Page 3 of 3
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:38 am
by BCloninger
SqHunter wrote:What about Bondo? Permanently alter the grip geometry. 1 layer of anything will not do what I need done as far as grip ergonomics go.
And yep, I am practicing. I have shot half a case in the last month

Good Heavens! You're practicing enough for both of us! Good for you!
Several folks have done Bondo or wood working projects to rebuild their stocks to something better suited. If you have the talent, time, or inclination, go for it! So long as it conforms to stock profile rules such as comb height and drop at heel (yeah, I know, more rules) you're good to go.
By way of explanation, I understand from earlier threads that the current rules were developed to eliminate position stocks with adjustable cheek pieces, extensible stocks, and some earlier "Frankenhunter" rifles in hunter class.
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 9:45 am
by AZRifle
I was thinking along the lines of what BCloninger just wrote. If "temporary" objects were allowed in general, think of what might show up on the firing line that was not there when the rifle was checked in.
Unfortunately the rule book is required to be written well enough to weed-out those who do not care to follow it.
Jerry
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:01 am
by SqHunter
Oh, I will follow the dang rules but I can't say I like them very much
Guess I will have to buy another rifle after all. My Savage Anschutz 54 is my sweet heart, I am not going to bondo it. I had hoped to compete with the grand old gal though.
Thanks for the respones guys.
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:41 pm
by BCloninger
Good call! Both of them.
Rules often seem arbitrary and have consequences way beyond their original intent, until the original intent is completely lost. Wish it were otherwise.
Please do leave the 54 alone! Cutting it up now seems like a shame when there are so many good choices available, in particular the CZ 452/455.
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:35 pm
by AZRifle
SqHunter wrote:Oh, I will follow the dang rules but I can't say I like them very much
Guess I will have to buy another rifle after all. My Savage Anschutz 54 is my sweet heart, I am not going to bondo it. I had hoped to compete with the grand old gal though.
Thanks for the respones guys.
It seems if you are just wanting a reference point, a tiny dimple might do. Aspot of easily removed elmers or dimple of epoxy might add the reference you are looking for.
It does not take much at all for the fingers to feel.
Jerry
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:53 pm
by SqHunter
Naw, Jerry I mean I put TAPE on it. LIke I moved the grip curve two inches towards the trigger, and the comb is forward a good inch. Grip diameter is a good inch or two larger too.
Good news is it fixed my trigger control issue, bad news is I can't shoot it anywhere but at home

Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:34 am
by Evelio Mc Donald
Trent and SqHunter
I really did not say that using tape is illegal, but depending on what you use, and how, it may be "frown" on, specially if you happen to win the match. There are a lot of sore loosers out there, and they will try to find any excuse to protest your rifle or equipment. The way I look at it, if the tape is wrap around tight, and the set up does not exceed the legal dimensions it should be legal.
It really gets down to the match director, and the person certifying the rifle. I have seen several Hunter class stocks at the Nationals where the pistol grip shape, and the cheek piece has been modify, with all different home made stuff that pass inspection.
In my personal silhouette lever guns, I actually have several layers of tape over the stipelling in the forearm, since I use the split finger hold it would tear my skin up. I have shot them in several Nationals, and they always passed the inspection.
Evelio.
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 2:27 pm
by SqHunter
Thanks for the response Evelio. Interesting, guess I will shoot it this way till someone tells me otherwise. Besides, Jason beats me at every match so I have no worries about "sore loosers".

Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:18 pm
by AZRifle
SqHunter wrote:Naw, Jerry I mean I put TAPE on it. LIke I moved the grip curve two inches towards the trigger, and the comb is forward a good inch. Grip diameter is a good inch or two larger too.

THATS CHEAT'N! hahaha!
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:28 pm
by Trent
I do appreciate that this thread has remained positive and helpful. I think it says a lot about the community of people on this forum.
Great thread SqHunter. And perfectly timed for me and my illegal glove.

Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:50 pm
by SqHunter
I can see where this sport can be addictive. I mean, I have just started and now i am on a journey to find the most ergonomic stock. I can see where I will end up with at least one stock bondoed, taped, and painted, and then I will HAVE TO HAVE a custom or two or.... You get the idea.

Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:52 pm
by BCloninger
Uh oh - you're infected...
Re: "Device" rule interpretation ?
Posted: Thu May 06, 2010 4:03 pm
by AZRifle
SqHunter wrote:Naw, Jerry I mean I put TAPE on it. LIke I moved the grip curve two inches towards the trigger, and the comb is forward a good inch. Grip diameter is a good inch or two larger too.
Good news is it fixed my trigger control issue, bad news is I can't shoot it anywhere but at home

In all honesty, the way you describe it takes away from the "hunting style" of the stock toward that of a thumbhole.
I have a hard time thinking someone would find it accaptable at a major competition.
Jerry