stocks and accuracy

[WoodchuckAssassin]

I recently bought a savage 11 heavy barrel in 308. The stock is not savage's accustock. I was curious how much a nice stock (a boyds or hague) affect accuracy? The heavy barrel and really nice trigger will account for most the accuracy...I think...but didn't know if a new stock would be worth investing in.

 

[230RN]

How is it shooting now compared to your expectations?

(1)The heavy barrel and really nice trigger will account for most the accuracy...I think...(2) but didn't know if a new stock would be worth investing in.

Correct on (1) unless the stock is really really warped or the barrel has been straightened or otherwise screwed up (usage, bad crown....)

For (2), I repeat my question: How is it shooting now compared to your expectations?

 

[CWL]

Rather than spending money on a new stock just yet, how about just bedding it, either yourself (pretty easy) or by a smith?

 

[WoodchuckAssassin]

Haven't shot any groups yet; I just picked her up yesterday. The barrel is already free-floated, so I wasn't sure if bedding it was an option.

On another note, the rear most screw (the one at the back of the trigger guard), doesn't seem to tighten like it should. When I go to tighten it, the screw just keeps turning and doesn't want to set. It's not "loose" feeling, and keeps the trigger guard sturdy, but it wont tighten down like the other two screws. I realize that the two front screws do all the work, but I wasn't sure if this is a situation that others have had happen to them.

 

[JTHunter]

WA - the screw you mention - can you completely unscrew and remove it? If so, are the threads "machine-type" threads (small and fine) or are they larger and coarser like a wood or sheet metal screw?
If they are the latter, I suspect the hole in the stock is reamed out. An easy fix would be to remove the trigger guard to have full access to the hole in question. Find out exactly how deep the hole is, then take some 2-part epoxy and 1 or more wooden toothpicks (pref. the round type), coat them with the epoxy and insert into the hole, point down.
Screw the screw in HALFWAY and let epoxy cure. This forces the coated toothpicks to the outer edges, holds them in place until the epoxy cures, and tightens up (shrinks) the hole. After cured, carefully back the screw out, replace guard, and put this screw in FIRST - but do NOT tighten completely. Put in the other screws and tighten them completely, then finish tightening the back screw.
If you want to do a little more work, you can also drill out the hole using a FORSTNER bit (drills flat-bottomed holes). Find a wooden dowel (pref. oak or other hardwood) and epoxy it in place. After curing, re-drill the proper-sized hole for that screw and re-attach guard.

IF it is a machine screw (fine threads), use a magnifying glass to look down into the hole and see if there is a hole in some metal piece that may be reamed out as well. This repair will unfortunately, be more involved.

Good luck!

 

[Water-Man]

In my experience, a stock has little effect on accuracy.

 

[jmr40]

As long as everything fits together correctly the average person won't notice any difference. Some serious target shooters may see their .3 MOA rifle transformed into a .25 MOA rifle after changing. That may make a difference to them, but not for most of us.

Quite often you read about someone replacing their stock with an aftermarket stock and their accuracy improves dramatically. In almost every case they had a fitment issue with their factory stock that could have been corrected and gotten the same results. Some of the most accurate guns I've fired were setting in the cheap plastic stocks everyone on the internet runs down.

And I have 3 rifles setting in McMillans, and a 4th in a Brown Precision. I've used B&C, Hogue, High Tech Specialties, and HS-Precision in the past. None of my rifles shot any better after making the change. I chose to replace mine for other reasons. They look, feel and balance better. They are far more durable than wood, and most factory synthetics. And depending on the stock can be 1/2 to over a full pound lighter than anything from the factory, including factory synthetics.

But you need to choose carefully if you want weight reduction. Most aftermarket stocks are far heavier than factory. You don't get into a true lightweight until you get into the $600 price range.

Shoot it first. Chances are you'll decide your money is better spent on better optics or more ammo.

 

[WoodchuckAssassin]

JT Hunter:
That's great advise! I've done some work on rifle/handgun internal parts, but I've never messed around with stocks before. The screw has thick threads, so I think I'll go the wooden dowel route.

JMR40:
I am not ashamed to say that I am NOT a .25 or even .5 moa shooter, so I might just keep the stock as-is for the time being I'll be sinking my money into ammo. I have a feeling I'm gunna put a *****on of rounds through it very soon, so I need to save my pennies for that. Thanks again for the input.

 

[Deus Machina]

I don't much care about the stock, as long as it's not total junk.

