Wandering Zero on Savage 111 .30-06
#11
RE: Wandering Zero on Savage 110 .30-06
ORIGINAL: kelbro
Try it without the bipod. I have read quite a few reports of the bipods and Savage tupperware stocks not getting along.
Try it without the bipod. I have read quite a few reports of the bipods and Savage tupperware stocks not getting along.
Mike, the fact the gun cools and returns POI eliminates scope, rings and the oiling I mentioned. I would also think it eliminates the ammo as they both do it as I understand it. I am pretty sure it is a bedding issue, intended to be a freefloated the barrel heats up and touchs somewhere causing pressure andmaking the POI walk, once it cools it is back to free floating/POI. I'd say remove the stock and check for any signs of rubbing, being new their maybe little evidence but its worth a check and cost you nothing. Could try sliding a dollar bill or sticky not along the barrel channel after each shot of the group next time your at the range.
Good luck
#12
RE: Wandering Zero on Savage 110 .30-06
Update;
OK, so this problem has been driving me crazy, so I had to see if I could find a (the?) problem. So I took the thing apart and examined it closely looking for stock contact and found one definate problem that probably isn't the cause of the wandering zero problem, but was rather a result of poor/lazy workmanship on the part of the scope installer at the place I bought the rifle (who I will not name other than to say that the name MIGHT rhyme with "slander fountain" ).
The problem was that when they mounted and boresighted the scope they didn't shim the scope to get a close elevation boresight with the turret at mechanical zero, instead they just cranked the turret in (POI down) so it was almost at the lower stop. Also the "gunsmith" (who should know better! [:@]) didn't use the windage screws on the rear base to get the boresight close either. I'm starting to think that the resident gunsmith didn't do the work and rather it was handled (poorly) by one of the gun counter "experts". I guess I should have stayed and watched, but I guess I took for granted that they'd at least know how to properly mount and boresight a stinkin' scope! [:@]
Anyway, I returned the turrets to mechanical zero and remounted and boresighted the scope. I don't know if this is part of the current problem, but I've heard said that scopes MAY have problems when the turrets are at the extreme ends of their range.
I also found that the "pillar bedding" isn't really done right either because the "pillars" sit below flush with the wood. So, instead of the action sitting directly on the pillar and not touching the wood at all, the bottom 1/2" or so of the action actually rests on the stock and doesn't even contact the pillar, so the pillars might as well not even be there. The only thing they do is provide a metal contact surface for the action screws. Looks like the Savage stockmakers either need to be shown what a real piller bedding job looks like, or they intentionally half-a$$ed the lob to save a couple bucks while driving up the perceived value of the rifle to the consumer in the advertising (something tells me it's, unfortunately, the latter [:@][:'(]!).
I also found that the recoil lug wasn't fully back against the stock, which was my fault, and that could very likely be the main problem here. I suppose that I'll have to wait unitl the next time at the range to see if the problem goes away now that the action is correctly seated in the stock.
If not I'll have to have a 'smith either sand the stock so the pillars are above the surface or more likely have him remove the factory "pillars" and install some true pillars. Or I might have it glass bedded. All of there things are beyond my ability and/or comfort zone.
Out of curiousity, what would the approximate cost be to have the stock pillar bedded the right way or professionally glass bedded?
Thanks for everyones help,
Mike
OK, so this problem has been driving me crazy, so I had to see if I could find a (the?) problem. So I took the thing apart and examined it closely looking for stock contact and found one definate problem that probably isn't the cause of the wandering zero problem, but was rather a result of poor/lazy workmanship on the part of the scope installer at the place I bought the rifle (who I will not name other than to say that the name MIGHT rhyme with "slander fountain" ).
The problem was that when they mounted and boresighted the scope they didn't shim the scope to get a close elevation boresight with the turret at mechanical zero, instead they just cranked the turret in (POI down) so it was almost at the lower stop. Also the "gunsmith" (who should know better! [:@]) didn't use the windage screws on the rear base to get the boresight close either. I'm starting to think that the resident gunsmith didn't do the work and rather it was handled (poorly) by one of the gun counter "experts". I guess I should have stayed and watched, but I guess I took for granted that they'd at least know how to properly mount and boresight a stinkin' scope! [:@]
Anyway, I returned the turrets to mechanical zero and remounted and boresighted the scope. I don't know if this is part of the current problem, but I've heard said that scopes MAY have problems when the turrets are at the extreme ends of their range.
