Fella's. I have an problem. My trigger is too far away from the stock grip on my hunter rifle. While a different trigger would be preferred, may I add "something" to the front of my grip to bring it forward?

If so, what can I add or not add? How does it have to be affixed? Permanent or not?

Also, if legit, what have you used?

Thanks! --M

lets chat next time we bump at a match.

I'm glad you brought this up, Mike. I'm currently remodeling my CZ Varmint stock while I look for a donor action for a custom gun. Everything on my new design will be permanently fixed in place, but I would sure love to know what's legal for hunter class stocks and what's not. I'd hate to show up at Pe Ell and not make it through check-in.

It might be wise for you guys to look at a current rulebook before trying to get your modified Hunter Rifle past Ernie the Technical Officer at the Conard Cup.......Something about attachments, whether permanent or temporary are not allowed on Hunter Rifles....Marv

I'm going off the rulebook that I ordered from the NRA last year and the PDF of latest rule changes that I printed out off the NRA website. My stock won't technically have any attachments at all, as by the time the Conard Cup rolls around I'll have it all smoothed, polished, and painted. All I'm doing is taking the factory CZ 452 Varmint stock and using wood and bondo to:

• Slim the wide Varmint foreend to the profile of the American (almost the same as Steve Wooster stock width and bottom curve)
  
  Build up the pistol grip on the front to the profile almost as much as Dave's Mark Pharr stock, curving it down to almost vertical which in effect also brings it closer to the trigger
  
  Build up the right side palm swell to about 80% of the Wooster stock
  
  Raise the comb to just short of center of the bore line directly behind the bore, currently to about 1/4" above it on the offside, not seeing a need to push it to the limit of 1/2" on the offside
  
  Add 7/16" to the length of pull by just putting in a wood spacer and tapering it and the buttstock to make it flow into the factory rubber buttplate

I'm not really one to push rules and all I have to go by is what the rulebook says, so I doubt I'll get as close to the boundary of what's allowed as the "real" hunter silhouette stocks do. I can always fall back to using the factory CZ silhouette stock that I'm shooting the Varmint barreled action in now if I have to. I haven't done anything to it other than open up the barrel channel to float the thicker barrel of the Varmint model, so it will definitely pass tech.

It might be better if you don't tell that guy Ernie what you're doing.
I hear that he's a real SOB about the rules!

That said, IMO if it 'looks to be an attachment' -- either temporarily or permanently affixed -- it's likely to get turned over to the jury. Otherwise, if it's all sanded and painted over, how will anyone ever know?

nomad wrote:That said, IMO if it 'looks to be an attachment' -- either temporarily or permanently affixed -- it's likely to get turned over to the jury. Otherwise, if it's all sanded and painted over, how will anyone ever know?

Like I said, I am not one to push the rules at all. It's not that I worry about getting caught and embarassed or not being allowed to shoot. It's more of an ethics thing that my equipment shouldn't give me any type of advantage that others couldn't get. If I happen to win (not likely since I just moved into AAA class), I want it to be because I had my head in the right place and made good shots. I don't want it to be because I fudged the rules a bit to get an advantage.

Really and truly, I'm building up this stock to see which features I like best so that I can make a good decision on my custom. I expect the stock will change dimensions and features several times before I settle on what's best for me. It's already a combination of Pharr, Wooster, and Nesika Bay designs, and I haven't even finished the first version yet. I'll be shooting it "ugly" with the bare wood and bondo showing until a week or so before the Conard Cup. I might even just throw a coat of flat black paint over it then. I'm not in a big hurry to be done with it. Mark and Marvin's workloads would put me several months or more away from a finished gun even if I found an action to build on today. Like the decision with which action and trigger to use, I want to do it right and do it the best that I can on the first try so I won't have $5k in my gun like Dave does.

I'm working with my father-in-law on the this build, as he's a phenomonal woodworker and all-around great guy who is doing about 60% of the work on this project out of the goodness of his heart. Little does he know that I'm going to give the CZ to him when I get a better rifle built. By that time, I want to have the CZ as fixed up as it can be. He's just now getting interested in shooting silhouette, and I want to get him hooked. As a side benefit of that, I would probably get to go to a lot more silhouette matches if I could tell my wife "I just want to go shoot a little and have fun with your dad since mine is so far away in Alabama..."

If we're no longer kidding around:

It is possible, under the rules as they stand, to have 2 rifles on the line that are dimensionally identical, yet one will be fully legal (because it was built that way from inception) and the other illegal (because it was modified TO those dimensions via the addition of 'attachments'). That's pretty silly and makes no sense to me.