If it's bedded and free-floated, the stock won't affect your shot-to-shot accuracy.
It might change your accuracy now compared to next week or so, because of humidity and heat. Nicely bedded stocks will minimize that.
The most important thing with the stock is that the receiver sits firmly and evenly, and your cheek weld is consistent.

 

[taliv]

the key is consistency shot to shot. if recoil is changing something between shots and allowing the gun to shift, then expect less accuracy. a few things that can make this more pronounced are
contact with the barrel (which will change as the barrel heats),
contact on the sides and bottom of recoil lug (get your dremel out and fix that)
bad fit on the tang that leaves little contact between stock and action in the middle
recoil lug is not square so only touching on one side
action screws are holding the recoil lug a few thou from the stock so recoil lug doesn't touch except during recoil and effectively your action screws are your lugs

 

[ford8nr]

The one thing a good adjustable stock WILL DO is allow you to fit the gun to you instead trying to fit yourself to the gun. My 4 position rifle has cant, length and night adjustments done between each position. DEFINITELY makes a difference. Don't know if your present stock is adjustable. If not an adjustable stock, butt plate and comb, will improve your shooting.

 

[Eb1]

I find that a stock could have great affect on accuracy. A nice heavy laminated stock from Boyds helped me shoot my .25-06 better. It helped with the gun jumping up, and seemed to make the recoil come straight back more. It could be just because of a better fit and stock weld, but it did help.

The gun was really accurate before, but I didn't care for the poly mold stock, and it, the gun, would just jump up instead of push back. Like I said, the Boyds fixed that issue for me, and I shoot the gun better.

 

[dubbleA]

taliv hit it on the head about needing to be consistant. The bedding and recoil lug area are keys to that. Without a firm foundation things are going to continually change. I don't think savage had ever had a decent stock other than after market synthetic or laminates.


I would shoot it first and see what it does as is. Years ago I purchased a Rem 700 with the cheap SPS plastic stock on it. Everyone agrees it is junk and while true that rifle shot sub 1/2" groups literally right out of the box consistently. The problem was that the POI would changed quite a bit. I later sat in in a AICS chassis and it continued to shoot great, the action later became a .260 rem build.

Only you can put a cost into improving the rifle and it's purpose. If the gun is going to be a average hunting rifle it's probably not worth it but if longer ranges or a target rifle are desired it's certainly not going to hurt putting it in a quality bedded stock. It's only going to be a part of a consistently great shooting rifle though as there are shooting skills, ammunition etc involved.

 

[taliv]

i'll add that there is a difference between mechanical accuracy and a stock helping the shooter shoot better.

as for the latter, I recently switched from mcmillan A5 to KMW sentinel stocks and was amazed at how much it helped me shoot.

as for the former, there is a video around somewhere of testing a barreled action being shot while c-clamped to a 2x4 piece of wood. iirc, the results were pretty decent accuracy.

again, as long as it's consistent, even a super cheap stock is capable of accuracy, even though it may be very uncomfortable to shoot

 

[Cee Zee]

It really depends on whether the stock on the rifle now is causing problems. Savage makes some weak synthetic stocks which can flex a good bit. That can affect accuracy. Most stocks won't cause a big problem with accuracy but some can whether they contact the barrel or not. Any time you get excess flex you will lose accuracy. Just how much you lose is another question. Remember that it doesn't take much movement to matter downrange. If you're shooting a target 500 yards away (certainly within the range of that rifle) 1/1000th of an inch can make a considerable difference. As others have said it usually shows up as a lack of consistency rather than total inaccuracy. That's where you see a stock causing problems IMO. If your action moves where it contacts the stock you can have some accuracy issues.

I know my Savage MkII rimfire was not as consistent with the synthetic stock I put on it as it is with the Boyd's thumbhole laminated stock on it now. That stock was obviously flexing during the act of shooting. The new stock I put on it made the rifle more consistent. But there were other issues involved like the torque on the action screws. It's temperamental about that too.

The only way you'll know for sure if it helps your rifle is to make the change and see what happens. I would guess you would get some benefit in accuracy but is it worth the cost of a stock? Only you can decide that.

 

[Chuckin' TV]

I just had a thread on the whether the B&C stock's aluminum bed would improve consistency and I had two nays. But these guys are bringing up a good point of having the stock fit you. The biggest thing about precise shooting is eye alignment and comfort. If you have to contort yourself to see through the scope your not going to be consistent. I put a Limbsaver pre-fitted pad on my Tikka. Not so much for recoil reduction but for more length and a better grip. The gun still recoils like hell but you don't feel it.

