-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
After spending all that money do you wish...
- Thread starter rookie7
- Start date
Why would you want an "unobjective" report?
Anyone else see the irony of the .023" technicality he pointed out, and then made this comment?
Why would you want an "unobjective" report?
Anyone else see the irony of the .023" technicality he pointed out, and then made this comment?
Why would you want an "unobjective" report?
Anyone else see the irony of the .023" technicality he pointed out, and then made this comment?
I'm confused.. Is there some reason that I should prefer a slanted or biased view?
I'll be waiting to see the Stiller converted to use Vudoo mags. Until then I'll just sling lead with the 455. I might let my 22 smith play with my p-54 Sako while I wait.
I figured you just should have left the "un" off, but either way works.
I assumed that's what you meant, and was just having some fun, while being truthful at the same time. there are no really unbiased reviews here about anything. All of us have some bias, even if it is not as obvious as the company in question sending a free sample. I usually try to at least mention my bias when talking about a product, but even if it is not mentioned, it should be assumed.
I am being as unbias as I can. I own, 2 Annies, 2 40x's. Win 52D, Savage Tactical, and several others. The reason I subtracted the .223 from the goup is that is the way the rules say to measure. I was not trying to do anything shifty at all. Where is the bias?
Dude.. I never said that you were doing anything "shifty", nor did I accuse you of being biased. As a matter of fact, I originally posted a comment, without specifically mentioning you or anyone else, about cherry picked targets, to which you seemed to be a little defensive in your reply. I then congratulated you on some fantastic shooting despite measurements not being what I'm accustomed to in the world I shoot in. I thought that I was being kind in my approach to what I saw as an error. Can we just get back to the spirit of the thread and quit making this about you?
At what point did I accuse you of being shifty or biased?
What an awesome thread! My hat is off to the OP for starting such a cool discussion. Generally, I read and learn from threads like this far more than I comment, but I've noted a few things where I feel a bit of detail regarding product direction at Vudoo is pointing and to add a bit of perspective related to the current design of the V-22.
Since it's been mentioned here, I'll state now my obvious bias toward the V-22, but I'll do my best to approach this from a more informative position than speaking in favor of anything specific. Someone made the statement in an earlier post that now is a great time to be into rimfire, as there are A LOT of highly capable, accurate and reliable platforms out there from many manufacturers. I agree with that statement and remain humble with ears and eyes wide open. I'm also making these statements from a position of having had the opportunity to develop most all commercially marketed firearms platforms for many large companies in the industry.
DBM: I originally designed what is currently the Vudoo DBM in 2010. The design intent was to satisfy a particular customer base, wherein, the magazine could not be allowed to rattle and could not be inadvertently dropped from the rifle. Hence, the Oberndorf style magazine release. After listening to current feedback and watching how you guys really want to use your rifle, I designed a more modern release that is outside the trigger guard. It's ambidextrous, can be operated with the trigger finger or by running your hand on the underside of the trigger guard. This system is currently being spooled up.
Mid-Lock VS Rear Lock: This is an area of much debate and I'm sure will continue to be for as long as we're all involved in this. First, there's nothing wrong with either. Both work very well, both can be part of what is an accurate system, etc. To offer a bit more perspective without getting into who does what and why, I'll use history as a basis of my opinion.
Obviously, the Remington 40X(B) were mid lock actions. The 40X receiver began life as a Short Action Centerfire blank that was pulled from production and turned into what was the 40X. The receiver bore and lug ways were already broached, so through some very clever and inventive processes, the abutments were added to the receiver and bolt assembly components were created. The downside of this was the lug ways extending ahead of the abutments, in particular, the left lug way (looking forward). A spring loaded tensioner was devised to support the bolt nose in a more concentric manner, but it wasn't without its issues.
Following the 40X, the quest continued to create and manufacture the ideal mid lock action. Of course the benchrest crowd got involved and a guy named Tony Gilkes jumped on it. He made what I believe to have been the first true mid lock receiver without lug ways extending forward of the abutments. It was also a three lugged bolt. The problem was, he had to make the receiver in two pieces, machining the rear section with the abutments and the forward section with the bore to support the bolt nose. He then joined them together and finish machined the receiver as one piece. It was very time consuming and cost prohibitive, so he only ever made two of them (I believe Kevin Nevius owns both of them).
