I just bought a .22 of my own (there are about a dozen in the house but not mine). Any way I had not seen the Mark II in a laminated stock that wasn't a thumb hole, so this one caught my eye with it's salt and pepper stock. I took it out this am with some cheap CCI ammo to see what she will do, and talk about shocked, 50 yard groups after about 75 shots to season it in were in the .35" range repeatedly on some AR10 10 meter air rifle targets I had in the box. I have never had an unmodified rifle come close to that level of consistency and can't wait to find out what it will do with some match grade ammo. How has everyone else' experience been with these rifle? Jeff
- Thread starter persistant7500
- Start date
Re: Savage Mark II bgv
I have a Mark II "Mako" that at 100 yards I can shoot clothes pins off a line, with bulk Remington ammo. Savage Mark II's are crazy!!
I have a Mark II "Mako" that at 100 yards I can shoot clothes pins off a line, with bulk Remington ammo. Savage Mark II's are crazy!!
Re: Savage Mark II bgv
about the same as yours, i have the "salt and pepper" laminate too, pre accutrigger model. it has a rifle basix in it now.
works very well with every match ammo i put through it. usually under 1.25" at 100 yards, and if i remember all the little things, 5" or under at 200 with Wolf ammo. 50 yards is just one .35 to .45 cal hole.
i'm now running CCI std vel. for economic reasons, and usually get 1.75" or under at 100 yards, usually under 7" at 200. 50 yards is usually .75" or under.
about the same as yours, i have the "salt and pepper" laminate too, pre accutrigger model. it has a rifle basix in it now.
works very well with every match ammo i put through it. usually under 1.25" at 100 yards, and if i remember all the little things, 5" or under at 200 with Wolf ammo. 50 yards is just one .35 to .45 cal hole.
i'm now running CCI std vel. for economic reasons, and usually get 1.75" or under at 100 yards, usually under 7" at 200. 50 yards is usually .75" or under.
Re: Savage Mark II bgv
top predator, did you add a second sling stud to your fore end or did it come built that way. I only have the one at the end of the stock, and another question, why would you want the bi-pod mounted so far rearward? I was always under the impression that the farther out the support the less any movement at the butt will detract from accuracy.
top predator, did you add a second sling stud to your fore end or did it come built that way. I only have the one at the end of the stock, and another question, why would you want the bi-pod mounted so far rearward? I was always under the impression that the farther out the support the less any movement at the butt will detract from accuracy.
Re: Savage Mark II bgv
i put the extra one in.
bipod is further back for a few reasons:
1. easier to pivot and manipulate the bipod
2. closes nice and tightly against the stock
3. i've always found that with bolt actions, levers, pumps, etc. either rimfire or centerfire the more i rest them closer to the action, the more consistant they are, especially with a cheaper synthetic stock. i guess it's less flex on the stock and such.
4. for hunting if i get crap stuck in the bipod, i can clear it out easier, deploy and adjust it quicker if need be, and less chance of getting it snagged on stuff.
i could be wrong, so far i haven't seen any other bipod mounted that way anywhere on anything. but i feel more comfortable with it there so perhaps that's the thing that builds my confidense in keeping it there.
i've always tried to get them as far back as i could without having the bipod effect the mounting bolts or magazine operation. plus the back end sort of acts like a hand stop for off hand shots. in the field.
mkii F
marlin 22 mag
savage .308
yeah i like chopping the front of the stock off too. looks different and reduces weight. (i'm more of a hunter than a target guy, less weight is good)
i put the extra one in.
bipod is further back for a few reasons:
1. easier to pivot and manipulate the bipod
2. closes nice and tightly against the stock
3. i've always found that with bolt actions, levers, pumps, etc. either rimfire or centerfire the more i rest them closer to the action, the more consistant they are, especially with a cheaper synthetic stock. i guess it's less flex on the stock and such.
4. for hunting if i get crap stuck in the bipod, i can clear it out easier, deploy and adjust it quicker if need be, and less chance of getting it snagged on stuff.
i could be wrong, so far i haven't seen any other bipod mounted that way anywhere on anything. but i feel more comfortable with it there so perhaps that's the thing that builds my confidense in keeping it there.
i've always tried to get them as far back as i could without having the bipod effect the mounting bolts or magazine operation. plus the back end sort of acts like a hand stop for off hand shots. in the field.
mkii F
marlin 22 mag
savage .308
yeah i like chopping the front of the stock off too. looks different and reduces weight. (i'm more of a hunter than a target guy, less weight is good)
Re: Savage Mark II bgv
I like the idea of that bipod back further on the stock, TP... I may give that a try myself.
Savage puts out an impressive accurate rifle IMHO, and at a reasonable price as well. I've always been more then satisfied with the ones I own.
I like the idea of that bipod back further on the stock, TP... I may give that a try myself.
Savage puts out an impressive accurate rifle IMHO, and at a reasonable price as well. I've always been more then satisfied with the ones I own.
Similar threads
