40NAV,
I too had issues with my old 10 FP blind mag once, but, fortunately, it was only caused by me not fitting the blind mag back into the stock correctly.
The front was too high and the bolt would not feed a round.
I finally figured out that it was my screw up and I reseated the mag correctly.
The rifle now feeds correctly and shoots beautifully again.
I hope you don't take the following wrong, but I provide it to share with some of the ways I was able to improve my accuracy at a time I too was changing stocks and such on my rifles.
I am a retired engineer so I have been trained to measure everything that I want to improve.
After I retired, I have done a lot of shooting at our local range and have found that regular practice has made a big difference in my results.
At 75 I am still doing that and measure all the groups that I shoot.
The long term averages with particular rifles and comparing Powder-Bullet combinations (or factory ammo choices) based upon measured results are what tells me how me and the particular rifle are doing.
I find that a few great single groups among a large number of larger groups are probably just anomalies and the long term average is the true measure of your accuracy.
But a significant number of great groups occurring with a number of much larger groups is an indicator of 'shooter induced variation' that is indicative of a probable technique problem that could be masking an accurate rifle's performance.
A few years ago I bought a really accurate rifle that came with 2 test targets with 5 round groups that were shot from a fixture. Both were at or under 0.1 inches.
I knew that the rifle was accurate.
Up until then, I always believed that the rifle or the ammo was the cause of inaccuracy because I never had anything to prove the inherent accuracy of the rifle without me behind the trigger.
After shooting the new rifle myself a while, I recorded a few groups that were under 0.2 inch - very few, about 0.1% - but my long term average was above 0.45 inches.
It proved that the rifle shot great but there were still a number of groups that were over 0.6.
That told me that I was the cause of most of the inaccuracy.
I started to concentrate on consistent set-up, both in positioning my body and getting eye-position behind the scope.
I also concentrated on ensuring my trigger pull was smooth and slow to eliminate jerking.
Over about 2 years, my long term average reduced by more than 25%.
My technique improvements also improved my accuracy with all my rifles.
My two model 10 Savage .308s improved by 29% and 26.5% respectively.
I have passed my observations on to several of my shooting buddies who wanted to improve and they have started to see improvements in just a few months.
I am still working on eliminating 'shooter induced variations' in my sessions.
I have to admit that they still occur when I get sloppy, but they occur with a lot less frequency now.
Eventually I learned to call my shots, that is identify immediately that I jerked the trigger or didn't have the right position when the trigger was pulled.
One telling indicator is that if the rifle stock was in the right position, my scope is still around the aim point after recoil and the bullet is at or very near the aim point.
If the stock was set-up out of position, the scope position is usually to the right and the point of impact is also to the right because the recoil pushed my shoulder back to the right.
I have learned to identify and fix those kinds of problems on the next shot and get the POI back where I expected it to be.
I also found that once I got consistent, the rifle wasn't the only source of inaccuracy.
Each rifle I have, even the most accurate, has preferences for powder or bullet weight and for factory ammos.
I find that to really understand what my rifles like, I needed to keep records of conditions, the components used, and measure and record my results.
Good luck in figuring out how to improve the rifle's accuracy by working on your stock. I agree that is it can be a major source of error.
But don't overlook the benefits of eliminating 'shooter induced variations' also.
Only using measurement of your results will give you the opportunity to find the clues to figuring out what to concentrate on the most.
Bookmarks