It was realized that rear lock was the best approach for cost, etc., so the focus to make it part of what has been many accurate platforms, including the Winchester 52, overshadowed that of the mid lock rimfire action, although many continued to pursue designing/making the mid lock. So, once again in the firearms industry, cost was and remains to be the driving factor behind the adopted design, not accuracy potential (this doesn't pertain to strictly rimfire).
When I designed what is now the V-22, I had no interest in doing just another rear lock receiver (because it's easier) and absolutely no interest in using the typical existing magazine (because it's easier) intended for a smaller receiver diameter. The AICS style magazine was created first, followed by the mid lock receiver and you'll note there are no lug ways ahead of the abutments. By it's very nature, the rimfire platform is more complex than centerfire, so to do it very specifically with end user desires in mind ahead of being stifled by costs leads to disruption in the market. Especially when one can manufacture them on a large scale at a cost that makes sense, maintaining a steady state of quality, deliver on time and support the product with World Class customer service. That was the approach then and remains the approach now.
Thanks guys for the support and confidence and as usual, I'm available anytime should anyone have questions.
MB
Since it's been mentioned here, I'll state now my obvious bias toward the V-22, but I'll do my best to approach this from a more informative position than speaking in favor of anything specific. Someone made the statement in an earlier post that now is a great time to be into rimfire, as there are A LOT of highly capable, accurate and reliable platforms out there from many manufacturers. I agree with that statement and remain humble with ears and eyes wide open. I'm also making these statements from a position of having had the opportunity to develop most all commercially marketed firearms platforms for many large companies in the industry.
DBM: I originally designed what is currently the Vudoo DBM in 2010. The design intent was to satisfy a particular customer base, wherein, the magazine could not be allowed to rattle and could not be inadvertently dropped from the rifle. Hence, the Oberndorf style magazine release. After listening to current feedback and watching how you guys really want to use your rifle, I designed a more modern release that is outside the trigger guard. It's ambidextrous, can be operated with the trigger finger or by running your hand on the underside of the trigger guard. This system is currently being spooled up.
Mid-Lock VS Rear Lock: This is an area of much debate and I'm sure will continue to be for as long as we're all involved in this. First, there's nothing wrong with either. Both work very well, both can be part of what is an accurate system, etc. To offer a bit more perspective without getting into who does what and why, I'll use history as a basis of my opinion.
Obviously, the Remington 40X(B) were mid lock actions. The 40X receiver began life as a Short Action Centerfire blank that was pulled from production and turned into what was the 40X. The receiver bore and lug ways were already broached, so through some very clever and inventive processes, the abutments were added to the receiver and bolt assembly components were created. The downside of this was the lug ways extending ahead of the abutments, in particular, the left lug way (looking forward). A spring loaded tensioner was devised to support the bolt nose in a more concentric manner, but it wasn't without its issues.
Following the 40X, the quest continued to create and manufacture the ideal mid lock action. Of course the benchrest crowd got involved and a guy named Tony Gilkes jumped on it. He made what I believe to have been the first true mid lock receiver without lug ways extending forward of the abutments. It was also a three lugged bolt. The problem was, he had to make the receiver in two pieces, machining the rear section with the abutments and the forward section with the bore to support the bolt nose. He then joined them together and finish machined the receiver as one piece. It was very time consuming and cost prohibitive, so he only ever made two of them (I believe Kevin Nevius owns both of them).
It was realized that rear lock was the best approach for cost, etc., so the focus to make it part of what has been many accurate platforms, including the Winchester 52, overshadowed that of the mid lock rimfire action, although many continued to pursue designing/making the mid lock. So, once again in the firearms industry, cost was and remains to be the driving factor behind the adopted design, not accuracy potential (this doesn't pertain to strictly rimfire).
