👉An Experiment in Rimfire Bedding

[Josh Smith]

For various reasons I don't want to glass bed my Savage MkII. I'm not sure I'll stick with this stock, and, in my work with Mosins, I find that minimal receiver to stock contact provides the best repeatability. I'm experimenting to see if that'll carry over to rimfire; I think it should.

Self-locking pillars are, from what I can tell, my own invention. They should provide the rigidity of epoxy-secured pillars without the epoxy.

They're made of two parts, allowing the pillars to clamp to the wood when the action screws are tightened. Length sizing is critical so as to clamp the wood without crushing it.
As critical as securing horizontal movement is securing vertical movement. On centerfire rifles, I do this by shimming the vertical surface of the recoil lug crossbolt to ensure firm contact with the recoil lug.

The Savage MkII has no recoil lug, so I used the rearmost nut which happens to secure the trigger housing to the receiver:

This little bit of shim stock provides a nice, tight fit.

This design has been an evolution, applying lessons I've learned from playing with Mosins and M.95s and modifying them a bit for this application. I think this is its final form, but maybe not. We'll see.

Regards,

Josh

 

[Frontiersman]

I like that. I bed my center fires in similar fashion, but often just float the barrels on my rimfires. I do have a WMR, I floated and bedded. I really can’t say it became more accurate. I don’t think the barrel “whips” as much on a 22 as the larger center fires. But I’m sure barrel profile has some effect there. Bull barrel 22s I concentrate most on ensuring it is solidly fixed in the stock. Floated or bedded doesn’t seem to make much difference as long as it’s not loose. But then im not trying to turn 1/2” groups into 1/4” groups.

 

[Josh Smith]

I'm still re-learning how to shoot precision, having not done it in something like 15 years. But, when I get on the rifle correctly, I do see quite a bit of improvement, even accounting for flyers:

Mini-Mag HP, 50yds

Mini-Mag Solids, 50yds

CCI SV, 50yds

CCI SV, 50yds

CCI SV, 50yds

CCI SV, 50yds

Not my best work, but I've also not sent match ammo through it yet.

Regards,

Josh

 

[Alan]

That’s a clever direction to explore, especially avoiding epoxy while still trying to control consistency. Rimfire tends to be forgiving, so it’s a good platform for testing ideas like that and seeing what actually moves the needle in repeatability.

 

[Doug]

Pillar bedding without epoxy is an interesting problem to solve. I am curious whether the self locking design holds consistently under recoil or if you're seeing any shift after extended strings.

 

[Josh Smith]

Pillar bedding without epoxy is an interesting problem to solve. I am curious whether the self locking design holds consistently under recoil or if you're seeing any shift after extended strings.

It's rimfire so recoil is negligible, but it would be soaked up by that rear pillar.

Another thing, I've read that the flat dovetailed spot on the barrel, here:

is a mount for a recoil lug on the .17HMR and .22MAG versions. I'm still looking for pics.

If this ends up being true, then chances are I'll install one even though it's not strictly necessary.

 

[Conman]

Pillar bedding without epoxy is an interesting problem to solve. I wonder whether the self locking design holds consistently under recoil or if you're seeing any shift after extended strings.

 

[Josh Smith]

Pillar bedding without epoxy is an interesting problem to solve. I wonder whether the self locking design holds consistently under recoil or if you're seeing any shift after extended strings.

It's a .22lr, so recoil should be negligible. Also, there should be no rearward action on the pillars since that rear stud is acting as a recoil lug.