Adam, I wish I could take credit for noticing this, but it was mentioned by someone else, somewhere and poo-pooed by the experts. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START : --><img src=
http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":">;
brewstop, I couldn't find <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>any</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> documentation about a differently spec'd bolt-head for the Mk.I*s either, but concluded I just hadn't looked in the right place, yet. The beveling of the bolt-head seem to be a practical application change for N.A. production which didn't effect the interchangeability of N.A. parts onto the British rifles, dependant on how the original contract was worded. ;) (Come to think of it, are the sears interchangeable?)
MM, I think filing/stoning to the rails and bolt-head to be the only proper way to fix a rifle that has had problems in the smoothness of it's bolt operation.
Niner, I think the 'smartly operating the bolt' had more to do with getting the empty case out of the bolt-way and overcoming the resistance of the cocking upon closing design.
Hopefully the artical will help prevent further slot problems in Mk.I*s and hopefully someone with a larger collection than I can do a 'stare and compare' and report. BTW, my <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>only</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> Savage is just barely beveled in the bolt-head's rail slot.
This is also one of those topics that would be best discussed at a large round table with empty chairs inviting others, while being served ale by women with half exposed bosums. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :ms --><img src=
http://x9eralpha.home.comcast.net/smile5.gif ALT=":ms">;
Take Care, Brad
<p>
; 
; 
