Thread: Rifle Modifications-Improvement or Victim of Marketing

Ten years ago I got suckered in and started to search for "Accuracy".
Spent time and money at it.
Now I have come a full circle and happy that close enough is good enough.
Main secret to accuracy is, "If you don't feel comfortable, don't take the shot".

Originally Posted by Hall

Ten years ago I got suckered in and started to search for "Accuracy".
Spent time and money at it.
Now I have come a full circle and happy that close enough is good enough.
Main secret to accuracy is, "If you don't feel comfortable, don't take the shot".

You are dead right Hall - accuracy is a fickle thing sometimes - never ceases to amaze me how much hunters spend in the search when at times the awnser is right in front of them - take my old 700 Rem BDL - on a target I would very confidentally put it up against a modern Tikka provided same scope - power and ammo - yet now likely well under half the cost - yes a little heavier but- some of the older rifles shoot - sitting in our local store is an early LSA 55 Tikka in .270 - lovely wood - and I bet the modern ones would struggle to really have a accuracy advantage and its all steel and a lot cheaper - and how many will not admit they stuffed the accuracy by playing around and getting the recipe wrong - seen that happen a few times - much head scratching how the fuck has this thing gone from shooting an inch to over two inches - well ya attempt at improving the bedding did not work did it - but what ever rocks ya boat so long as ya get out and shoot things thats more the main thing - my rant for day - and yes enjoyed it as I do dragging a fat little fallow home and putting it on table

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

You are dead right Hall - accuracy is a fickle thing sometimes - never ceases to amaze me how much hunters spend in the search when at times the awnser is right in front of them - take my old 700 Rem BDL - on a target I would very confidentally put it up against a modern Tikka provided same scope - power and ammo - yet now likely well under half the cost - yes a little heavier but- some of the older rifles shoot - sitting in our local store is an early LSA 55 Tikka in .270 - lovely wood - and I bet the modern ones would struggle to really have a accuracy advantage and its all steel and a lot cheaper - and how many will not admit they stuffed the accuracy by playing around and getting the recipe wrong - seen that happen a few times - much head scratching how the fuck has this thing gone from shooting an inch to over two inches - well ya attempt at improving the bedding did not work did it - but what ever rocks ya boat so long as ya get out and shoot things thats more the main thing - my rant for day - and yes enjoyed it as I do dragging a fat little fallow home and putting it on table

my .223 is still hot glue gun bedded from 20 years ago...Ive taken it apart,looked at it and realise its still shooting really well so leave the plurry thing alone.....

Interesting thread, which rings bells with me.

I have 4 centrefire rifles and always reach for the cheapest and least flash for a hunt. It’s a .284 Win converted T3 with a factory barrel, stock and trigger and its shoots better than my full custom 7RM that cost many times more. I have thought about a carbon stock, but with the bedded and stabilised stock I have repeatability and don’t care about scratches.

Aside from bedding, all I have done is mill the small transition off the front of the action to make it flat and fitted a Remington style recoil lug with the same outer profile as the action as I’m not a fan of the captive lug system on T3s.

The lesson for me is that flash harry rifles don’t necessarily shoot better, definitely cost way more, and are too nice to hunt with.

Another change for me is a desire for a blued walnut rifle. Must be an age thing, but that will be next - probably a Mauser 98 based rifle.