I did not want to Hogg(pun intended) up another's post with this. So I wil try to explain my point in a separate thread.

In another thread I postd that a bolt action is inherently a more accurate action than a break action firearm.

This is not to say a break action is not strong enough. Or that a break action is not accurate enough to accomplish hunting accuracy. It is just simply a fact that a bolt action is inherently more accurate. I am not sure how anyone could think otherwise. It really is common knowledge in the shooting world.

I am not trying to say Knight rifles are better because they have a bolt. Or that Encore's or CVA's are inferior because of their design. All the rifles talked about here are definitely strong enough, and accurate enough for their intended purpose. I am only saying a bolt action will be a more accurate design.

Strength is one reason why. A one piece stock is definitely stronger than a two piece stock. No doubt about that. This is not to say that a two piece stock is not strong enough to do the job-because it is. But a two piece stock is definitely not as strong as a one piece stock.

Also the biggest problem the break action's have with accuracy is the fact that it has a two piece stock. Specifically the biggest problem is the forearm. Since the forearm is not solidly attached to the action it can cause alot of problems down the road. I could go on with the forearm problem, but I think you guys already know what those problems are. Tom.