stagpanther
New member
Ended up raising the rings in order to clear the magnification lever, which it does just barely even with high rings.
That's the beauty of Weatherby magnum hunting cartridges--they have an extensive point-blank range relative to the kill zone size. They may not print sub .5 MOA--but if they can hold around MOA through that trajectory--that's a great benefit for serious hunters. I had an extra set of Leupold high rings on hand which I already installed and re-installed the scope to. I worked on the owner's newer MK 5's which he installed the same scope on--but Weatherby's bolts have a different lug system resulting in a shorter bolt handle throw. This gun was the one he replaced with the MK 5--but I'm getting more confident I can get it to shoot nearly as well--maybe as well-- as the newer gun.Stag,
EGW base might work well for you. They are pretty tall. Even my 50mm Sightron STAC uses low rings when combined with the EGW base.
Also, for a magnum, for 200 yard zero, your probably a lot closer if you do 1-1,1/4" high.
Heck, my non magnum cartridges are only at 1.5" high at 100 for a 200 yard zero.
The receivers are built like tanks--and the pre-64's have the highly-desirable controlled-feed mauser style bolt. Many think the switch to the push feed bolt was the death knell of the post-64 model 70's--though the receiver is still "a monster."At Christmas time a friend showed me a pre-64 Model 70 he inherited from his grandfather. The action was amazingly smooth, beautiful rifle. Made me want one, since I love vintage firearms. I found one at a gun shop in 300 H&H. He wouldn't take my offer but it isn't moving either. I'll give it another try at the end of the month.
I like the push feed model better. Control feed being more reliable is a myth that has been repeatedly debunked.The receivers are built like tanks--and the pre-64's have the highly-desirable controlled-feed mauser style bolt. Many think the switch to the push feed bolt was the death knell of the post-64 model 70's--though the receiver is still "a monster."
It's probably a historical context thing--though apparently big 5 dangerous game hunters can make a pretty good argument for control feed. The safety is just a tad kludgy for my tastes but bomb-proof simple in stopping the firing pin, otherwise I really love the over-all design of the receiver. The only other small beef I'd address would be having a bolt knob with better scope clearance. The Weatherby ammo finally came in (I shot a few of my own 130 gr Berger hunting hybrid handloads and they did quite well--but they only shoot weatherly factory stuff) and today looks like the only break I have in our stormy weather weather to try em out, it's 5 degrees outside right now.I like the push feed model better. Control feed being more reliable is a myth that has been repeatedly debunked.
After doing that, will the pressure on the barrel always be the same regardless of how the rifle's held when fired?My advise....
Take a piece of cardboard, and wedge between the barrel and forestock. You can play with position and how thick. Then mark forestock ( NO, NOT a permenant Sharpie!!) and lay in some fibreglass matting (YES, with the resin) for your pressure point.⁹
That's a problem right there--I know sometimes it will be freehand shot (though my guess pretty rarely) otherwise braced on a pack, tree branch or stand rail. I thought maybe just putting some spacer material in the area atop the front sling swivel might be a good idea?After doing that, will the pressure on the barrel always be the same regardless of how the rifle's held when fired?
When the round fires, the barreled action starts vibrating. So does the stock fore end. All before the bullet leaves. If you think the barrel should vibrate the same for each shot fired, shouldn't there be ample clearance from barrel to stock to let that happen?That's a problem right there--I know sometimes it will be freehand shot (though my guess pretty rarely) otherwise braced on a pack, tree branch or stand rail. I thought maybe just putting some spacer material in the area atop the front sling swivel might be a good idea?
Theoretically--yes. But there are two separate things going on--the whip of the barrel, and the foreend is also flexible enough, even though it's wood, that it bends even under light pressure so that the "rebound" could vary from one shot to the next. I think to truly free float the barrel I'd need to take down the channel quite a bit and then bed the entire stock.When the round fires, the barreled action starts vibrating. So does the stock fore end. All before the bullet leaves. If you think the barrel should vibrate the same for each shot fired, shouldn't there be ample clearance from barrel to stock to let that happen?
As the stock also vibrates, if it's resting on anything hard it'll bounce off it. Amount varies with how hard it is.
Why not epoxy bed just the receiver and totally free float the barrel so the stock fore end and barrel can whip and wiggle at their own resonant and harmonic frequencies? Especially those of the barrel. External force on the fore end will bend it so some clearance to the barrel is needed else the barrel will whip and wiggle different from shot to shot.Theoretically--yes. But there are two separate things going on--the whip of the barrel, and the foreend is also flexible enough, even though it's wood, that it bends even under light pressure so that the "rebound" could vary from one shot to the next. I think to truly free float the barrel I'd need to take down the channel quite a bit and then bed the entire stock.
Both styles proved equally reliable in NRA high power competition rapid fire matches shooting 10 shot strings in 60 seconds. Big game guides in Africa liked big bore bolt guns on Winchester 70 and magnum mauser 98 style control feed actions reliability.I like the push feed model better. Control feed being more reliable is a myth that has been repeatedly debunked.
The fore end is not as stiff as the barrel. Measure them and you'll find out. Competitive shooters know this as the sling's changing force on the forends moves point of impact most notably with M1 and M14 rifles. Especially when slung up in prone wherein the point-of-impact moves horizontally as the front elbow position changes left or right.With changing shooting rests, comes changing pressure on the forestock. (as long as it's rested on the forestock and not the barrel, i see it all too often!)
With a raised pressure point, it won't matter where the pressure is applied from a rest, it will still transfer to that raised pressure point between the stock and barrel.
Another option would be to full length bed, ala Melvin Forbes with his Forbes, and now New Ultra Light Arms.
Doing this gives zero flex on the stock, although the stock needs to be fairly stiff to begin with.
And i'd use Devcon for this, not Acraglass.