As a curious person can I ask your pet peeves with the build quality on the mark2?
Alright, here goes:
i) The action has a very "cheap" look and feel to it, like they used a piece of rolled conduit as their base material. Compare that to any action machined from a solid billet (CZ, for ex) and the "cheapness" of it should be obvious.
ii) Way, and I mean
way too much wood is removed from the stock to fit the action. The thickness of wood under the action screws is worryingly thin. I looked at pillar bedding my MKII, but after seeing a thread about someone who had done so, then had the bottom area of their stock crack, I determined pillaring a MKII is a risky proposition. Not enough wood left to support the action! There was one genius who fitted U-channel into the action area to stiffen it up and support pillars, but man, that is way too much work to invest in a MKII. I see no good reason for the excessive wood removal either, I measured things up and I think I found a good 1/4" could have been left in some critical areas without affecting how the action fits into the stock re: clearances.
iii) Never had a problem with my mags, though you will read many complaints about them. Yeah, they're cheap and dinky stamped metal.
iv) Stupidly thin bottom metal, when you apply proper torque to the action screws, you bend it. Once bent, like folding a piece of paper, it'll never be flat again (unless you're a skilled metal worker and can smack it straight, but it'll just bend again when you put it back in the rifle.)
To summarize, the whole package just has an overall cheap look and feel to it. Left me wanting something more refined and solidly built.
The accuracy of my MKII was on point though, one of the few Savages up on the successful list for the 1/2" challenge.