 

[sage5907]

The stock design, recoil pad and trigger are far more important than what the stock is made of or the cosmetic finish. One of the best shooting rifles I ever owned had a wood stock that looked like it was grown in a swamp. I think most of the accuracy of a rifle comes from the barrel because if the barrel is bad you don't have a place to start.

 

[LAGS]

A stock is only made to hold the action and stock in place and give you something to hold on to.
As long as the stock is not flexing, or is putting pressure or allowing the action to shift it should not effect accuracy.
BUT.
The design of the stock, can effect accuracy, from the Shooters standpoint.
If it is uncomfortable to hold, hits the shooter under recoil or shifts on your shoulder when trying to aim the rifle , YOUR accuracy will suffer, not the accuracy of the rifle itself.
Dimensions of a rifle stock are less critical than are required for a shotgun, like Length of pull, drop in comb or even cant or cast off.
But you need to find out what fits you, and works for you.
A rifle that is set up for shooting with open sights, may not work for a scope.
You will hold the rifle differently for each application.
When considering a stock change , or the fit of the rifle, always check the fit with the type of sights you intend to use, and in the Position you intend to do most of your shooting in.
A rifle may be dead accurate on a bench sitting, but the same rifle may not fit as well when you are standing while hunting or just the opposite.

 

[Cee Zee]

All excellent points LAGS. If your rifle is setup for shooting with irons then finding a good cheek rest when using a scope is often impossible. And even rifles intended to be used with scopes sometimes have too much drop again leaving you with no cheek rest. And a rifle setup to use a scope can mean you would need to lay your head over sideways and rotated back away from iron sights if you wanted to use them. It's generally a good bet that rifles that come without irons are setup to shoot with a scope. But that isn't always the case. Sometimes old designs become traditional and you'll see a stock obviously designed for iron sights on a gun that doesn't even have iron sights. These are the reasons I like gun shops that actually let you pick guns up and check them out without having to ask someone to get it for you from behind the counter so you can check it out. They instantly start trying to sell you whatever you look at and often the rifle just never will be right for you.

I was taught to pay attention to stock designs because I grew up around a lot of shotgun shooters. We have a trap range in the back yard and people were constantly coming by to shoot. Trap machines were actually pretty rare in those days and we had a really good one for a while. Dad always insisted that it was essentially rented and he did what he said, he sold it after 2 years. But I learned a lot about shotguns in that time and a lot of the stock design issues also apply to rifles. Not all of them by any means but a lot.

A person also has to think about how high the scope will be mounted on a rifle when considering how well it will work for you. If you want a big objective lens that means a big objective bell which means the scope will need to be on a higher mount. That means it needs a higher comb too.

It's true that the barrel determines the ultimate accuracy of a rifle. But practical accuracy is another story. For example thumb hole stocks can be great for shooting targets at the range but they are tough to point at a squirrel up in a tree. I guess that's the kind of thing that makes me keep a bunch of different rimfire rifles.

 

[Still Shooting]

Stock Fit and Rifle Accuracy

I have several different rifles, from multiple makers, and each manufacturer has a slightly different "take" on off-the-shelf accuracy. Currently, of course, just about everyone in the business is putting increased emphasis (and advertising money) on accuracy. But my experience is that stock fitting makes a difference, and sometimes it is a big difference.

I have a tang safety Ruger 77 in .257 Bob, that was NOT good as a new rifle. At a point, I realized that the fore end was putting pressure on the barrel at about 8 o'clock (seen from the shooter's position), halfway between the action and the tip. I relieved the pressure, and the rifle suddenly turned in 5-shot groups of 1/2moa or better.

After 32 years, the above rifle was not shooting as well - groups were 1-1/2 to 2 moa. I again checked the former problem spot, and there was no contact. I decided to try free-floating the barrel, but it didn't do much for the groups. I read about a specific early Ruger problem, where the action screws can put a stress on the action itself. Either pillar bedding or a shim under the tang will correct the situation, so I tried a shim. Better, but I still wasn't getting the accuracy the rifle originally had. So I went away from the free-floated barrel, and put a shim under the fore end tip, at 6 o'clock. At about 8-9lbs. of weight hung from the forward sling swivel, the barrel free-floats. The idea here was to control barrel resonance, and it definitely worked. The gun is back to shooting better than 1/2 moa groups on any day that my old eyes can do it.

I have had similar experiences with some of my other rifles, so I believe that there is room for improvement on many factory rifles, and stocks/bedding can make a difference. Will it make a really lousy shooter into a precision rifle? -Not likely, but it can make a 2-3 moa rifle into one that will shoot 1 moa or better, consistently.