If you take your original stock and move your fore hand a bit further away or a bit closer you will get different POI's. The new stock will weigh differently to the old. So putting a springer in a new stock I'd expect the scope settings to have to be altered.
I've got mixed views on this thread.
The OP seems on a mission here so he's going to do it anyway ... and fair play to that.
Does the OP shoot top end PCPs also? How accurately does he shoot them?
If he's telling me that ...
a) He shoots a top end PCP FT rig and consistently gets 5 shot 5p sized groups at 55 yards
... and then ...
b) He shoots his springer FT rig and consistently gets 5 shot under 30mm groups at 55 yards
I'd believe that and be impressed.
If he then said ...
c) Following his bedding in his springer groups have now reduced to 20mm at 55 yards
I'd be absolutely amazed.
I'm not saying that a top end springer FT shooter may not notice some very small improvement ... but I'd expect it to very small, and probably not worth doing. For a newish springer FT shooter ( or HFT ) who may be working on consistency and stability of basic stance, breathing, relaxation, trigger control, follow through etc, and whose groups may be averaging 50mm at 55 yards, then I'd say that you aren't going to notice any improvement until you've achieved 'b' above ... and there is a lot of work to do there before you need to worry about pinching another 1 or 2mm off your groups at 55 yards.
That's just shooting techniques and results in virtually no wind. Throw in what 5,10,15 mph etc winds are going to do to you and any 1 or 2mm improvement isn't going to improve scores at all until you've learned about wind. So another world of work to do there learning about wind on different courses.
So from that angle I want to try and keep telling the OP to not waste time on this and try and get to 'b' first.
Even with any dampening from a very thin film of compound the rifle is going to recoil about 10mm backwards ... and it will still be the shooter's ability to control that recoil ... or make it recoil consistently ... that will show good results.
So on the other hand ...
Someone mentioned the POI shifts that have been written about by springer shooters. I've certainly seen those ... up to around 1 inch or so at 35 yards. I've posted about this on different threads over the last couple of years and some time ago Paul James PM'd me and gave me some advice re pellets and also the POI changes. As we all know Paul was about as good as it got in the world of springer shooting and he advised me to bed the action into the stock, in particular around the trigger area and at the rear of the action. I may be throwing us all a curve ball there as I had mentioned to Paul that my stock had a worn out hole that the front trigger pin went through and that there did seem a small gap between the back of the action and the stock. So Paul may have meant to eliminate problems there as he specifically mentioned putting filler in the hole/recess where the 'lug' sits, which I had told him was worn. I only seemed to get that 1 inch shift with that custom FT stock.
I have pics somewhere of the lady that shoots a custom HW97 in FT ( Heli Jalakas from Estonia ). The stock is a custom skeletal job ... looks like alloy. It looks as if the action just sits on small 'bungs' to support it in the stock.
So I'm not saying it's not worth trying. I think I'm saying that it's not going to turn a springer into a PCP and it's not going to shortcut all that time on the practice range and shooting courses. Get to 'b' first with a decent rifle and then play about with whatever fine tuning you want to see if you can knock a mm or two off. To be honest, until you've got to 'b' or got someone of that ability shooting the rifle I don't see how you will judge any improvement?
( Edited to say that I'm a lifelong springer shooter but a new FT shooter. I can achieve 'b' on some days but all over the place on others. I've tried most short cuts re springers but still found that it's practising and shooting and shooting and shooting ... and hopefully noticing and learning from when things go right and when things go wrong ... that brings improvement ).
Last edited by skires; 17th July 2014 at 07:30 AM.
There are no shortcuts to good performance with a springer.
I'm just getting a new Warren Edwards stock set up with my 77K lazaglide action in it and one of Brian's polly hooks on the back so this stuff is very relevant to me at the moment.
As the action and stock are fixed together, the only way reduction of recoil can occur is via the mass of the stock soaking up the momentum. Anything more would require a sliding sledge action like the SR. Bedding might reduce vibration from the action which is a good thing but doesn't affect recoil.
For my rig I am most interested in getting consistent accuracy and no zero shifts.
Last edited by Adam; 17th July 2014 at 10:33 AM.
The problem with all of these 'tweaks' and I'll include tuning in that too. Is that you need to be very careful about what your criteria for success is and how you're going to objectively measure it.
I'm unclear about what your criteria for success is - you've said that you're going to modify one gun and make a comparison with another (very similar unmodified gun) but what exactly are you comparing between the two?
There's a real problem here, and that is that you're very likely to compare how one gun 'feels' to shoot against how the other one 'feels' to shoot and use that as your basis for deciding whether your tweak has been a success. How a gun feels is a very subjective thing, and if you're used to shooting PCP's a springer will feel bloody horrible to shoot because it bounces around and kicks you in the shoulder.
Now you could argue (and I think you are arguing this) that surely if a gun kicks less and feels better to shoot, it should be more accurate. However that doesn't necessarily follow with springers I have found.
For me, the one and only criteria I'm interested in is - can I hit more stuff with this. I don't care what it feels like, I don't care how hard it is to cock, I don't care how consistent it is over a chrono, I don't care if I can balance a dozen pellets on the turret without them falling off when I take a shot and I don't care it it twangs like a church bell when I shoot it. I only care about - real world accuracy, because that's what they give out trophies for.
Accuracy is a difficult thing to to test on a springer, to test it objectively you need to test it over a long period of time (at least a couple of competitions and a couple of tins of pellets). and you need to be so familiar with your springer and your technique that you're able to identify when you've made a bad shot and when you've made a good shot.
If you don't have a reasonable and repeatable level of accuracy before you start accuracy testing, it's impossible to gauge whether a gun post tweaking/tuning has improved or not.
The consequence of not having a clearly defined criteria for success and not having a repeatable and objective method of measuring your success is that you'll inevitably end up coming up with other 'theories' about how you can further improve things and you'll justify these theories to yourself based on the flawed results of previous tests.
What starts out as a 30 minute job of putting some rubber in a stock ends up being years of wasted effort on a series of wild goose chases.