When I designed what is now the V-22, I had no interest in doing just another rear lock receiver (because it's easier) and absolutely no interest in using the typical existing magazine (because it's easier) intended for a smaller receiver diameter. The AICS style magazine was created first, followed by the mid lock receiver and you'll note there are no lug ways ahead of the abutments. By it's very nature, the rimfire platform is more complex than centerfire, so to do it very specifically with end user desires in mind ahead of being stifled by costs leads to disruption in the market. Especially when one can manufacture them on a large scale at a cost that makes sense, maintaining a steady state of quality, deliver on time and support the product with World Class customer service. That was the approach then and remains the approach now.
Thanks guys for the support and confidence and as usual, I'm available anytime should anyone have questions.
MB
Last edited:
Thats awesome. Just yesterday, i ordered a barreled action of yours from Mile High, only because they had it in stock, and i didnt want to wait on a lead time. After reading this, im glad i went this route, and not building up what i had originally intended.
I did the same thing earlier this week!
Hope to get out and shoot it this coming week.
No matter if an action is rear lock up or mid lock up it can still be competition worthy. The question is why are all custom rimfire benchrest actions rear lock up instead of mid lock up? It really isn’t due to being better but it was done to make it easier to fix a flaw of a 40x and that is to go from the 40x’s vertical lock up to horizontal lock up. It’s no secret (I can’t take credit for this one as all the good benchrest smiths already know this) that the vertical lock up causes the 12 o’clock lug to not make perfect contact. Many times it makes the action a single lug setup. Even using the cnc machines we have available today will not correct this issue 100% of the time and why all the custom actions like the stiller, turbo, falcon, 10x etc all use the rear horizontal lock up. Now can a single lug action shoot? It sure can but why use two lugs to only use one ?
?
I agree 100% that rear and mid lock-up can be contenders in competition, as this has been proven over a long period of time. However, vertical and horizontal locking both suffer from single lug contact and the reasons why vary across of range of contributors. I won't go into all of them here, but the leading reason amongst OEMs that rear is predominately used over mid is manufacturing cost. Simply put, when the abutments are in the back, there's a very simple bore propagating forward that does not impose manufacturing challenges that machining mid-point located abutments impose. In addition, in rear lock up, there aren't many reasonable options for anything but horizontal lock up, so I believe that's the true basis of horizontal vs vertical.
Just because lugs are oriented vertically doesn't automatically mean the top lug won't make contact. In the 40X, the top lug not making contact is caused by the same issues found in the M700 centerfire and all the clones currently on the market. Tolerancing of bolt to bore and a 60 degree sear angle cause the rear of the bolt to be pushed upward, driving the top lug off the abutment (it's easy to see the same cantilevering effect in rear locking lugs). This is why Jim Borden created the "Borden Bumps" and why others like him have devised various ways of dealing with the issue. It's true that it's more easily dealt with in horizontal locking conventions (but not without trade offs), but all-in-all, properly dealt with, vertical locking lugs can and do make full contact on both lugs. I've dealt with it in the V-22 design as the ability to use any M700 trigger was a big part of the requirement.
MB
Just because lugs are oriented vertically doesn't automatically mean the top lug won't make contact. In the 40X, the top lug not making contact is caused by the same issues found in the M700 centerfire and all the clones currently on the market. Tolerancing of bolt to bore and a 60 degree sear angle cause the rear of the bolt to be pushed upward, driving the top lug off the abutment (it's easy to see the same cantilevering effect in rear locking lugs). This is why Jim Borden created the "Borden Bumps" and why others like him have devised various ways of dealing with the issue. It's true that it's more easily dealt with in horizontal locking conventions (but not without trade offs), but all-in-all, properly dealt with, vertical locking lugs can and do make full contact on both lugs. I've dealt with it in the V-22 design as the ability to use any M700 trigger was a big part of the requirement.
MB
I have a v-22 in hand, and it suffers from this exact problem just like the 40x (not as bad as some 40x’s though). While this is the first and only action I’ve looked at so far, of course I can’t say they will all be this way. Due to how many projects I have going on (even in my retirement lol), I’m not sure yet if I will do a barrel on it. I want to as I’d like to lap the lugs and recheck it after. One thing I can’t stop looking at is this magazine setup. What I like most is how easy it is to tune should you ever get a stock inletted a little off. Of course the mags themselves are bad ass as well. Question, if I order say a manners T4, what trigger guard inlet should be requested ?
