) focused on shims in a couple of positions which is simplified by not having to alter collars accordingly. I've attached photos of the screw holes in my rather nice PU sniper re-furb ('43) which is a tremendous shooter.

Ridolpho

[WarPig1976]

Had to dig in the safe and pull one apart....I'm wrong, was thinking of the O3A3 when I shot my mouth off....