I have just (over the course of a couple days) read most of this thread.
Someone kill me please...
I've learnt many things... including some details about sheep and goats that I could very well done without having learnt.
I've also learnt that having many rifles and having access to too many different pellets would cause me to never make sure which ones to take to a match. I would be constantly swapping gear, thus never getting to know one setup well. Mind you that I am only implying, not explicitly stating, that this is the case for any of you
After having successfully upset Simon (and possibly a few others) in the above paragraph, I really think that tinkering like this would be a *very* bad idea for the average shooter
. Apart from wasting stellar amounts of money, it would rob me from the opportunity to learn to shoot the kit that I do have, and to learn to work with its idiosyncracies.
I am still going to stick to my NJR100, even with all the deficiencies outlined. The longer lock time would teach me proper follow-through (and that's something I can definitely do with).
Reading this thread really put things in perspective for me. For me, there may be a very straightforward fix.
I know that, when I really dig in and try to shoot my 100 well, it responds by being amazingly accurate, and the biggest improvements I can now come up with, are improvements to my shooting technique... which cost a lot less than new stocks and scopes and air splitters and counterweight range estimating divining rods.
So, apart from cranking up the hammer sprinng a bit (it is currently quite slow at 10.5 fpe), I am not going to do anything to it anymore until I can actually shoot.