I'm thinking you checked for full lug contact with an empty chamber? With an unloaded bolt (no opposing force on the bolt face), the sear will push the back of the bolt upward enough to push the lug off the abutment. You'll also notice, what ends up being the top lug is also the lug that accommodates the side bolt release, so there's less area in that lug. With a loaded chamber (load on the bolt face), this does not happen. Have you shot the rifle?
I appreciate your comments about the magazine. Part of the appeal is to be able to use any DBM (trigger guard) you want, as everyone has their favorite. DBMs are one of the subjective components and it's an area where I listen to the end users a lot, hence the new design from Vudoo. Manners is set up to do at least most of them, if not all. I have one of the new ones here if you'd like to take a look at it (I'll post a pic).
Editing to add: I've checked every action/rifle I have here in the lab, none of them exhibit single lug contact conditions. Moving to PM to understand what you're seeing.
MB
I appreciate your comments about the magazine. Part of the appeal is to be able to use any DBM (trigger guard) you want, as everyone has their favorite. DBMs are one of the subjective components and it's an area where I listen to the end users a lot, hence the new design from Vudoo. Manners is set up to do at least most of them, if not all. I have one of the new ones here if you'd like to take a look at it (I'll post a pic).
Editing to add: I've checked every action/rifle I have here in the lab, none of them exhibit single lug contact conditions. Moving to PM to understand what you're seeing.
MB
Last edited:
I'd been building CF rifles for 11yrs before attempting the 1st 22RF for myself. Had seen Europtic advertising the run of deluxe trainers on the Stiller 2500XR, and really wanted one, but choked on the price. A call to Stiller in Feb of 2016 got one of these actions coming pronto, as they were in stock at the time. I already had a Krieger 22RF blank on hand, plus an Ultimate EPS reamer from PTG. Bought a surplus T4A Elite stock for the Europtic trainer run I found listed on Manner's website, got some Seekins CF DBM & milled the top of the mag well down to fit the inlet for the custom DBM they'd made for Europtic, and put it all together. I was hoping for accuracy comparable to that of my Anschutz 1611 prone rifle, and wasn't disappointed with the Stiller/Krieger. I wasn't so happy with trying to make reasonably quick magazine changes, but the rifle fed smoothly, and extraction/ejection was very consistent.
I was still testing different brands, grades, & lots of 22RF ammo in the Stiller when I became aware of the Mike Bush-designed repeater conversion for his 10rd 22RF mags. Having CMP 40X & 40XB rifles in the closet that were collecting dust, and wanting to get more experience in fitting & chambering 22RF bbls, I sent both those actions to jelrod for the repeater conversion, and placed orders for Benchmark 3-groove & Lilja tite bore blanks. Had gotten both these rifles up & running by the time VGW announced the V-22, so wasn't initially that interested in buying another full-out custom 22RF. But then a friend & customer expressed interest in buying my Stiller, so I sold it to him, and put the proceeds into a V-22 action, Krieger blank, and another Manners Elite Tactical T4A.
So, being a newbie when it comes to 22RF smithing, I probably didn't recognize all the differences in the ignition systems of the Stiller/40X/V-22 actions. All I knew was that I was having a blast-and-a-half shooting those four rifles. I put Jewell HVR triggers on all of them, and have mounted Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56 scopes in Seekins/Vortex 34mm rings. Sold the newest of the original Cronus scopes off the V-22 last evening to a customer for the 6 Creedmoor rifle I'd finished for him, so replaced that scope with a new Cronus BTR. Looking forward to getting out to the range to zero it, then do a tall target & box tracking test with it, and get the zero stop set. Any excuse is good enough to get one of these rifles & some ammo out to the range....and I'm very much looking forward to DJ's report on his work with the V-22.
