I'm cheap, me.. altered Mcmillan, legal?

[OnaginOffagin]

If I dropped my 1710 into a Mcmillan stock (like the 1712 featherweights), and built up the cheek comb to approximate the Pharr and Nesiko stocks, would it be legal in hunter smallbore rifle?

[Jerry G]

I guess if it looks like a hunter stock and dosn't have a thumb hole it's good to go.

I don't realy know what a hunter stock realy looks like but I'm sure someone does.

[BlauBear]

So long as the top of the comb stays below the centerline of the bore it's legal for hunter - but why tinker with a stock that nice? Sell it and get a Pharr.

[OnaginOffagin]

well.... actually I don't even have a McMillan stock yet.... just thought I might be able to find one cheap since everyone is buying Pharr's....

I have a 1710 Meistergrade, and I'm not gonna gunk anything on that stock!

Guess I will have to buy one someday.... I have a Rem 700 SS in the West Coast version of a Pharr (Nesiko, I think), and I like it a lot. But in smallbore, I have the 1710 in an OEM stock, and a Model 54 in an Mcmillan Silhouette Master.... the McMillan Silhouette is pretty close to the dimensions of a Pharr, might tweak it a bit......

[saikatana]

BlauBear wrote:
So long as the top of the comb stays below the centerline of the bore it's legal for hunter - but why tinker with a stock that nice? Sell it and get a Pharr.
I thought this requirement was only for the Standard Rifle. Did I misread (again) the rules?
Thanks for any help in understanding
Saikatana

[BlauBear]

See rule 3.2.1 - It inherits the rules specified in 3.1.1, which inherited rules from 3.1.

I actually think the NRA should consider allowing an exception for the AR-15 stock because it has become so common, but my understanding is that they are trying to prevent the return of chin guns. (Those were before my time, but have been described as designed for the stock to fit under the chin to provide a more stable grip.)

[sobrbiker883]

See rule 3.2.1 - It inherits the rules specified in 3.1.1, which inherited rules from 3.1.

I actually think the NRA should consider allowing an exception for the AR-15 stock because it has become so common, but my understanding is that they are trying to prevent the return of chin guns. (Those were before my time, but have been described as designed for the stock to fit under the chin to provide a more stable grip.)

Oh you just wanna shoot an AR10 in .260........
(that would be sweet though!)
I just wouldn't wanna have to catch your brass upside my head!

[BlauBear]

Oh you just wanna shoot an AR10 in .260........
(that would be sweet though!)
I just wouldn't wanna have to catch your brass upside my head!

Absolutely true sir! That's how I knew where to find that particular rule 'cause I sure did look for a loophole!

And it's only fair to warn you that playing catch with AR brass fresh from the oven is a bad plan. I would particularly discourage catching them with your collar...

[Jerry G]

I'm not quite sure what the chin gun did for the sport. Seems like the scores with any of the guns are about the same in most maches.

We have way too many rules. It's getting to be like the government, write a rule to address ever issue regardless of the outcome.

[BlauBear]

Kitty & I discussed rules awhile back and realized how difficult it is to simplify the game. If we require factory stock rifles, those of us that really enjoy tinkering are alienated, and what about repairs? Maybe go the CMP route where the rifle must look a certain way regardless of the internals? But which profile is "The Standard"? A factory stock Anschutz 1712 has a very different profile from a Ruger 10/22 or Remington 597.

Any mature organized competition will accumulate a lot of rules and ours are usually more helpful - by defining what to do when during a match - than restrictive. Match Directors have a lot of discretion and there is still very little room for "lawyering" the rules.