Does anybody know about these Fultons nuts/bolts and screws?

[RJW NZ]

Hi, I know we have members here with Fultons rifles but I forget who, my question is; does anyone know what these screws do in the sides of this No1 fore end? I'm guessing the flat head one is a machine screw that's tapped into the receiver recoil lugs, and the round head is the same but is threaded into the receiver side wall, would that be right?
Any reason why they would have different heads on them? I see this on several Fultons but haven't had the chance to handle one to know why it is so ...

Also, any thoughts on that brass hex nut/bolt right through the fore end in front of the magazine? I vaguely remember years ago some comment about 'stabilizing the fore end', but thats about all I have. If so it seems a pretty slim concept for accurizing.

I'm writing up about the Fultons rifles in the upcoming guide and just want to confirm my suspicions about these nuts/bolts and screws, thanks RJW

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.

[Thunderbox]

In all of the Fultons rifles that I have stripped, the four screws simply protrude through the forend and touch the receiver - i.e. they are not connected or tapped into the receiver. The screws are simply used to centre the receiver in the forend but, as they have almost no mechanical strength because of the thinness of their wood bearing, its hard to see how much they add to any bedding effect. I've experimented by backing them off or resetting them, and I've never detected any effect on grouping. Possibly the effect is only visible over great range - 1000 yards maybe.

The cross-bolt ahead of the magazine well is commonly found on early target rifles from Fultons and Alex Martin, etc, but seems to have been ignored by other gunsmiths such as Stensbys or AJ Parker. Although its hard to date target rifles, I get the impression that the bolt was not fitted to later rifles. Again, its hard to see what contribution it makes to the accuracy of the rifle, and I wonder if it was simply a "fad" that made the rifle look "technically prepared" in the fashion of the time.

[RJW NZ]

Hi Thunderbox, thanks for that, I agree with the observation about the wood being a bit too thin to do any good work there and because of that this has been puzzling me for some time what was going on in there, even if they were threaded into the lugs the wood would simple compress inwards, so thanks for shedding light on that. The idea of centering the lugs and receiver seems to have lasted as an accurizing method and PH of course use dowels to do the same job. I diligently used receiver dowels and bedding compound on the receiver lugs on a 2a and am convinced that made a significant difference. cheers rjwnz