I was still testing different brands, grades, & lots of 22RF ammo in the Stiller when I became aware of the Mike Bush-designed repeater conversion for his 10rd 22RF mags. Having CMP 40X & 40XB rifles in the closet that were collecting dust, and wanting to get more experience in fitting & chambering 22RF bbls, I sent both those actions to jelrod for the repeater conversion, and placed orders for Benchmark 3-groove & Lilja tite bore blanks. Had gotten both these rifles up & running by the time VGW announced the V-22, so wasn't initially that interested in buying another full-out custom 22RF. But then a friend & customer expressed interest in buying my Stiller, so I sold it to him, and put the proceeds into a V-22 action, Krieger blank, and another Manners Elite Tactical T4A.
So, being a newbie when it comes to 22RF smithing, I probably didn't recognize all the differences in the ignition systems of the Stiller/40X/V-22 actions. All I knew was that I was having a blast-and-a-half shooting those four rifles. I put Jewell HVR triggers on all of them, and have mounted Athlon Cronus 4.5-29x56 scopes in Seekins/Vortex 34mm rings. Sold the newest of the original Cronus scopes off the V-22 last evening to a customer for the 6 Creedmoor rifle I'd finished for him, so replaced that scope with a new Cronus BTR. Looking forward to getting out to the range to zero it, then do a tall target & box tracking test with it, and get the zero stop set. Any excuse is good enough to get one of these rifles & some ammo out to the range....and I'm very much looking forward to DJ's report on his work with the V-22.
Mike,
I'd like to suggest a few fixes to your dbm.
Make it for an M5 inlet.
Remove more material from the guard area so it will work with all triggers. I figured I could swap a Bighorn into the Vudoo stock and go shoot but was shut down because the Calvin Elite flat blade was bottoming out on all that metal. No problem I figured, as I had an extra PTG Stealth. No dice there either as the Vudoo is a different inlet.
Needs to fit our centerfire stuff too.
I'd like to suggest a few fixes to your dbm.
Make it for an M5 inlet.
Remove more material from the guard area so it will work with all triggers. I figured I could swap a Bighorn into the Vudoo stock and go shoot but was shut down because the Calvin Elite flat blade was bottoming out on all that metal. No problem I figured, as I had an extra PTG Stealth. No dice there either as the Vudoo is a different inlet.
Needs to fit our centerfire stuff too.
DB,
In the beginning, the M5 was a consideration, as were a couple other inlet possibilities, however, the plan to participate in the completion of the Carbon Fiber stock project (it has it's own DBM and uses the Vudoo dimensional profile) was a huge consideration as well. That stock is now available so I believe I'll re-visit the consideration of other inlets, the M5 being at the top of the list. I appreciate the input and will keep you posted.
MB
Getting back to the OP’s question...
I got to shoot my Vudoo for the first time this weekend, and I can say without a doubt, “After spending all that money, I couldn’t be happier!” Do I wish I would have just purchased it sooner... I would say no, because it makes me appreciate how much more consistent the Vudoo is and how much more I enjoy shooting it. At least for 2 days... I won’t be second guessing it now, and I was very much second guessing myself after pulling the trigger and waiting to shoot it. That was a lot of money to drop and I probably could have gotten a good shooter cheaper, but I haven’t owned a better rifle and I have never had this much fun!!
Most of my 22s are and have been CZs and I still own a couple.
The consistency across all ammo the last couple days was better than the exact same lots in my last CZ full build or even my other CZs. I cannot speak to why, but only know what I have seen on paper. My other builds have been able to shoot well, but I was not nearly as consistent with them. The lots I shot this weekend were shot from the same lots shot from my last CZ, off the same table, same time of day, same scope, but obviously different rifles. I honestly didn’t expect as much improvement as I’ve seen.
To each their own, but I am very happy and it was worth it to me. I didn’t buy one as a competitor, only for self competition and shooting with family. That being said, it does make me want to look harder at some local groups, as I have a new found confinence (that could probably be shot down by some guy with a 70 year old rifle and open sights).
Good luck with your search.
I got to shoot my Vudoo for the first time this weekend, and I can say without a doubt, “After spending all that money, I couldn’t be happier!” Do I wish I would have just purchased it sooner... I would say no, because it makes me appreciate how much more consistent the Vudoo is and how much more I enjoy shooting it. At least for 2 days... I won’t be second guessing it now, and I was very much second guessing myself after pulling the trigger and waiting to shoot it. That was a lot of money to drop and I probably could have gotten a good shooter cheaper, but I haven’t owned a better rifle and I have never had this much fun!!