I also found that the "pillar bedding" isn't really done right either because the "pillars" sit below flush with the wood. So, instead of the action sitting directly on the pillar and not touching the wood at all, the bottom 1/2" or so of the action actually rests on the stock and doesn't even contact the pillar, so the pillars might as well not even be there. The only thing they do is provide a metal contact surface for the action screws. Looks like the Savage stockmakers either need to be shown what a real piller bedding job looks like, or they intentionally half-a$$ed the lob to save a couple bucks while driving up the perceived value of the rifle to the consumer in the advertising (something tells me it's, unfortunately, the latter [:@][:'(]!).
I also found that the recoil lug wasn't fully back against the stock, which was my fault, and that could very likely be the main problem here. I suppose that I'll have to wait unitl the next time at the range to see if the problem goes away now that the action is correctly seated in the stock.
If not I'll have to have a 'smith either sand the stock so the pillars are above the surface or more likely have him remove the factory "pillars" and install some true pillars. Or I might have it glass bedded. All of there things are beyond my ability and/or comfort zone.
Out of curiousity, what would the approximate cost be to have the stock pillar bedded the right way or professionally glass bedded?
Thanks for everyones help,
Mike
#13
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: MA
Posts: 290
RE: Wandering Zero on Savage 110 .30-06
As I said before I wouldn't be surprise if fixing the way the scope is mounted will solve the problem. The crosshairs are mounted on springs and funny things happen when you are at the end of the range. I had good experiences with Savage. They are cheap, but they work well for the money.
Good luck
Good luck
#14
RE: Wandering Zero on Savage 110 .30-06
Check out http://www.aquilafirearms.com/index.htmfor the bedding work.
#16
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location:
Posts: 20
RE: Wandering Zero on Savage 110 .30-06
I think the point of impact is drifting due to barrel heat. How long do you wait between shots? Try shooting one, wait 5 or 10minutes, shoot another one, wait 5 or 10minutes, etc.
If this produces better accuracy then it pretty much confirms it.
Sporter barrels heat up quickly. But it will be cold in MN when deer season is on so no big deal probably
If this produces better accuracy then it pretty much confirms it.
Sporter barrels heat up quickly. But it will be cold in MN when deer season is on so no big deal probably
#17
RE: Wandering Zero on Savage 110 .30-06
Follow Up,
I finally got back out to the range to see if what I did helped. I took out a box of Winchester 150gr Super-X PSP's to try instead of the Fed Fusions. I've had good luck with Winchester ammo in the past, and at $13/box the price was right!
When I got there I found out that not only did I seem to fix the problem, but it actually shoots VERY well for factory ammo. In fact, with the accuracy I was getting, I'm not sure how much better handloads would be.
I shot a total of 15 rounds, 6 to get it zeroed 1.5" high at 100 yards, and 9 shots (3 groups of 3) for groups at 100 yards. The three groups measured 1.125", 0.75", and 0.625". Average = 0.83"! The 1.125" group had two shots touching and one that I dropped low. Don't know if it was me or the rifle, but I'm including it 'cause I don't know for sure. Honest sub-MOA (average) 3 shot, 100yd groups with a 22" sporter barrel is GREAT. I think I've got a keeper! I'm definately not taking it out of the stock again!
Thanks for the help folks, I appreciate it!
Mike
I finally got back out to the range to see if what I did helped. I took out a box of Winchester 150gr Super-X PSP's to try instead of the Fed Fusions. I've had good luck with Winchester ammo in the past, and at $13/box the price was right!
When I got there I found out that not only did I seem to fix the problem, but it actually shoots VERY well for factory ammo. In fact, with the accuracy I was getting, I'm not sure how much better handloads would be.
I shot a total of 15 rounds, 6 to get it zeroed 1.5" high at 100 yards, and 9 shots (3 groups of 3) for groups at 100 yards. The three groups measured 1.125", 0.75", and 0.625". Average = 0.83"! The 1.125" group had two shots touching and one that I dropped low. Don't know if it was me or the rifle, but I'm including it 'cause I don't know for sure. Honest sub-MOA (average) 3 shot, 100yd groups with a 22" sporter barrel is GREAT. I think I've got a keeper! I'm definately not taking it out of the stock again!
Thanks for the help folks, I appreciate it!
Mike