- Thread Starter
- #21
Chiming in with an update. Had some decent weather this past week so flung a bit more lead down the 99's tube trying to figure out what's making it string vertically. After a scope change to rule one variable out, 60+ rounds over a couple days of trial and error, and some long discussions with 2 really good gunsmiths, I pulled bases, rings, and scope off to inspect everything and start over. It appears that when i had the weaver bases milled out to accept picattiny rings, the new cut faces were rough enough that sliding the new rings into the grooves generated some pretty fine shavings that stayed in that groove and interfered with the base/ring fit. Once I removed those shavings, cleaned the cut faces up a bit, and re-assembled everything, I'm now getting 0.60 - 0.75 MOA groups using 2 different factory ammos (87 gr Vmax and 105 gr bthp) and with 2 different scopes. No more vertical stringing with my shots. I'm happy and relieved. I've got about 100 rounds thru the tube now and my preferred scope back on, so will try a box of 103 gr Hornady Precision Hunter ammo thru it to see if I can get this thing under 0.5 MOA before i start handloading for it.
Had I to do this thing over, the one thing I'd probably change in retrospect is leave the traditional Weaver bases off and install an EGW picatinny rail that's made for the 99. This would have saved me a lot of time and headaches. (I considered that when I first put this together but chose not to because it looked like the rail may interfere with the ejected casings. I've since learned that not to be the case.) Other than that, there's not much I'd change. My modified 99 w/scope weighs in at 9 lbs 8 oz, (14 oz heavier than my daughter's unmodified 99f w/scope) but doesn't alter the balance at all and the added weight gives me a rifle that physically fits me now and is accurate and consistent enough to do what I want it to do. (I'm pretty sure if weight was a bigger consideration for me, I could achieve the same goals and shave another 4-6 more ounces off.)
It's time to quit fiddling with this now and start chasing coyotes with it. Happy New Year to you all.
Had I to do this thing over, the one thing I'd probably change in retrospect is leave the traditional Weaver bases off and install an EGW picatinny rail that's made for the 99. This would have saved me a lot of time and headaches. (I considered that when I first put this together but chose not to because it looked like the rail may interfere with the ejected casings. I've since learned that not to be the case.) Other than that, there's not much I'd change. My modified 99 w/scope weighs in at 9 lbs 8 oz, (14 oz heavier than my daughter's unmodified 99f w/scope) but doesn't alter the balance at all and the added weight gives me a rifle that physically fits me now and is accurate and consistent enough to do what I want it to do. (I'm pretty sure if weight was a bigger consideration for me, I could achieve the same goals and shave another 4-6 more ounces off.)
It's time to quit fiddling with this now and start chasing coyotes with it. Happy New Year to you all.