Most of my 22s are and have been CZs and I still own a couple.
The consistency across all ammo the last couple days was better than the exact same lots in my last CZ full build or even my other CZs. I cannot speak to why, but only know what I have seen on paper. My other builds have been able to shoot well, but I was not nearly as consistent with them. The lots I shot this weekend were shot from the same lots shot from my last CZ, off the same table, same time of day, same scope, but obviously different rifles. I honestly didn’t expect as much improvement as I’ve seen.
To each their own, but I am very happy and it was worth it to me. I didn’t buy one as a competitor, only for self competition and shooting with family. That being said, it does make me want to look harder at some local groups, as I have a new found confinence (that could probably be shot down by some guy with a 70 year old rifle and open sights).
Good luck with your search.
I've got PTG Stealth DBM on the V-22 & 40X repeaters, the V-22 in a Manners T4A, 40X in a B&C #2015. The 40XB is in a Manners T4A w/DBM mini chassis. I ordered the V-22's T4A with the PTG DBM inlet, but have bought several of these stocks off their online inventory list with B-O M5 inlet and got a very good fit with the PTG units, so there's very little difference between the two DBMs' inlets. The PTG Stealth's skirt that projects below the stock's bottom makes hitting it with a magazine while hurrying a reload a fair bit easier than it is when reloading the 40XB with the mini chassis' flush mag opening - at least, that's my experience.
Going back to the OP's question about buyer remorse - not the slightest bit of remorse in my case, even though I already had the two 40X/XB rifles up & running very well. But then, I'm obviously a bit nutz over accurate & reliable 22RF rifles...
Going back to the OP's question about buyer remorse - not the slightest bit of remorse in my case, even though I already had the two 40X/XB rifles up & running very well. But then, I'm obviously a bit nutz over accurate & reliable 22RF rifles...
I built up a CZ 455 / MPA / Lilja setup, a sweet shooter no doubt, but I didn't like the front-heavy / long length penalties for some of the positional stages. I'm now using a stock 10/22 action with Kidd trigger and ultralight barrel in a VC Titan stock with a Tract optic. It shoots 99% as good as the CZ and I won my latest match with it, so that's my match rifle going forward.
I'd love to build up a Vudoo V22 with a Bix 'n Andy trigger in a J Allen stock with a NF 7-35, but that's a Bugatti Chiron setup and I drive a Toyota.
I'd love to build up a Vudoo V22 with a Bix 'n Andy trigger in a J Allen stock with a NF 7-35, but that's a Bugatti Chiron setup and I drive a Toyota.
Well i love my CZ455 Tacticool Now but man did it stick when i got it
My biggest thing is if i had to pay for all the work i done myself (trigger job , Pillars , Bedding , floating , Mloc rail . QD cups , ) would i wish i just got a better rifle ,,, yes i would
But for me half the fun was taking a dog and making it shoot 5 shooters at 50 like this
My biggest thing is if i had to pay for all the work i done myself (trigger job , Pillars , Bedding , floating , Mloc rail . QD cups , ) would i wish i just got a better rifle ,,, yes i would
But for me half the fun was taking a dog and making it shoot 5 shooters at 50 like this
Sure is ,, took me along time and alot of work to get it to there
Like 5lbs per inch difference in the action screws makes a hell of a difference
the barrel retaining screws need to be the same i go up to 45 inch pounds in , 15,25,35,45 alternating to keep it square
but yes its shoots amazing now with cheap ammo thats a federal hunter match group at 50
Like 5lbs per inch difference in the action screws makes a hell of a difference
the barrel retaining screws need to be the same i go up to 45 inch pounds in , 15,25,35,45 alternating to keep it square
but yes its shoots amazing now with cheap ammo thats a federal hunter match group at 50
It's hard not to like a KIDD! I've got a Classic and would love to have a Supergrade. My KIDD will hang with any of my other rimfires and outshoot several of them.
