Rimfire rifles and synthetic stocks ...or not?

[Pete]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game,uk.rec.shooting.target (More info?)

Here's one for all you pundits - it really bugs me.

When it comes to centrefire rifles, the wisdom passed down from on
high is that, when it comes to stock material, laminate beats solid
wood and synthetic beats all. (Assuming that all 3 are of comparable
build quality.)

The theory goes that solid wood is capable of moving/bending in
response to changes in atmospheric conditions - rain, humidity changes
being the main issues. Ergo, your top flight c/f rifle needs a
synthetic stock to avoid problems of shifting POA brought about by
movements within the stock, however small.

How come then, that the better quality rimfire bolt action rifles (and
whilst we're about it, what about air rifles?) come with wood stocks?

Could it be that whatever shifts occur are generally not noticeable at
the shorter ranges at which rimfires are shot? Have I just worked it
out?


From Pete

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Being eaten by a crocodile is just like falling asleep in a blender"
Bart Simpson

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game (More info?)

On Tue, 06 Jul 2004 12:52:54 +0100, Pete
<pete.ansbro@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>The theory goes that solid wood is capable of moving/bending in
>response to changes in atmospheric conditions - rain, humidity changes
>being the main issues. Ergo, your top flight c/f rifle needs a
>synthetic stock to avoid problems of shifting POA brought about by
>movements within the stock, however small.
>
>How come then, that the better quality rimfire bolt action rifles (and
>whilst we're about it, what about air rifles?) come with wood stocks?
>
>Could it be that whatever shifts occur are generally not noticeable at
>the shorter ranges at which rimfires are shot? Have I just worked it
>out?

Could be you're right, Pete. Or it could be
that those who buy rimfire rifles and airguns are both
more conservative (traditional) and pragmatic than the
top-flight C/F owner seeking to extract the last
possible smidgin of potential accuracy from his
rifle/ammunition.

Rimfire rounds and airgun pellets are generally
used 'as bought' and deemed 'accurate enough for the
job'. (I know some competitive 'field target'
airgunners both weigh and size every pellet, but they -
like the C/F shooter - are searching for that elusive
'perfection'.

I saw some bright orange 'plastic' stocked air
rifles at a fairground shooting stall a few years back.
Some foreign import - possibly Chinese(?). Eminently
practical and hard wearing I'm sure, (and very
distinctive if stolen!) but they looked bloody awful
and felt far more slippery than even heavily varnished
wood. In a wood-like finish with a stippled surface
for grip I would probably have appreciated them more.

Gyppo

John Craggs - Writer - Adult Tutor - Storyteller
and All-Round Rogue
Need a laugh? Then subscribe to the free Monday Silly Digest:
mail to: gyppo1@ntlworld.com With 'MSD SUB' as subject.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game,uk.rec.shooting.target (More info?)

Pete inconvenienced several billion electrons when they wrote:

> The theory goes that solid wood is capable of moving/bending in
> response to changes in atmospheric conditions - rain, humidity changes
> being the main issues. Ergo, your top flight c/f rifle needs a
> synthetic stock to avoid problems of shifting POA brought about by
> movements within the stock, however small.

It doesn't necessarily need a synthetic stock, but using an epoxy type
bedding compound in a solid wood stock does the trick nicely. Same principle
though. Thinking about it, I've seen people do the same thing with their
small-bore rifle.


> How come then, that the better quality rimfire bolt action rifles (and
> whilst we're about it, what about air rifles?) come with wood stocks?
>
> Could it be that whatever shifts occur are generally not noticeable at
> the shorter ranges at which rimfires are shot? Have I just worked it
> out?

To be pedantic, a lot of the top notch smallbore & air rifles are available
nowadays with aluminium stocks... 😱)

However, you may have guessed right about the fact that you just don't see
any error at the short range.

Also, certainly in small-bore disciplines like free rifle or standard rifle,
you happily zero in your sights on the day and don't necessarily expect to
use the same settings one day as the next. Provided it holds a good group
then you're OK.

--

Tally ho!


Adam.

"Gun control is being able to hit the target."

 

[john]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game,uk.rec.shooting.target (More info?)

