• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Re-doing my 22LR Trainer setup -OR- talk me out of buying more stuff

TheGerman

TheGerman

Oberleutnant
Full Member
Minuteman
    • Jan 25, 2010
    10,608
    30,196
    the Westside
    Had the simple run of the mill Savage MKII BV as a trainer with an older 1st Gen Vortex Crossfire on it, cheap rings/base. All in all, nothing spectacular and it got the out of the box accuracy mostly everyone gets. Again, it worked but it was nothing fantastic.

    Anyways, I absolutely hated the stock because of the poor cheek weld (added a Karsten cheek piece to fix this) and the fact that the finished laminate was super slick/slippery on practically any type of clothing. The damn thing did not want to stay on my shoulder and would slide around like crazy. I put up with it for the better part of a year and a half but when the 99$ special Vortex scope took a shit and broke and 1 of the rings snapped in the process of taking sad scope off the rifle, I decided that it is time to do this correctly and be done with it just like I've done with all of my rifles the first time out but have decided against on the 22LR for some reason.

    So here's where you guys get to talk me out of buying shit. And no, I'm not spending 1400$ for an Anschutz at this point as much as I'd like to.

    What I'm looking to do:

    - (reusing) Savage MKII heavy barrel action, metal floorplate, detachable mag and Karsten cheek piece.
    - DIP Metal trigger guard
    - Unfinished Boyd's Tacticool stock so ShortBus (CustomGunCoatings) can seal it and put a GAP pattern on it
    - EGW 20MOA or DIP 25 MOA base (haven't decided yet but leaning towards the 20MOA)
    - Vortex Rings
    - Vortex Viper PST 2.5-10x44 (MOA reticule, partially why I am looking at the Vortex)

    Ok, commence talking me out of spending money please.
     
    Not to talk you into or out of anything, but I really can't see how you will gain much accuracy from the changes you have planned.

    Now just to make your rifle the way you want it is another thing.

    I hope you get good results from your upgrades.

    Oh yeah, I hope you contacted Vortex about your scope breaking. I'm pretty sure they would like the opportunity to make it good again.
     
    Last edited:
    jeffersonv said:
    Not to talk you into or out of anything, but I really can't see how you will gain much accuracy from the changes you have planned.

    Now just to make your rifle the way you want it is another thing.

    I hope you get good results from your upgrades.

    Oh yeah, I hope you contacted Vortex about your scope breaking. I'm pretty sure they would like the opportunity to make it good again.
    Click to expand...

    Already did, and having it fixed but going to hand it off. Wanted to move up to a clearer optic and have always liked the other Vortex scopes. The scope breaking, with the rings breaking with the way I have a deep hatred for the stock pretty much kicked me off the fence about finally doing something about it.

    Wasn't looking to do anything weird or super expensive but wanted to get the rifle setup more similar to my main rig with quality parts rather than the cheap shit that can (and did) break. The stock I am literally wanting to set on fire after a year of fighting with it and the trigger guard is a no brainer as who the hell wants a plastic one?! It's mainly little stuff but it adds up. Besides sending it to a smith and having the action bedded (can you have a 22LR trued?) what else is there as far as accuracy 'upgrades' outside of buying an Anschutz?
     
    I don't think youll need the cheek piece with the tacticool, the comb on it is pretty nice as long as you go with low rings. Ive got that exact scope sitting in my safe that Ive been contemplating selling to upgrade to the PST 4-16 FFP for my 308, it lived on my 223 AR for about 100rds then I sold the AR that I could possibly talked out of...
     
    Talking with a friend about new glass for his .22, he keeps bringing up variable mag optics. My first question for him was "why variable...?". I have 16x on my rifle, and don't shoot under 100 with it. So, I don't really have any need for less mag or variable on this rifle. But, would you need lower power mag for the rifle?? Like 1shot says, a Bushnell 10x (I had a couple of those mil-adjusted scopes) works fantastically for the money. I would buy another if I needed mil/mil and didn't want to dish out $300+ for an SWFA. But, if you're set on MOA, then carry on.

    I can't logically try to talk anyone out of spending large amounts of money on a .22...never works, especially on my own rifles. ;)
     
    My CZ 455 VPT gets shot 5x more than all of my other rifles combined so the best question is why not get one
     
    the only thing i'd add to the MKII, if you keep it, is a trigger upgrade.

    i think the CZ 455 upgrade would produce better results, even if it's just the regular varmint.
     
    1slow01z71 said:
    I don't think youll need the cheek piece with the tacticool, the comb on it is pretty nice as long as you go with low rings. Ive got that exact scope sitting in my safe that Ive been contemplating selling to upgrade to the PST 4-16 FFP for my 308, it lived on my 223 AR for about 100rds then I sold the AR that I could possibly talked out of...
    Click to expand...