I have suggested, in light of the current hunter rules, that the 'attachments' rule be changed. I haven't had any success. (AFAIK it was originally intended to avoid stabilizers, gyros, force-field generators, etc, etc, etc being hung on the 'hunting' rifle. That got taken out of context and it is now considered to include things it wasn't supposed to. IMO, buttpads and anything that corrects LOP are OK because it's been done forever and almost has to be accepted. Just about anything else that's 'added' is probably a violation.)

Since my 'friend' Marvelous Marvin has stuck me with helping to work tech (lol) I plan -- as we've done before -- to allow anything in hunter that meets the 'looks' requirement, doesn't notably exceed the dimensions of existing (already accepted) stocks and doesn't have anything ridiculous hung on it. (I don't think the original poster's question about just adding a chunk of something on the front of the grip makes it but, if he presents it and we bust it, he can always appeal.)

Everybody needs to remember a couple of things:

1. Legal hunters can now be made with dimensions that won't get by standard rifle. If you 'swing both ways' you need to be careful...

2. Even if a rifle gets by tech, another competitor can still protest it and then it's up to the jury. If anyone on the jury asks: "Did you add any attachments to your stock in violation of the rules?" a shooter might want to think about how he'll answer...

Ernie...I have not " stuck " you with anything....I have simply used my power to anoint you Chief Technical Officer.....Now you just have to live with that designation for the 2006 Conard Cup....For better or for worse....

Marv...not so marvelous...Chief Statistical Officer...CBC 2006

Oh Yeah...we now have 111 shooters...only nine spots left and all entries close on April 10th...

Before you have things changed too much I would consider other factors also- such as where you have your thumb, etc.

The reason I say this is that the length your trigger finger can reach out is determined by the "back" of your grip and the thumb, not the location of the bottom 3 fingers.

You may be needing to take off of the stock, not add to it. I suspect ultimaly you will do both

That's good advice. Even though I haven't finished off my original design, I have indeed been through the issue you're talking about. I'm not adding nearly as much to the rear of the pistol grip as on the Wooster stock design, but I'm not dipping it quite as deep behind the tang as the Pharr design. I'll try to post some pictures of it in progress if I think about it when I have it out. It seems like everytime I change one thing and get it "just right" then another thing needs to be adjusted a bit. Every change makes it fit me just a little better, though, so I'll just keep tweaking.

Mordecai et al:

I phoned NRA this am -- since Marvin has 'annointed' me (I think I'd prefer 'appointed' lol) and I'm sure that everyone wants things at the match to run fairly and without needless angst.

Here's what I was told:

Adding spacers, buttplates, recoil pads etc to correct LOP is perfectly OK. Attaching ANYTHING else to a hunter stock that is not specifically permitted in the book is NOT ALLOWED.

I don't personally agree with NRA's position on this but "them's the rules".

I won't bust anything that isn't an obvious attachment. (I'm certainly not going to suggest that we rasp on a stock to determine if something has been 'attached' beneath the paint job!) That said, if another competitor protests something that has already passed tech, the ball gets rolled into the jury's court.

If you think someone's actively cheating, grab a line officer, stand up and make a face-to-face complaint. (NOBODY likes cheaters!)

If OTOH it's just something that's innocently 'there' (and it doesn't gain unfair advantage) let's try to remember that it's just a game...

I have to get one of those T-shirts that says: "I'm here for the door prizes!"

Ok.. since you're gonna be the tech officer at the only match I'll shoot this year where anyone might care at all, if I use my "Frankenstock" down there I'll make sure it's all smoothed and painted so that no one other than someone who reads this site will have any idea it didn't come that way. Even if they protest and the jury says it's not legal, it's not like I'll be winning anything this year anyway and I have the factory silhouette stock to fall back on. That said, I've already got four people with CZs wanting me to ship the stock to Boyds or someone when I'm done so they can front the cost for duplication and buy copies of it for their CZs. If I'm reading this right, a copy of the stock from a duplication machine cut from a blank would be perfectly legal but my original wood/bondo Frankenstock of the same dimensions would not be legal. Is that correct?

Jason,

That's exactly what the NRA says -- assuming that what you're creating will pass the 'looks like a hunting rifle stock' part. A stock that meets that requirement -- whatever that is -- and does it without using any 'attachments' is just fine. One that's exactly the same, dimensionally, but got that way through being modified by having anything 'attached' to it does not meet the rules.

FWIW I think that's as silly as I'd guess that you do...

So there's no solution for an ill fitting stock that's legal?