Pete <pete.ansbro@virgin.net> wrote in
news:9k4le0h0pv3ph3h3jg73bnmee6ac1k738c@4ax.com:

> How come then, that the better quality rimfire bolt action rifles (and
> whilst we're about it, what about air rifles?) come with wood stocks?
>
> Could it be that whatever shifts occur are generally not noticeable at
> the shorter ranges at which rimfires are shot? Have I just worked it
> out?

IMHO it’s all about vibrations. Not sure about the CF rifles but there
are very little barrel vibrations on a rim fire (no recoil either). If I
camo my rim fire for close hide shooting I don’t get a change in POI but
a stick touching my Pro-hunter’s barrel will throw the shot in fact
anything touching the barrel will throw the shot. My guess is it’s all
down to vibrations and a change in vibrations which results in a change
of barrel harmonics and so a changing in POI. Expensive wood will be
less affected by atmospherics, production line wood isn’t going to be
half as well sealed and possibly not true to begin with. I know my old
M77 had a warped stock and it’s not the only one I’ve seen.
IMHO stick with alloy / synthetic mixes.

John

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game,uk.rec.shooting.target (More info?)

>
>IMHO it’s all about vibrations. Not sure about the CF rifles but there
>are very little barrel vibrations on a rim fire (no recoil either). If I
>camo my rim fire for close hide shooting I don’t get a change in POI but
>a stick touching my Pro-hunter’s barrel will throw the shot in fact
>anything touching the barrel will throw the shot. My guess is it’s all
>down to vibrations and a change in vibrations which results in a change
>of barrel harmonics and so a changing in POI. Expensive wood will be
>less affected by atmospherics, production line wood isn’t going to be
>half as well sealed and possibly not true to begin with. I know my old
>M77 had a warped stock and it’s not the only one I’ve seen.
>IMHO stick with alloy / synthetic mixes.

Perhaps you are right and the fact that many guns have 'barrel bands'
etc, where the forend of the stock is attached to the barrel causes
vibration.

Many newer air and rimfire rifles have free floating barrels. This
must mean that they are less affected by movement of the stock. Most
of my guns have floating barrels, my ruger has both a floating barreld
and a synthetic stock but then again It doesn't really matter;- with
back to back 25 shot magazines, off the shelf rimfires are fine and
for rabbits by the hundred where I shoot. If you miss with the first,
then there are plenty more to keep up the good work.

With the air arms s200 air rifle for example, the sports version has a
barrel band, the target version has a floating barrel, the stock is
the same wood.

 

[john]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game,uk.rec.shooting.target (More info?)

hungryrob <hungryrob@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:u0jne0hbdcjt18opm69q7ltpjso8ucmh92@4ax.com:

> Perhaps you are right and the fact that many guns have 'barrel bands'
> etc, where the forend of the stock is attached to the barrel causes
> vibration.

Yes, if you take a look at the majority of under-levers they all have
bands and most break action single shot rifles have fixed forends so to
speak. The strange thing is that some of the single shot break actions
rifles are VERY accurate.
Fullstock rifles can suffer great problems with accuracy, presumably
because of the variations along the barrel length.

>
> Many newer air and rimfire rifles have free floating barrels. This
> must mean that they are less affected by movement of the stock. Most
> of my guns have floating barrels, my ruger has both a floating
> barreld and a synthetic stock but then again It doesn't really
> matter;- with back to back 25 shot magazines, off the shelf rimfires
> are fine and for rabbits by the hundred where I shoot. If you miss
> with the first, then there are plenty more to keep up the good work.

I guess it’s all about range. My rim fire would be useless at 200 yds
both in terms of accuracy and power but it’s never been designed for
such extreme ranges.
My pro-hunter will produce ½ MOA at 200 yds but at 30 yds the rimfire
will give smaller groups.

>
> With the air arms s200 air rifle for example, the sports version has
> a barrel band, the target version has a floating barrel, the stock is
> the same wood.

I’ve seen such things many times and still can not understand why
manufactures spend extra money making a rifle less accurate.

John

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: uk.rec.shooting.game,uk.rec.shooting.target (More info?)

John inconvenienced several billion electrons when they wrote:

> My pro-hunter will produce ½ MOA at 200 yds but at 30 yds the rimfire
> will give smaller groups.

At a guess it's a bullet stability thing. The faster, heavier bullet form
the centrefire round probably won't have stabilised at 30 yds.

--

Roger & out,


Adam.

"No trees were harmed in the sending of this e-mail, though
several billion electrons were seriously inconvenienced."