    Agreed....
     
    TOP PREDATOR said:
    the only thing i'd add to the MKII, if you keep it, is a trigger upgrade.

    i think the CZ 455 upgrade would produce better results, even if it's just the regular varmint.
    Click to expand...

    I don't doubt that the CZ is a nicer rifle but, accuracy really comes down to finding out what ammo your particular rifle wants. I just went through this with my Sako Quad. I had all but given up on it because I couldn't get it to shoot better than 1.5 moa. I'd tried a bunch of ammo and couldn't find what it wanted. I went out last week and spent $65 on 250 rounds. Thank God it liked the Wolf Match Target!! I had tried Wolf Match Extra and it hated that stuff. I shot some 50 yard groups in the .3's yesterday and some 1/2" groups at 100 as well.

    OP: Out of your list of mods, the stock sounds like a worthwhile upgrade if the factory unit is giving you that much trouble. Keep the cheek piece until you can see if the comb is high enough on the new stock. The new metal parts won't make you shoot any better but, if it makes you feel better about the rifle, do it.
     
    shooterman_zero17 said:
    Talking with a friend about new glass for his .22, he keeps bringing up variable mag optics. My first question for him was "why variable...?". I have 16x on my rifle, and don't shoot under 100 with it. So, I don't really have any need for less mag or variable on this rifle. But, would you need lower power mag for the rifle?? Like 1shot says, a Bushnell 10x (I had a couple of those mil-adjusted scopes) works fantastically for the money. I would buy another if I needed mil/mil and didn't want to dish out $300+ for an SWFA. But, if you're set on MOA, then carry on.



    I can't logically try to talk anyone out of spending large amounts of money on a .22...never works, especially on my own rifles. ;)
    Click to expand...


    I am a big believer in fixed power, and useing hold overs. That is if you are shooting tactically, and man sized targets, (even though they will be reduced scale for Rimfire Tactical Precision Matches). But, the big buzz word lately is "TRAINER". So, as we did in the Army, we trained as much as ever in using holdovers. You don't have time to set dials....so a variable is a waste of money. Our variables, we kept at max power. If targets are close enough, and you want to put it on 3.5, you are going to hit something anyway.....Save the money. Buy a fixed power, good rings. SWFA has great MIL/MIL scope on thier "Sample List".
     
    Why not try painting the stock yourself? Camo spraypaint would get rid of that glassy feel you hate.
    Gap camo is incredibly easy to do.
    Check the d.i.y. section for camo stencils.

    If you screw it up, you can get your new one and have Bus hook it up. I wouldn't make him use all that effort on a pine stock though, that's just mean.

    I've picked up lots of brand new viper stuff for myself and others, on the px here for $100-150 off msrp.
     
    I just wouldn't put that much effort into a Savage. The Internets seems to think they can shoot dimes at 100yds but my missed bowling pins. If your going to start down the road to making a first rate trainers step by step I would do so in a different car. Upgrades are often hard to sell for a decent price later if you find that you are strapping nitrous to a fiat. I would start with at least a CZ action. If you can stand single shots the Kimber 82G's at CMP for $425 are a hell of a value and have a huge beefy walnut stock that you can hack on yourself. I'm adding a thumbwheel cheek at the moment.
     
    Sigh, I hate you all.

    Curious, wheres the best place on a price for the CZ 455 VPT or a CZ barreled action?

    eta: I see they have a 455VT which is the Tacticool stock; besides the Manner's stock is that the only difference between the VPT and this one? And in the long run, is the composite stock just nice to have or would it actually make a difference in the way the rifle shoots and its overall accuracy?
     
    Last edited:
    Curious, wheres the best place on a price for the CZ 455 VPT or a CZ barreled action?

    ***believe it or not, check out the walmart special order catalog. ask the guy / gal or manager behind the counter.

    eta: I see they have a 455VT which is the Tacticool stock; besides the Manner's stock is that the only difference between the VPT and this one?

    ***yes

    And in the long run, is the composite stock just nice to have or would it actually make a difference in the way the rifle shoots and its overall accuracy?

    ***yes, stiffer (less flex), stronger than the laminated tacticool for action torqueing, less prone to expansion / contraction than wood (even laminated). but it does come with a higher 370.00ish pricetag.

    i've sold and miss my BV as it was a good shooter and a Bday present to myself years ago. but when shouldering and checking groups from my 455V the sentimental journey ends.
     
