Thanks for your patience....The thought of one screw between receiver and stock does seem inadequate, but I do not understand the physics of a 10/22 enough to make that assumption.
So, would a properly pillar bedded single screw setup equal a pillar bedded Kidd rear tang/ front pillar setup?
Thanks for your patience....The thought of one screw between receiver and stock does seem inadequate, but I do not understand the physics of a 10/22 enough to make that assumption.
So, would a properly pillar bedded single screw setup equal a pillar bedded Kidd rear tang/ front pillar setup?
This would be in a Richards Micro Fit BR stock
Thanks
It would be very difficult to deny that the addition of a rear receiver tang used to pull the rear of the receiver down and into a solid under-surface, isn't an aid to much more solid bedding for the action.
When the receiver has a solid footprint, or bearing surface, underneath it, that will also be a good thing for stability of the bedding and support for the receiver.
I'm experimenting with some of these recommendations currently, mainly to see for myself, exactly how a Ruger 10/22 system can be affected in either a good, mediocre or non-plus manner.
There is some reasoning that prevails about many of these modifications not having much, or little effect, on accuracy and they're geared more toward centerfire benchrest guns. Some feel that the most part of the accuracy involved with the Ruger 10/22 rifles lies with the choice of barrels used and the best .22 rimfire ammunition available.
I don't necessarily agree with all, or any, of the above as being "gospel", but I want to have the knowledge gained from my experience doing some, or all, of it to actually see for myself which, if any, modifications involved will improve accuracy, or not. Hear say, passed along by some, without definite proof, doesn't help with my methodology. I just got's to know for myself.
And besides, it's a ton of fun trying to get ten .22 rimfire rounds into the same hole at 50 yards.
It would be very difficult to deny that the addition of a rear receiver tang used to pull the rear of the receiver down and into a solid under-surface, isn't an aid to much more solid bedding for the action.
When the receiver has a solid footprint, or bearing surface, underneath it, that will also be a good thing for stability of the bedding and support for the receiver.
I'm experimenting with some of these recommendations currently, mainly to see for myself, exactly how a Ruger 10/22 system can be affected in either a good, mediocre or non-plus manner.
There is some reasoning that prevails about many of these modifications not having much, or little effect, on accuracy and they're geared more toward centerfire benchrest guns. Some feel that the most part of the accuracy involved with the Ruger 10/22 rifles lies with the choice of barrels used and the best .22 rimfire ammunition available.
I don't necessarily agree with all, or any, of the above as being "gospel", but I want to have the knowledge gained from my experience doing some, or all, of it to actually see for myself which, if any, modifications involved will improve accuracy, or not. Hear say, passed along by some, without definite proof, doesn't help with my methodology. I just got's to know for myself.
And besides, it's a ton of fun trying to get ten .22 rimfire rounds into the same hole at 50 yards.
No doubt!! My plan is to free float either a Shilen or Lilja in a Kidd receiver and 3oz/3 oz. trigger. Ammo is Lapua, RWS and Eley.
I'm selling one of my less used Anschutz to fund this so I should have the scratch to build a nice bench gun...purely for fun and see how far I can take a 10/22.
I've successfully pillar bedded before, and have access to a mill if I go the tang route. I just want to put the money and time to where it will be best used.
The two best accuracy improvements for a stock 10/22 are good ammo and practice. The standard mechanical changes such as barrel, bedding and triggers get you from 90% to 99%.
Small things like rear tangs, special bolts or receivers only take you that last 1% and the vast majority of shooters rarely reach that stage. Heck, for most shooters, the 90% is better than they'll accomplish.
But, if it makes you happy, do it anyway. There are reasons other than pure accuracy for most modifications.
Hello NJGunner, I recently had Randy/CPC machine 2 receivers for the rear anchor. A Feddersen and a stock Ruger receiver. The Feddersen is finished and we have started shooting that one - wow. I didn't shoot it without the rear tang but it can't hurt to add one, especially a wood stock (the Feddersen is in a Titan stock and is rock solid with or without). I'm mounting the Ruger receiver in a Boyd's walnut pro varmint and I'm just starting on the stock, pillar bedding, rear anchor, refinish the murky appearance, etc.. I dropped both receivers in the Boyd's before doing anything and they just 'rock' around - begging for the pillar bed and rear anchor! If you send it to Randy, get him to 'true' it while he's at it, so the barrel points 'true north' so to speak. Beautiful work and worth every penny. If nothing else, it takes the 'what if/wish I would've' out of the equation, the crap that bounces around in the back of my tiny brain while shooting.
I asked Scott Volquartsen that very question and he said that with all of their testing it didn't make a difference in accuracy so they made the decision to not have it on their receivers.
The two best accuracy improvements for a stock 10/22 are good ammo and practice. The standard mechanical changes such as barrel, bedding and triggers get you from 90% to 99%.
Small things like rear tangs, special bolts or receivers only take you that last 1% and the vast majority of shooters rarely reach that stage. Heck, for most shooters, the 90% is better than they'll accomplish.
But, if it makes you happy, do it anyway. There are reasons other than pure accuracy for most modifications.
Jeff
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Well said Weasel, Better said than I could do in the other thread. Do you remember the JC Whitney catalog? Headers promised 20%, mufflers another 20%, carburetor another 20%. It just doesn't work like that especially if none of it played well together! Some would have us believe the addition of a rear tang will transform a factory stock 10/22 into a tack driving rifle.
Well said Weasel, Better said than I could do in the other thread. Do you remember the JC Whitney catalog? Headers promised 20%, mufflers another 20%, carburetor another 20%. It just doesn't work like that especially if none of it played well together! Some would have us believe the addition of a rear tang will transform a factory stock 10/22 into a tack driving rifle.
Thanks for your patience....The thought of one screw between receiver and stock does seem inadequate.
So, would a properly pillar bedded single screw setup equal a pillar bedded Kidd rear tang/ front pillar setup?
Thanks
Probably, but then you would lose sleep over NOT having a tang and you wouldn't be able to anecdotally discuss the benefits with other forum tang owners.
Get your rest, get a rear tang.
Don't suffer from ISS(inadequate screw syndrome), if you have a tangless receiver, get a good solid rear screw. We know that there are millions of tangless receiver shooters out there suffering in silence.
Beautiful work and worth every penny. If nothing else, it takes the 'what if/wish I would've' out of the equation, the crap that bounces around in the back of my tiny brain while shooting. 
We know that there are millions of tangless receiver shooters out there suffering in silence.
Linear Mode