    Wanted to come back and mention how much I hate all of you :p

    I decided what the hell, and that everyone said pretty much what I was thinking in that, stop tip toeing with the 22 and just get what you want. Shook the wifely money tree and out fell the CZ 455 VPT. Looks like I will be selling the Savage MkII BV or keeping it around for whenever someone is visiting and wants to go shooting with me (and then laugh at them as they fight keeping it shouldered with that shitty stock).

    Now my only question is, what base fits on the CZ? Saw some from DIP, but wasnt sure what the go-to bases for this were.
     
    Last edited:
    Defusion said:
    DIP is pretty much the go-to base.
    By the way, How about some pics?!? ;)
    Click to expand...

    Not here yet. Just got the shipping notification last night.

    Was looking at the CZ DIP bases, is there a reason they sell the extended ones, as in, you tend to need them? Trying to figure out if I can get away with the regular base or need an extended one for a Vortex PST 2.5-10
     
    I have the regular one, but maybe with a longer scope you might need it.
    Here are some pics
    <images removed, check couple posts down>
    Don't know if it's bad to have the mounts stick out a bit. If you don't like that, you may need to get the extended one. Though I could still mount it one slot back.
     
    Last edited:
    Yeah I don't like the bases that hang over, but will need to see where the scope needs to be for proper LOP and eye relief. Will order the regular one and go from there.
     
    Well, you already figured out the rifle part... congrats!

    On to optics - I disagree wholeheartedly with going with a fixed power optic IF you are shooting close in targets; especially "live" targets when fast target acquisition is required. I shot with a fixed Weaver T24 and it was too much optic; so I switched to a Super Sniper 16X... still too much close in. It drove me nuts when on turtle control duty on the stocked ranch ponds when I couldn't find the dang 1" heads at 25-30 yards. I now shoot a Bushnell Tactical Elite 5-15X and I'm much happier. My 100 yard groups haven't suffered and at 15X I can still see the holes. But when chasing those damn turtles or rabbit or coyotes or... the 5X (or 7.5X for easier mildot calculation) comes in really handy with movers.

    FTR, my "regular" rifle wears a NF 5.5-22X but it is very, very rare that I ever touch the magnification away from 11X even at 1,000. I always use holdovers and don't touch the turrets until past 750 yards.

    Whatever you go with, enjoy it. Obviously that will be the easiest part!
     
    That's why I was going with the 'lower' end 2.5-10x optic. While I understand some of the benefits with a fixed magnification optic, I don't think they outweigh the benefit of being able to scale back and open your FOV; a FFP reticule/optic pretty much deters any disadvantages with this.

    On my main rig I have a 3.5-15 I go to 1k yards with and find that I am normally in the 10x range and not often at full magnification (hence why I normally only use FFP optics). My Mk12 Mod1 has a NF 2.5-10 on it as well and I never find it lacking (just wish it was FFP, but its on 10x 99% of the time). I've always shot with optics in this range so there is no getting used to it for me and I don't feel that need for much higher magnification. Even at 200 yards with the 22, 10x is sufficient. The Vortex I had was variable up to 22x I believe but the reticule was true at 10 or 12x (cant remember) and it practically stayed on that magnification 99% of the time as I do holdovers on the reticule. For some reason I prefer MOA even thought I learned on the MIL/MOA system.
     
    Fixed the rail, this is how it should look:
    IMG_2771.JPG

    IMG_2775.JPG
     
    Yeah that looks better, but depends on your eye relief after setting your correct LOP.

    As I have none of the equipment in hand yet, with the Vortex 2.5-10x44, does anyone know if I can pull off low rings with the DIP base or would I need the mediums?
     
    Mine are the low ones from seekins, the bolt has some play in it, and it does touch the eyepiece/parallax ring just barely. I don't have anything to measure mine, but the SWFA site says: 46mm / 1.811". I'd take that as a maximum with low rings (though not every manufacturers low ring with be equally low). I'd probably go with mediums with this scope if I had to do it over again.
    The objective shouldn't pose any problems though. Have plenty of room there. 50mm would probably still work.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    T
    My 1st PRS rifle setup and what round to use.
    Replies
    20
    Views
    2K
    superde
    superde
    Gustav7
    My "budget" Savage Experiment & Bell and Carlson Medalist 6 Review
    Replies
    42
    Views
    6K
    Gustav7
    Gustav7
    padom
    MDT LSS-22 Chassis Review / CZ 455 22LR
    Replies
    23
    Views
    13K
    Gavs
    Gavs
    O
    New guy jumping into rifle shooting and building a trainer
    Replies
    17
    Views
    942
    Greg Langelius *
    Greg Langelius *
    TheGerman
    Finally took the CZ455 VPT out; this was all your fault for talking me into buying one
    Replies
    15
    Views
    2K
    TheGerman
    TheGerman
    Top Bottom
    Back